14.7.1

Object

Representation ID: 4564

Received: 07/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Helen Lucas

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

There was no indication to the public that Greenbelt had changed to grey belt until the Medway local plan was published

Object

Representation ID: 4653

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The Medway Green Belt Review 2025 is flawed (I have commented on this extensively in other parts of my response).

The Duty to co-operate is being mis-used to effectively bully Medway into sacrificing Green Belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 4683

Received: 09/08/2025

Respondent: Mr john Kay

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Medway Council green belt review occurred without local residents being informed or public consultation. If green belt land is redesignated or boundaries reviewed this should be done with transparency and public engagement.

If Gravesham develop the land under their control and Medway allow development on what is currently green belt land, urban sprawl will join Gravesham to Medway, defeating the primary purpose of green belt.

National guidance states that for land to become grey belt it should have been previously developed.
Chapter Farm is and has always been crop producing land .

Object

Representation ID: 4813

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Alison Stiling

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Failure to adopt brownfield sites first.
Erosion of green belt.
Inadequate infrastructure
Poor air quality

Object

Representation ID: 4814

Received: 10/08/2025

Respondent: Mrs Hazel Wiggins

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Failure to adopt brownfield
Erosion of green belt
Inadequate infrastructure
Poor air quality