Questionnaire
Agricultural land should be maintained and cherished, we are becoming more and more reliant upon importing of goods and recent events have proven we need to maintain as much independence as possible. The funding allowed for this growth would be far better suited to improving and developing the existing infrastructure and amenities, our schools need funding, our doctor surgeries need expanding, our shops and villages need improving. Ever expanding and increase of population to the area only serves one agenda and it is not for the good of the county or its residents.
As previously stated, this development proposal does not lend to benefit the county, village or its residents. There is only one group of individuals who will benefit from this development in the short term and this is not in the benefit of anyone else.
The existing schools, doctors, high streets and shop parades need severe improvement. Our agricultural land should be sacred! As an individual investor, I cannot buy agricultural land for means of development, why can the council when it suits them?
Increased crime rates will go hand in hand, what measures are being put in place to ensure the emergency services have the support required to safely manage the extra workload.
I am strongly against the decision to expand the local town to this extent based on increased crime, decreased agricultural land which is a necessity, lack of funding for current schools and GPs, poor infrastructure.
In order to agree I would expect to see both the transport and environment plans which according to a recent article in Private Eye magazine and other people I have spoken too, does not seem to be available. With one road in and road out, the need to reduce pollution caused by vehicle traffic jabs caused by Additional proposed 10600 homes on the peninsula needs to be explained. The proposals for an additional road network could cut across SSSI land which seems to suggest a major stumbling block and I understand that access to the A289 would be a traffic light system which would massively increase volumes of traffic in ALL directions of the A289 and result in the Wainscot roundabout becoming a car park. My understanding is that in order for you to receive £170 million pounds to proceed with this plan you must have both transport and environment plans submitted and approved, so have you got the money and where are the plans?
No answer given
As I have mentioned key plans and environment do not seem to be available and the proposed rail link travels to Gravesend were travellers to London would need to change. Experience has shown that during peak periods passengers who travel daily from Chatham, Rochester and Strood are already crowded on to the trains and therefore passengers from the new station would soon get frustrated and look for an alternative transport method. With the possibility of 750 homes being constructed next to Christmas Lane on the opposite side of the Ratcliffe Highway what access bridge or tunnel will there be for foot passengers to reach the station across a very busy road ?
Whilst housing is a important provision for many people, why are Medway Council insisting that including existing new developments on the peninsula and potentially 10600 more are to be placed on vital agricultural land and areas like Capstone Park in Medway have been refused planning permission? With important figures on the council living in the Capstone area.this has the flavour of nimby!!
If these proposals are to go ahead I would like to see an independent authority produce a sustainable plan which covers the comments I have mentioned.
There is not enough flesh on this, especially around the new sports centre which has been long promised- barely a mention of it and no detail, this is after cabinet made a decision to investigate this further in 2018 which was never acted upon. There is no visibility on this.
There are far too many houses proposed, and there is a black hole in the finances, which have been overtaken by events ( this whole thing is taking far too long) There is no surety about the railway plan and it is continuously being truncated further and has lost the Medway Link which is a disaster for place making. The shared bridge has now been dropped. There is a lot of over promising and under delivering going on and people have lost faith in the progress, it now appearing as a crowbar to put houses on the peninsula, thus avoiding other areas of Medway, but vague promises of infrastructure and community facilities seem to be disappearing one by one.
Basically far too much housing on sensitive areas. Not enough certainty that the transport aspect is sustainable, with the relief road having 20mph issues. Green spaces corridors are being reduced to 10m !! the shared bridge is gone and there should be a bi pass, not an "A" road going through the middle of what will be Hoo!! This is the opposite of place making. The land owned by Homes England and the Deangate Ridge, owned by Medway Council, should not be built upon because A) There is a conflict of interest as Homes iEngland is the Funder and Medway Council is controlling the project as administrator and bureaucrat. B) The areas of scientific and natural interest are right next door to these two areas, C) They are the wrong side of the A228 which will give a hideous split in the town of Hoo
There are too many proposed new neighbourhoods. In my opinion about 5,000 homes would be about right. There is a lot of uncertainty about the infrastructure and what level of growth it can sustain, particularly the relief road, and studies need to be released which can show sustainability. There also needs to be room left to grow, particularly the energy infrastructure, which is of national importance, and the Kingsnorth industrial area. If these can be grown then there will be jobs for the people in the new houses and then they wouldn't need to necessarily commute on and off the peninsula every day.
This is a very short consultation which lacks specificity as to any of the details, particularly around the replacement for Hoo swimming pool which is now 50 years old. There need to be new facilities in place for the residents of the new houses before time rather than years after the event. Like a good meal in a restaurant, timeliness is important for enjoyment and if you are left waiting for long periods between courses it can be very irritating and spoil the enjoyment.It is particularly difficult to get GP services in this area.
The Hoo Peninsular is a group of small villages which under this proposal would become a mass urban sprawl. Hoo St Werburgh will become a small town taking away the character. People choose this area due to not wanting to live in a built up area and the pollution that comes with the increasing amount of traffic.
2: Accessible and well-connected settlements. The proposals show foot and cycle paths linking the different areas of proposed Garden Village. It is ideology to assume that people will use these routes in preference to jumping in the car to get from A-B quicker. 3: Vibrant and sustainable communities . Villages are just that, small communities where people who choose to live in them accept that the facilities are not that of a town.
The framework opens up opportunities in the future to link the outlying villages with Hoo St Werburgh due to the open spaces surrounding each village, the green buffer zones need to be bigger to prevent this. The proposed railway station will not be of use to villagers who want to travel within the medway towns. By removing the Medway curve you are defeating the object of encouraging a reduction in car use. Nobody is going to travel to travel by train if they want to go to Strood, a 10 min journey by car but probably an hour if you go via Gravesend by train. The line to Strood would allow travel further afield and access to the High Speed trains to London. Instead of the station a dedicated shuttle bus to Strood Station would allow access to the whole rail network at a fraction of the cost.
By splitting Hoo St Werburgh into three neighbourhoods you taking away the village aspect and destroying the character, it encourages segregation rather than inclusion..
The proposed road network will not alleviate the traffic problems that the Peninsular suffers on a daily basis. The addition of circa 24,000 cars, allowing 2 per household plus increased HGV movement from the new industrial area using the roads particularly at peak times will result in the same problems as we suffer now. A majority of the new inhabitants will work outside of the Peninsular. The pollution levels around Four Elms roundabout / hill are already well above legal limits which have not been addressed by the council to date, will only increase . This is detrimental to the health of the residents and puts a strain on the NHS. I feel that he proposed relief road incorporating the army road will become an overnight parking place for lorries.
I cannot see any page numbers, but searching for "Vision", all the elements sound aspirational and positive. Very much hope that any development in rural Hoo will indeed be landscape-led, accessible, attractive and vibrant.
Re. 1 & 4: I can't see how these principles fit with the planned second highway onto the Hoo Peninsula, as it will cut through the green spaces you have marked to be kept, on Figure 4.9 from 'Hoo Development Framework - Public Consultation Summary'. The imposed traffic noise, exhaust fumes and street lighting will destroy this wonderful rural landscape, gobbling it up into the spreading townscape. Instead, changes can be limited to upgrading current paths for walkers and cyclists as is planned, keeping an attractive access to the Hoo Peninsula beyond. The need for this second highway seems unnecessary, when the already planned slip roads at Four Elms roundabout will aid quicker access. The A4 into West London has the same size of carriageway - two lanes each way. It is unclear why the Hoo Peninsula needs more access than the main artery into West London . Re. 2. If 'accessible' could also include the large swathe of the Hoo Peninsula in the west and north of as well - Cliffe Woods, Cliffe, Cooling etc - that would be excellent. There is currently only a fast running single carriageway - the B2000 - running between 'town' and 'country', where the pathway on it runs out very early on, close by the junction with Bunter's Hill Road. After this, there is no safe way to walk or cycle to get to these communities - the only way is by car. There is a bridleway, but it is basically a muddy path, often churned up in wet weather by the horses. It is also incorrectly marked on various maps, variously as an all-weather path and even as a tarmacked road, but it is only a path by the edge of a field off the Lea Green Road/Common Road/Haven Street junction, running up into the woodland to Cliffe Woods. A possible all-weather path could run past what was the Higham Cricket ground to Cliffe Woods - where there was road access a few years ago - and could give off-road access to the Hoo Peninsula beyond. Re. 4. Smaller developers seem to create far more interesting & attractive places for people to live than the larger well-known names. Esquire Developments, for example, have created hugely attractive places to live - 'Appleyard Quarter' at Hoo, Cliffe Woods and also around Cliffe. Instead of the ubiquitous, uninteresting houses seen in most new builds - loud red roof tiles, little planting, no room for cars and outside space - Esquire has used an attractive mix of building materials that signal 'country living', within a well landscaped space.
Searching through the document, the 'Overall Framework Plan' incompasses everything - "The overall Framework plan combines a new vision for Hoo, aspirations and four key principles into an illustrative plan." I agree with some points, but there are important things that I don't agree with - please see my previous comments. Re. housing and infrastructure: I agree that houses need to be built, but hopefully this can be done with care and attention while not needlessly destroying the attractiveness of the area. For example, creating a second highway through beautiful countryside to run alongside the current one just widens the town area into the countryside, creating an even larger pollution zone of fumes, noise and light. Hopefully, good infrastructure - schools, shops, businesses, bus routes, green areas, play areas etc - will benefit both new and current residents. Including a new NHS Minor Injuries Unit here as they have in Faversham - where it is open daily and where X-rays can be taken - would be of huge benefit to those on this side of the Medway, taking the pressure off Medway Maritime hospital.
There is a lot of building planned, and it is at an early stage so there is no deep detail to comment on. The proposed green buffer spaces around them will help, and hopefully there will be green spaces in-between as well to stop the various communities losing their identity and becoming just one very large town. Hopefully connectivity consideration will also be given to the west and north of the Hoo Peninsula as it is currently not well linked when it comes to all-weather footpaths/cycle tracks, so hard to access except by car.
No answer given
The Hoo Peninsula is being over developed with the loss of grade 1 agricultural land & the countryside. A peaceful rural life for many people will no longer exist. Developments already built have had a negative effect on those living nearby.
The Hoo Peninsula is being over developed with the loss of grade 1 agricultural land & the countryside. A peaceful rural life for many people will no longer exist. Developments already built have had a negative effect on those living nearby. The countryside should be left alone & grade 1 farming land left for food production.
The Hoo Peninsula is being over developed with the loss of grade 1 agricultural land & the countryside. A peaceful rural life for many people will no longer exist. Developments already built have had a negative effect on those living nearby. The countryside should be left alone & grade 1 farming land left for food production.
The Hoo Peninsula is being over developed with the loss of grade 1 agricultural land & the countryside. A peaceful rural life for many people will no longer exist. Developments already built have had a negative effect on those living nearby. The countryside should be left alone & grade 1 farming land left for food production.
The Hoo Peninsula is being over developed with the loss of grade 1 agricultural land & the countryside. A peaceful rural life for many people will no longer exist. Developments already built have had a negative effect on those living nearby. The countryside should be left alone & grade 1 farming land left for food production.
Over the past decade a number of new developments have been built in Hoo, the aerial view you for one are using does not represent a current aerial view of Hoo, there is now a housing estate which backs on to Kings Hill Rec and Wall Close. The village is already under immense pressure, the current facilities are struggling, the roads are under pressure and it only takes one accident in the village for all of the roads to be gridlocked. In addition to this the pollutions levels in Hoo are already above the recommended levels. Buildings another 10,000 homes will increase the pollutions levels by 100 fold. You also need to consider the fact that 10,000 homes is potentially an additional 25,000 cars going in and out of the Peninsula. The electrics in the village are old and there has been a number (far more than usual) outages over the past 12 months - this will only set to get worse. The sewage system in the village will not be able to cope with the increased demand even with additional systems being put in place the older systems are going to struggle to dispose. The telephone lines in the village are also going to struggle. Building 10,000 homes on the Peninsula is a catoptric move, we need the wild life and the people of Hoo and surrounding areas need to open space.
By building the houses you are taking away the landscape, you are bringing in more polluted air and damaging peoples health. Village life should be kept as village life, the village will not be sustainable as you will be building on the current farm/ wet lands
I completely disagree with the frame work - again my points from the first page- Pollution Sewage Electric cables already struggling Telephone lines the doctor surgeries are already under immense pressure - so is Medway Hospital This doesnt just effect Hoo, it will effect all of the local amenities
I think that this will turn Hoo into a new town and the crime rate will increase, members of the community will no longer interact the way they do now, local village events will not be able to take place due to the additional 25,000 people that will be potentially moving into the area ( using the assumption for every 1 property built on average 2.5 people will live there)
Hoo in the last 15 years has nearly double in size and there has and still is immense pressure on the local services and road network. Crime levels have increased, drug dealers are on the rise, litter has increased with current villagers having to arrange local litter picking days. The pollution in Hoo is at an all-time high. Removing natural open spaces and replacing them with more houses will only contribute to the demise of the Peninsula.
It's the same question that people like me who live miles from supermarkets , what plans are in place to build major supermarkets Dr's surgery's , its impossible to get a drs appointment because there is insufficient surgery's to accommodate the increased new housing which will bring new family's???? As a Resident of Hoo St Werburgh I feel that I must say something about your new proposal for the development of the Hoo peninsula Firstly with 10 000 new house's Comes 10,000- 30,000 new Residents Also 10,000 - 30,000 cars There's no mention of new roads With this many new people where are the new drs and dentist? Where are the people supposed to shop ? No mention of Supermarkets the older generation have to travel Into Strood or beyond to shop I feel that more attention needs to be focused on these issues plus many more than the current ones Thank you A Resident of Hoo St Werburgh
How will the council protect birds and other wild life whose homes are on the Hoo Peninsular when the development commenced ?
High Halstow is a pleasant and very agreeable place to live. The latest proposed development of Redrow Homes will pretty much destroy this good feeling. It is a dim-witted plan that ignores all considerations of people, transport and space. 760 homes, doubling the size of the village, will be cramped beyond residents' acceptability. Driving along Christmas Lane would turn a simple enough half-mile into a complex convolution of a twisty, roundabouted-labyrinth making it a tedious and laborious slog - and a risky nightmare at rushhour. And be sure, nothing will look anything like Redrow's photographs! But, to my mind, the most serious objection would be the social changes to the village. Medway Council's secrecy is due to their hiding bad news... they are always happy to freely broadcast good news. I believe the bad news is due to the high concentration of 'affordable homes' that Medway Council will demand. I believe that the largest customer for 'affordable homes' will be London Councils - they will transfer their over-spilling tenants to be shifted into them. Medway Council will force their squeezing plans for the whole of the Hoo Peninsula desperately trying to avoid using areas like Hempstead, Capstone or Rainham. What other reason could there be that adequately explains their secrecy? Surely, the right approach is to spread London's expansion evenly throughout Medway Council's area! Thus, the social effects of London will come to live on Hoo Peninsula: Territories, gangs, drugs, violence, knives, guns, no-go areas... just like the media regularly shows us the events in the capital. It might be wise to consider upgrading your door-locks, alarms, outdoor lighting, property access points, CCTV... and so on. Forget the arguments of access to the Peninsula, forget the environmental disasters - Medway Council will easily brush these objections aside. High Halstow people would surely then take on feelings of anxiety and unsafeness. This, of course, is my personal opinion - I do not represent anyone's point of view. It is mine.
There is no room for additional housing, we can't get doctors appointments, the roads are gridlocked. It takes me ages to get out of the village to go to work as it is due to the number of cars as only 1 way in and out of hoo. There is not enough green space left to be built on without it impacting the wildlife and living conditions of the people already living here.
1. Not enough land to be built on or the services to support. We have regular blackouts as it is, the roads are too busy. Your images used are miss leading too as you have green space visible that has already been built on. That to me is the council agreeing itself that there just is not enough land! 2. You have not addressed the access needs for current residents in hoo the traffic is heavy as it is you have not addressed the roads to accommodated an extra 20,000 people. 3. The plans are not vibrant or sustainable. You are overloading already overloaded communities 4. They are not attractive and not tailored. Yiu have nit thought about sewage needs or electrical. Electrics and sweage already outdated and under pressure you have nit addressed these or taken into consideration.
Your report is based in lies and inaccuracy in your favour therefore your overall framework plan is heavily flawed
There is no room or infrastructure in any of these neighborhoods to support the plans
Disgusted with your use of old out dated images to suggest we have more green space then we do currently. 10,000 homes is an absolute disgrace to even be considered. There is no thought to the people living here already and the issues we currently put up with regards to current problems with traffic, pollution, lack of services and public transport. Where are the additional schools and doctors surgery's? You have not put any extra in for hoo.l because there is no room for them. We can't get doctors appointments as it is. We are not safe with the current level of cars. It took me 20 mins to get out of herdsdown in school traffic and only last week an ambulance with blue lights on was stuck outside the close trying to get in because of the school traffic and you want to add to this. You are putting current hoo residents at risk.
It is a given, that more housing must be provided and especially that in the social housing sector. However, it is also important to respect the residential living standards and quality of life of those living in Hoo at this present time.
As stated in the answer to question one, future developments must not detract from the nice village environment we currently enjoy. The village should not be allowed to be forced into being a town unless the necessary supportive infrastructure is provided. It also must not allow "section 106 funds" received from the developers to be diverted away from the Hoo area in favour of other areas within Medway Council areas! Also concerning is the resilience of the utility services - these MUST be improved before the development starts? Its great to see new schools as this shortfall along with GP facilities has been previously reported in developers prospectus with their assessment being that the existing provision "was sufficient" - certainly NOT the case!
Future developments must be well supported - utility services, GP surgery accessibility vastly improved if is expected to cater for a vast increase in the population.
Must be tastefully achieved without destroying existing living standards.
1. With regard to the proposed development adjacent to the farm access lane {on the industrial estate side] of Church Farm Close, it is my understanding that their is a high pressure gas main buried adjacent to the lane, and at the time of its installation, it was stated that there must be a clear ten metre corridor left in any future development! 2. Having lived in the village of Hoo for over thirty years, and witnessed several housing development, we don't need a repeat of the event occurring in February 2008 when the newly laid Southern Water Main down Bells Lane, laid to supposedly accommodate future developments, which was the subject to several excavations due to leaks and eventually blew out and subsequently flooded the gas mains serving the lower end of the village leaving residents without gas for eight (8) days. 3. Its great to have new schools but what the village MUST have is more local access to GP surgeries.
The format of this questionnaire is not fit for purpose. The document is a sales document with lots of high-level suggestions but little in the way of actual firm commitments and facts. It’s a case of never mind the quality feel the width The document rightly points out that the money available for HIF at £170M can only be used for transport and environmental projects. The budget was calculated when inflation was at 2-3% rather than the +9% that we are faced with now. Similarly, the cost of borrowing that we currently face was not part of the budget calculation. The council has indicated that a shortfall in funds for HIF will be covered by investments from developers etc. The plan would have HIF implemented by spring 2025, which is well before the developers see a return on their investments. The whole funding of HIF needs to be clarified on an urgent basis with contingencies publicised on what parts of HIF, and therefore the whole Hoo Development program, would be cut in the event that the financial requirements cannot be met. The document mentions that the plan is to build up to 10,000 homes in the next 30 years and acknowledges that there needs to be improvements on transport infrastructure as well health services, schools and leisure facilities. But it does not indicate when these improvements will/should take place. Any organisation undertaking such a major project must be able to advise it’s customers, in this case existing and future residents, commercial operations and developers, the key milestones that the project will hit and, as this will use public money, the associated costs. The document indicates that several new schools will be built to support the 10,000 new dwellings. This needs to be firmed up as the new schools will need to be in place before the construction of all the housing is completed. There needs to be a commitment that the new secondary school will be completed when the construction is underway for say the first 2000 houses. Similar commitments for the proposed primary schools are also required. The improvement in health care services needs to commence immediately. The COVID epidemic showed that the existing healthcare services providers on the Hoo peninsula were unable to provide facilities for Covid vaccinations. People had to travel to the Medway Towns for vaccinations. I personally had to drive my 86-year old aunt from Allhallows to Wainscott to get her vaccination. A detailed plan to improve the healthcare system on the peninsula needs to be put in place and at least partially executed before any significant expansion of the population takes place.
The format of this questionnaire is not fit for purpose
The format of this questionnaire is not fit for purpose
The format of this questionnaire is not fit for purpose
The document is a sales document with lots of high-level suggestions but little in the way of actual firm commitments and facts. It’s a case of never mind the quality feel the width The document rightly points out that the money available for HIF at £170M can only be used for transport and environmental projects. The budget was calculated when inflation was at 2-3% rather than the +9% that we are faced with now. Similarly, the cost of borrowing that we currently face was not part of the budget calculation. The council has indicated that a shortfall in funds for HIF will be covered by investments from developers etc. The plan would have HIF implemented by spring 2025, which is well before the developers see a return on their investments. The whole funding of HIF needs to be clarified on an urgent basis with contingencies publicised on what parts of HIF, and therefore the whole Hoo Development program, would be cut in the event that the financial requirements cannot be met. The document mentions that the plan is to build up to 10,000 homes in the next 30 years and acknowledges that there needs to be improvements on transport infrastructure as well health services, schools and leisure facilities. But it does not indicate when these improvements will/should take place. Any organisation undertaking such a major project must be able to advise it’s customers, in this case existing and future residents, commercial operations and developers, the key milestones that the project will hit and, as this will use public money, the associated costs. The document indicates that several new schools will be built to support the 10,000 new dwellings. This needs to be firmed up as the new schools will need to be in place before the construction of all the housing is completed. There needs to be a commitment that the new secondary school will be completed when the construction is underway for say the first 2000 houses. Similar commitments for the proposed primary schools are also required. The improvement in health care services needs to commence immediately. The COVID epidemic showed that the existing healthcare services providers on the Hoo peninsula were unable to provide facilities for Covid vaccinations. People had to travel to the Medway Towns for vaccinations. I personally had to drive my 86-year old aunt from Allhallows to Wainscott to get her vaccination. A detailed plan to improve the healthcare system on the peninsula needs to be put in place and at least partially executed before any significant expansion of the population takes place. Figure 2.29 Flood risk zones diagram is not showing any flood risk at Fenn where the Fenn Bell pub has been flooded at least twice in recent years. The diagram also does not highlight the location of the wells from which BP used to draw water for it’s steam and power generating plant. Do these not represent a flood risk? Previous versions of the HIF plan had a loop from the new station at Sharnall Street to the Medway Towns in addition to the connection to Gravesend. The Medway Towns loop has now been removed with a basic service running to Gravesend. Passengers wishing to travel to London will either have to buy an expensive ticket to use the high-speed connection from Ebbsfleet to Stratford or St Pancras or endure the extremely slow Thames Link service into London. The loop would have enabled passengers to commute for work in the Medway Towns and Maidstone or use a fast train service on South Eastern to several London terminus stations. I believe that the proposed station will be in danger of becoming a white elephant. Projected passenger analysis must have been carried out but does this show that the new station is viable with the current population? If not, how many new houses would need to be built to make it a profitable undertaking? This is the type of information that should be shared with residents in the framework document. You mention that Medway “is very well connected by road with the M2, and by rail with the high-speed connection between London St Pancras and Ashford International”. To make use of the high-speed connection to Ashford International, passengers would have to change trains at least twice but there again neither Ashford or Ebbsfleet can be regarded as “International” stations as Eurostar services no longer stop at these stations. Section 2.15 Constraints fails to mention that the Four Elms Hill relief road will use, in part, a road currently owned and used by the Ministry of Defence. No information had been forthcoming from HIF that agreement has been reached for full unfettered access and therefore this must remain as a constraint. The Constraints section mentions that “There are significant issues with traffic and air quality in a number of areas, particularly around Four Elms Roundabout which is the primary access point to and from the Peninsula. If unmitigated additional homes will put further pressure on the existing road capacity.” If the relief road is implemented, it will inevitably lead to HGV’s passing along the proposed new roads and housing areas in Chattenden and towards Deangate Ridge. HGV’s cannot be prevented from using this road as it is supposed to ease the number of vehicles and associated pollution on Four Elms Hill and roundabout. The proposed shared user bridge across Peninsula Way was part of earlier proposals but at the HIF consultation that took part in the beginning of January this had been taken out. It is unclear if HIF now includes the shared user bridge or even if this is part of the HIF scope. Without the bridge the A228 would remain as a barrier to pedestrian and cyclists moving between Hoo and Deangate Ridge and I would consider the retention of it in the plan should be treated as a high priority. The document mentions the following: “Additionally, the retention of a strategic gap between Chattenden and Strood will maintain the rural character of the peninsula, strengthening and defining the natural buffer between urban and rural Medway”. Does this mean the Hogmarsh Valley and the land to the east of Wulfere Way to Upnor will not be used for development? You mention sustainable energy sources – “district heating networks” but cannot see where these are to be located and what would be the source of the required energy. This should be part of the consultation document. I recognise that the scope of the document Is focussed on Hoo, High Halstow and Chattenden, but how about the other villages that outside of these namely, Allhallows, Grain, Stoke (Upper, Middle & Lower) and St. Mary’s? The impact on the residents of these villages and the employment centres located in/around them needs to be detailed as the only transport routes from these locations is via Peninsular Way or the proposed rail connection.
We have already had a limited green fields development to the rear of the Jet Garage at the top of Four Elms Hill. This expansion by Abbey homes, has served to loose agricultural farming space at a time of increased goods import costs. Additionally the added housing has increased the local areas air pollution which was already in an ''action required measures''. We have added noise and light pollution. Already as a direct result of this areas limited expansion, we have seen a substantial increase in anti-social behavior, quad-bikes/motorbikes from the estates children churning up fields and areas of SSSI, the noise. Litter and dog fouling in the area has more than doubled. The areas infrastructure is in poor state both for pedestrian and highway users.
1. Landscape-Led development. To be truthful to its heading, this area should NOT even consider the use of greenfield sites, especially with an abundant supply of brownfield areas available. The small amount of development has already lead to the SSSI being abused by motor vehicles for recreational use. This of course has both noise and air pollution to the landscape. 2. Accessible and well-connected settlements. The street hierarchy is not working for the occupants we have to date. Traffic calming measures have not stopped back route lanes around Chattenden becoming rat-runs. Vehicles frequently travel at excessive speeds through current residential lanes. Many of the highlighted walking cycling routes are already available, we have/do walk these routes frequently. 3. Vibrant & Sustainable communities. This is currently poorly lacking in Chattenden, therefore any improvements to this would be welcome. No plans seen for adult/family public house? 4. Attractive & Tailored built form. The current use of small plot sizes is not sustainable for healthy well-being to the occupying families. Additionally we currently occupy a dwelling with very small rear gardens, back in 2008 when i spoke to the developers on this, they said ''it was acceptable, due to the open agricultural land that the garden backed onto. Housing to the rear of these properties would prove difficult for the current residents on so many fronts.
Although the idea seems attractive, we find it hard to believe. This is biased on the very limited Abbey homes (4 elms place?), Liberty park and the Chimes Developments. Transport improvements have not materialised, we have often been left waiting at bus stops, Taxis have also stated ''sorry we have nothing in the area, try again in an hour''. The new rail-link Hoo to Gravesend, absolutely no use locally, London traffic only.
Chattenden. Terraced and semi-detached housing, this suggests packing dwellings together to maximise the number of housed/dwelling to the allocated space.
The infrastructure is hinted as a promise to come first. This looks more unlikely as the weeks pass-by. The areas infrastructure is already under pressure from the current limited developments. As for current residents, they will be expected to live with large scale building and development works for the next 30 years? This would be fine for younger generations, and yes, I know we have to plan for those too. However some of us do not have that amount of time left, is it right that we have to move at this stage of our lives to retire in peace-and-quiet. We thought we had planned for that back in 2007.
I cannot understand how, given the current global food situation and the acceptance that we will need to source more of our food locally in future, people think it would be a good idea to build on grade A farmland. This makes no sense at all. Given that the housing targets imposed by government bear no relation to the actual local housing needs this is just wanton destruction of a very important resource for the future of not only the local population but the population as a whole.
The HIF will fund the provision of road access (how well this will serve to reduce congestion once thousands more families are living on the peninsular remains to be seen) and a railway. The initial HIF application was flawed. What about all the other infrastructure that goes along with that sort of increase in population. The existing infrastructure is barely able to cope with the numbers living here already. Any contributions from developers towards the provision of necessary infrastructure eg. Water, Sewage, Sewage treatment, Surface water drainage,Electricity and flood protection will no doubt be added to the cost of the houses rendering them unaffordable to a lot of people. Any infrastructure provided will, no doubt, be at the minimum level allowable and as cheap as possible. In addition, it's all very well to build new schools and medical centres etc. etc. but who's going to staff them. We don't have enough teachers and doctors and nurses now.
Has anyone given any thought to the projections made by the Environment Agency and others with regard to the effects of rising sea levels due to climate change and the fact that the North Kent marshes and the Medway Estuary form part of the sacrificial flood plain to protect London?
They should NOT be built on prime agricultural land. They should NOT be built until ALL infrastructures have been upgraded to accommodate them. To build them first and install infrastructure afterwards would be to subject the whole of the population of the Hoo peninsular, old and new, to unnecessary difficulties.
I question whether the issues raised by residents of the Hoo peninsular in this consultation will be taken seriously or if it is just paying 'lip service' to a process in view of the fact that Medway Council have already pre-empted the legal process and have already caused a lot of damage
I can see no evidence in these documents which demonstrates there is a solid and robust need for the proposed development of this scale. I fear it is driven by a political agenda (and potentially by friendly developers) rather than by a carefully considered analysis of the needs across Medway. The impact of such a development on our town for many years ahead and cost of providing not just the core development but all the key elements of infrastructure (including those this plan does not fully consider) is likely to be much larger than envisaged in your optimistic costings. Much more work is needed to demonstrate this is a necessary development for Medway alongside a much more robust and fully costed (and realistic) detailed implementation plan. I see little evidence that the developments fully consider all the environmental and climate change risks and potential impacts we can expect to see over the next few decades. For example, sea level changes and the funding needed to implement a more robust set of flood defences for Medway would seem to be a strategic element of need which is perhaps not adequatle covered or understood. Sadly, the council has an extremely poor record of accomplishment in the delivery of Medway friendly infrastructure and development programs and most Medway residents have become very cynical as a result. The potential for years of blighted landscapes (e.g. Strood and Rochester Riverside is a good example) and badly conceived developments (current Chatham town centre blocks of yet more flats) is a real concern for many. It might be a better plan to focus on improving those areas the council have allowed to become run down and completing existing developments before embarking on a development for which there is no clear definition of need.
The principles stated do not appear to provide any linkage to a well-developed set of needs that this development will deliver solutions for. Simply stating there is growth strategy without defining a purpose for the growth and a definition of the metrics used to assess the delivery of that strategy seems foolhardy. The development proposed seems out of scale for the area and risk decades of blight for the communities that live there today and may live there in the future. Surely the key principles must include a definition of the specific needs that this development enables set in the context of the local area and the wider Medway perspective. The document seems light on costings, funding allocations and a well-developed roadmap for this activity set within a Medway wide Roadmap. The output of such a roadmap enables a realistic understanding of the strategic intent and the place of this development within that roadmap. Such a roadmap would also form the basis of a realistic local plan, sadly lacking at this time. It would therefore seem prudent to halt all work on this development framework until such strategic roadmap is in place and a formal local plan is adopted. I note that it seems unlikely that the levels of government funding available will deliver the infrastructure vision laid out in these documents whilst the overall cost and timescale for the whole development is undefined. This significantly extends the timescales for this development and the impact on the people who live in this part of Medway. One see's parallels with other developments across Medway which are often poorly conceived, inadequately researched and are allowed to drag on for decades. At this time there is a strong perception that the only beneficiary of the proposed development will be a small number of major development companies, the value for the people of Medway (and the people who live in Hoo) is undefined.
It is not a plan as I understand the meaning of a plan. It comes across as the output of a top-level study where content and conclusions have been watered down to fit the needs of this consultation with some padding to deliver a page count. One would hope significantly more in-depth information and analysis is available to back into this document. The various sections present a wide range of possibilities and opportunities and some of the barriers (but not all) that must be considered. But I can see little that constitutes a formal plan, with limited assessment of risk and benefits of alternate approaches, little content on delivery timeframe and the metrics that are planned to measure progress and little content on funding and other resources required to deliver this plan. Much more information on the HIF should have been presented, as it forms a key enabler for the rest of the development and the risk attached to delivering the HIF for a funding stated. From a cursory assessment It seems unlikely that the full extent of the HIF will be delivered within the funding avilable, it would be useful to understand the contingency planning for such risks that sit within the plan. The document comes across as a marketing document for the proposed development rather than as a serious development plan. I realise that this might be a deliberate approach to tailor the document down to an audience but for me it suggests a lack of depth and an attempt to manipulate for a political of commercial end goal.
To be clear, the definition of neighbourhoods using existing place names is an artificial construct designed to soften the reality that the existing communities and countryside will be sacrificed as part of the creation of a new urban landscape (town) . The document paints an idyllic image of new “village like” communities but the reality is essentially a number of housing estates dumped on top of existing landscape and communities. In the absence of a time phased and costed plan, it seems reasonable to assume that the necessary infrastructure that enable the suggested quality of life (so much more than a few roads) will come along in later phases (if at all) after the developers have finished the profitable phases of the develo0pment. The outline information presented is simply one vision of what could be and (as is usually the case) seems unlikely to be realised as outlined. Agin, it feels like a marketing document rather than a realistic proposal for such a significant development.
In summary the proposal does not demonstrate a strategic need for this development, at least not at the scale suggested. I can see no evidence of a strategic roadmap that shows how this development links to the wider Medway context. Ther lack of an agreed and well considered Medway Plan is a major barrier for any development activity of this nature. It would therefore seem prudent to halt all work on this development framework until such strategic roadmap is in place and a formal local plan is adopted. The proposal is incomplete and does not identify funding and resources needed, timescales, identification of risks and contingency plans and the full extent of the environmental impact. It might be a better plan to focus on improving those areas across Medway that the council have allowed to become run down and to complete existing developments before embarking on a development for which there is no clear definition of need.
Total lack of planning in respect to infrastructure.
Lacking any real consideration in respect to infrastructure, with regards to Transport, Roads, Doctors, Schools, Dentists, Water Supply, Drainage and Sewage
As previously stated there is a lot of planning in respect to building but little or no real plans in respect to the infrastructure needed to accommodate all this development
Again as I keep saying a lot of house building, but little or no thought to the infrastructure that needs to be in place prior to this construction going ahead.
Go back to the drawing board, have meaningful talks with the current residents whose lives have already been affected and will be further affected by all this building. Schools, Doctors and Dentists are already streached to breaking point and until the necessary infrastructure is in place and working the proposed development should not go ahead.
High Halstow is a village the proposed he peninsula into a towndevelopment in high High Halsow and in Hoo is turning the peninsula into a town.
We do not need to be connected to other settlements we are a village and wish to stay as such. Our community is vibrant and sustainable expanding it as proposed will degrade its vibrancy and sustainability.
where else in the country are there proposals to dump 12000 houses on one village . The proposals are unsustainable
There is an existing vibrant neighbourhood. I do not want to live in an urban environment.
Why are plans for Hoo and High Halstow being proposed by developers and not the local community. The road network here is unsustainable. More cars and lorries mean more pollution into an already dangerous air quality area. You must not double the size of the villages. the sewage system will not cope. The schools will not cope. there are only two doctors surgeries on the peninsula with not enough doctors to cope. I cannot get a face to face appointment. the Bus service is bad with one bus per hour , journey times to medway are onerous. The Hoo peninsula is important for the wildlife too many people will damage their environment.. Deangate the BP club and stoke road Sturdee club are closed where are we to go of social interaction.
The framework is reliant on the money from the HIF being able to deliver the infrastructure necessary for any further development in the peninsula.
Open spaces for recreation are most welcome.
Based on the fact that the framework is reliant on other factors it seems premature to have any development framework.
Without the necessary infrastructure this will be a disaster for both nature and those of us living here.
Nature and farmland need to be protected before profit and housing development.
improved traffic flow
I am opposed to the implementation of a proposed footway and cycle facility shown on pg 55. This is directly adjacent to our Forest School area which is used daily by our children. Each morning we do a sweep of the site and pick up full bottles of urine, empty bottles of alcohol and various other pieces of rubbish that have been thrown from moving vehicles over the fence and into our site. The children complete learning right up to the fence line on a daily basis and it would be a safeguarding issue for members of the public to be able to stop and see/interact with our children as and when they wished to. We would not have the staffing to patrol this long area of fence line. We also have a huge amount of wildlife that live within our Forest School - 2 families of foxes, hedgehogs and slow worms plus numerous species of birds which live unaffected presently as fast moving traffic is the only disturbance they have. I would urge you to rethink this proposal as we have taken 2 and a half years to get Forest School to where it is now - we have planted saplings, created a wild meadow area, maintained the older trees, fed nesting robins, created bug hotels, seating area with fire pit and our children would be devastated if they were unable to use this area any more. I would not feel I was upholding my duty as safeguarding lead if I was to let any child go into this area knowing that anyone could interact with them at any given moment. I feel if you were to put a huge fence along the whole of the Forest School area this may highlight the fact there is something there and may make people curious as to what is behind the fence and they may want to climb over. I hope you understand my views on this and this is echoed by all children in school.
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
missing a guiding principle of safety. no explanation of how local people will be able to afford the new housing and continue to be able to like in the area. It is Avery large and rapid increase in to the size of the village
1. The principle appears to be driven by building on all the possible land and that land can is unsuitable to be built on will be 'given to the community'. But we already have access to this land. 2. Are they well connected? The A228 will be a major barrier to the housing to the north west and Ropers land, used for access to the industrial area, will be a barrier to the north east. 3. By the very nature of the proposed development the community will be destroyed. 4. Attractive and well built form is not compatible with build affordable housing for local people.
over development. moving the village centre to the extreme north west is going to lead more car journeys
you are presenting that as separate development in instead of an integrated commit. This due to the rapid speed of the development, instead of a more organic growth of the village
You have made the consultation very hard to understand. The question refer to page numbers in a document that is not longer available and not the sections as they are listed in the web pages. When even the council employees admit that the documentation is difficult to read and that the maps provided are inaccurate, different to understand and misleading, then it has to be quested if the whole process is flawed. And once again the documentation provided for a Medway consultation is changed part way through. Having attend the consultations in the local area there are still many questions that need to be answered and the council is unable or unwilling to answer because they are blinker by focusing on the rapid development of the village.
No answer given
I strongly disagree with the footpath and cycle path proposal next to Wainscott primary school. This causes massive safeguarding issues for children. These children also have spent years building up their forest school. Which will be ruined if this goes ahead.
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
I have a problem with the path/cycle path that is proposed to run along side Wainscott Primary school. For starters it's a safety issue for the children. The school and children have worked hard to build up their forest school, the children should be safe in that area to explore, not at risk of undesirable people that would be just the other side of the fence. The same as any alley anywhere it will be littered, rubbish stuffed into/through the fence (so into the school property) and maybe on the extreme side but drug taking down there would be another worry, and what our children could come into contact with. There was a community meeting in Hoo recently with the police, I didn't realise Hoo had such a problem with drugs, but it does, so its not that unimaginable that it could become a problematic area. There's not a lot of room there, it would be very secluded, one side a dual carriage way and the other side a primary school, I wouldn't feel safe walking down there and i especially wouldnt want my children going down there. Walking through the village is much safer and not much of a longer route.
We do need a proper crossing point with safe foot paths either side currently no proper path from the footbridge.
No answer given
No answer given
Slowworms. Doctors. Dentist. School places.
This is an ideal opportunity to build a community and install the vital infrastructure (good roads, rail connections) BEFORE houses are built. Most other proposed developments are too far from railway stations, no capacity to improve existing roads or build new ones, and don’t leave enough remaining open space. Hoo Peninsula can have all this from scratch.
Landscape led is vitally important due to the nature of the area, and this should be top priority. It should also be attractive and in keeping with the area, and definitely well connected.
I think it is the best option for a sustainable future if the right infrastructure is put in place along with measures to protect surrounding open spaces indefinitely. Developments should also be energy efficient, with either solar panels and/or heat pumps in all new builds from the start, and car charging points for all new houses.
They look fine to me.
I think one of the most important aspects of this development is railway access to London, and consideration given again to rail access to Chatham, Strood, Rochester etc. And a good road network designed from the start. Many of the other proposed developments are too reliant on car travel on roads that are too small or unsuitable for any increase in traffic, and too far from the rail network.
I strongly disagree with the plan to build a footpath/cycle path adjacent to Wainscott Primary Schhol.
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
No answer given
1. The scale of proposed expansion to 2055, of 10,000 houses, is 179% - almost a trebling of the current population of Hoo & High Halstow parishes (2021 census - 13,387; increase 24,000, assuming the average 2020 UK household size of 2.4 (ONS)). A slower rate of expansion - say, of 5,000 houses - would be easier to assimilate. 2. Coalescence with urban Medway seems inevitable, given the proposed increase in population & the proximity of the urban area (less than 1 mile at its closest, Chattenden/Wainscott). The concept of a "rural" small town therefore seems unrealistic - if, in principle, attractive. 3. 24,000 more people = c.11,700 more jobs (UK in-work population 32.75m., June-Aug. 2022 (UK Parliament); UK pop. est. 67.08m., 2021 (ONS)). The new town therefore seems likely to be largely a dormitory for out-commuters. 4. The proposed new railway station will lack direct access (i.e., without changing) to London or the Medway towns.For London, it will therefore be less attractive than driving to Strood or Higham stations, with direct access, and, for the Medway towns, than the bus.
Strongly support the intention to conserve, & enhance, the Peninsula's natural environment - a unique asset, so close to London.
Please see answers to Q1a.
The proposed "high density" station quarter seems unrealistic - at least, for the suggested "target" market, of "young professionals". I was a "young professional", once - &, when I wanted high density, I opted for an urban environment, with greater facilities than the putative Hoo "rural" town could offer.
As indicated, the principle of a thriving Hoo Peninsula "rural" town at Hoo is attractive. Again, though, the problem is the close proximity of the Medway urban area - with a current population of c.250,000 -, and the lack of "rural" jobs (e.g., the current permanent agricultural workforce on the whole Peninsula might well be less than 100, based on personal knowledge). A more realistic approach would be to significantly reduce the size of the proposed new town at Hoo - making it easier to integrate it with the existing Peninsula rural environment - , strive to maintain the Peninsula's distinctive rural character (as well emphasised in the Framework), and accept that the Peninsula will continue to be an out-commuting dormitory for a population that prefers to work in a town, but live in the country.
There are no housing number for the options. Without housing numbers it is hard to see how such a large development will impact on the Hoo peninsular and surrounding area. The Consultation material is not adequate for the public to comment meaningfully on the proposal.
There are no housing number for the options. Without housing numbers it is hard to see how such a large development will impact on the Hoo peninsular and surrounding area. The Consultation material is not adequate for the public to comment meaningfully on the proposal.
There are no housing number for the options. Without housing numbers it is hard to see how such a large development will impact on the Hoo peninsular and surrounding area. The Consultation material is not adequate for the public to comment meaningfully on the proposal.
There are no housing number for the options. Without housing numbers it is hard to see how such a large development will impact on the Hoo peninsular and surrounding area. The Consultation material is not adequate for the public to comment meaningfully on the proposal.
There are no housing number for the options. Without housing numbers it is hard to see how such a large development will impact on the Hoo peninsular and surrounding area. The Consultation material is not adequate for the public to comment meaningfully on the proposal.
I am horrified that you think that you have the right to ruin our rural village by turning it into a large town with all the negative things that it entails
You say that this will be a landscape led development but we already have a rural landscape that you are intent on destroying. You say you will create sustainable communities when our present community is barely sustainable in terms of access to doctors appointments and increased traffic that the recent building program is already causing
I don,t want massive development on the Hoo Peninsular. Wouldn’t it be fairer to spread the house building around other parts of Medway instead of dumping it all in our area.
You are intending to create an urban area in a village environment and this is totally wrong in my opinion.
I would like to know what gives you as a council the right to come up with such an awful plan to change the place where we live. If you surround the area where I live with thousands of houses it will mean I will have to drive to reach open areas to walk in. I am a 72 year old and cannot make use of your proposed cycle lanes or your footpaths connecting green areas. I am 5 minutes walk away from open fields and views across the countryside and river but if you decimate the fields surrounding my village it will destroy a way of life that I and hundreds of other residents enjoy.
The direct/indirect impact the proposal will have on the children's nature area will be detrimental to the wildlife and potential learning opportunities the children currently have the opportunity to experience. If this goes ahead then this will be taken away from the children and any future children that may have the pleasure of attending the school.
I think that the needs and development of the children of wainscott primary school have not been taken into account and their learning opportunities should not be compromised
As per the reasons stated in my previous answers.
I feel the impact on the school should take priority over any other aspect
No
This will affect my children's school
Keep our villages as villages not towns
There are too many new homes already being built and the infrastructure cannot cope already
These will not bring together the communities. It's all too Americanised and no more flats/high rises are needed, as already proved, they are dangerous
I understand the need for growth and that people who live in Hoo will probably welcome changes, however, this will affect villages further out than the plans show. This will affect my children's school in Wainscott and all of the nature areas that they have. It will create more chaos, mess & litter and could overload any services that are needed. The estates that have been built before this seem to be where they just dump the people that nobody else wants in their properties for one reason or another or where people that are desperate for somewhere end up. This can create disruption in the community eg (I have actually heard people say this) - I work hard for a living and can't afford a 1 bedroom coach house whereas they do nothing all day except pop out more kids and they get a 5 bedroom house given to them and don't have to pay for it.