This policy fails to recognise the unique character of Chilham and its potential to make a more significant contribution to tourism in the borough.

The Council should recognise that many of its villages and much of its countryside is a tourist attraction. These can be protected and enhanced through sensitive and controlled development which enhances them including support for community buildings, pubs and shops which are vital to the visitor experience.

We also support draft Policy EMP11 which promotes the sustainable growth of tourism through the provision of new facilities and the retention of existing facilities. We consider the Ashford DOC to be a major tourist facility which attracts millions of visitors every year. The planned Phase 2 expansion of the centre will compliment other planned investments including the proposed International Model Railway Centre to the east of the site will drive the growth of tourism in the south of Ashfor

5.214 Good. But what else? The policy appears to be not to destroy what we have rather than encouraging more and exciting tourist developments? Very weak.

This policy fails to provide adequate protection to rural areas including the AONBs, and as such does not comply with paras 28 or 113 of the NPPF which require rural tourism development to respect the character of the countryside and that local authorities set criteria based policies against which proposal for any development on or affecting landscape areas will be judged and that distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of designated sites so that protection is commensurate with their

This policy fails to provide adequate protection to rural areas including the AONBs, and as such does not comply with paras 28 or 113 of the NPPF which require rural tourism development to respect the character of the countryside and that local authorities set criteria based policies against which proposal for any development on or affecting landscape areas will be judged and that distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of designated sites so that protection is commensurate with their

If the surrounding countryside makes a valuable contribution to tourism - does it make sense to allow industrial developments and over-scaled housing to intrude on attractive villages and communities?