5.16

Comment

Representation ID: 327

Received: 18/09/2023

Respondent: Mr Robert Drury

I'm astounded by the fact that there is the possibility of over 11,000 housing opportunities within Medway's urban areas, given it's already creaking nature in the current infrastructure. I believe that future growth will need to come from more purpose built rural development, where appropriate infrastruture (roads, schools, medical facilities, shops) can be part of the plan from day one, rather than piecemeal developments that aren't accompanied by the necessary elements to support them.

Comment

Representation ID: 424

Received: 06/10/2023

Respondent: Mrs Jill Norton

Outrageous to even consider loss of green belt and rural land and for these to be more than any other sites is dreadful.

Comment

Representation ID: 490

Received: 18/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Glen Cook

14736 extra house on "rural" land is bizarre. We have virtually no rural land left in Medway.

Comment

Representation ID: 532

Received: 20/10/2023

Respondent: Francesca Baylis

I am very concerned at any suggestion of development in the metropolitan green belt or AONB. These areas are vitally important to nature, to the councils climate emergency work and to the wellbeing of residents, and must be protected at all costs. Especially since greenbelt land only account for 5% of land in Medway but is being put forward for 7% of the supply. This is entirely disproportionate, especially with the need for the greenbelt about to grow ever more important to air quality mitigation. Brownfield development must be the main preference.

Comment

Representation ID: 568

Received: 24/10/2023

Respondent: Terance Butler Holdings

The Council should focus new development on existing urban areas and brownfield sites ahead of new greenfield land release.

Comment

Representation ID: 583

Received: 24/10/2023

Respondent: Mr John Baker

The reproduced maps/plans available to the public in the consultation documents make it difficult to identify the extent of possible development proposals in the four categories identified

Comment

Representation ID: 587

Received: 24/10/2023

Respondent: Ms Sally Fisher

I do not think that any greenbelt land should be built on in Medway. We need green spaces and wildlife which should be protected. Wildlife corridors could be created in other developments.

Comment

Representation ID: 623

Received: 25/10/2023

Respondent: Mrs Daniela Baylis

If no house building is carried out for Gravesham then no greenbelt land needs to be used. Green belt land should be discounted. it is there for a reason. Concentration should be on urban regeneration

Comment

Representation ID: 649

Received: 25/10/2023

Respondent: Jenni Davis

The figures for rural area are too high

Comment

Representation ID: 681

Received: 26/10/2023

Respondent: Ms Catriona Jamieson

I am against development on green belt, grade 1 agricultural land and Chatham Docks. Planning permission has already been granted for 7000 dwellings and we need less than 5000 dwellings for Medway population so lets not destroy our existing environment, employment opportunities and sustainable businesses.

Comment

Representation ID: 787

Received: 27/10/2023

Respondent: AC Goatham & Son

Agent: Bloomfields Ltd

As set out in previous Local Plan consultations it is understood that the full range of development needs cannot solely be met in the identified regeneration areas on brownfield land. On this basis, the approach set out in paragraph 5.16, which identifies four broad locations for development is supported; urban regeneration, suburban growth, rural development and green belt loss. By ensuring that there is a wide-spread of potential locations, any potential increase in defined housing supply numbers will be able to be absorbed.

Comment

Representation ID: 868

Received: 28/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Keith Harrison

Perhaps these are more useful for assessments in the next century.

Comment

Representation ID: 994

Received: 29/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Leslie Brown

Development in Cuxton, Halling, Hoo villages (as an example) is required to ensure local shops, post offices, community hubs can continue. Town centre former retail units being developed for flats will make no impact upon post offices banks and community facilities.

Comment

Representation ID: 1033

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Blueberry Homes

Agent: Savills

Our client supports the general approach to growth, albeit considers that there is potential for additional growth in Urban Regeneration areas, including the potential for the Site to make a greater contribution towards housing provision than set out in the Land Availability Assessment 2023.

References to ‘the Site’ mean Site Ref: GN6 (Gillingham No.3 and 4) identified in the Land Availability Assessment 2023 and as fully detailed in our letter of representations submitted to the Council.

Comment

Representation ID: 1079

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Medway Green Party

The Council Planners formulating the 2122 – 2140 Medway Local Plan may need those figures.

Comment

Representation ID: 1165

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: St John's College

Agent: Savills (UK) Ltd

The description of ‘rural development’ is not considered particularly reflective of the sites available. It is suggested that this category would be better subdivided into ‘village expansion’ and ‘new settlements’.
St John’s College is promoting site SR4 at Cliffe Woods for development and support Medway Council progressing the assessment of this site to Stage 2 within the LAA process. St John’s College would be very happy to liaise with officers to discuss the deliverability of Site SR4 as soon as convenient.

Comment

Representation ID: 1180

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Redrow Homes Limited

Agent: Ms Emily Brosnan

We support the four broad categories of locations where development could take place. We suggest that a balanced approach to dispersing development across the borough is pursued in the new Local Plan. This is because there are local development needs across the borough so growth should be distributed across the four locations, including Hoo Peninsula.

Comment

Representation ID: 1301

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: David Hopkins

I think the plan should prioritise urban regeneration and high quality rural developments (for example a new village), rather than "tacking on" suburban developments to the existing urban area.

Comment

Representation ID: 1302

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Mrs Helen Hopkins

Where possible as much urban regeneration should be used, rather than keep nibbling away at areas around Capstone for example.
And potentially look at having a new large village, rather than lots of smaller developments.

Comment

Representation ID: 1377

Received: 31/10/2023

Respondent: Barratt David Wilson Homes

Agent: Iceni Projects

Our assessment has indicated that Medway are only likely to be able to achieve approximately 21,000 homes from available sites in the District.

Comment

Representation ID: 1488

Received: 31/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Alexander Cameron

See comment above - but drop green belt loss immediately and focus down on the Suburban Regeneration only

Comment

Representation ID: 1548

Received: 31/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Fred Skipsey

Thoroughly approve decontamination + use of brownfield sites for a mixture of employment + housing opportunities, plus urban regeneration through converting empty high street premises for mixed business + residential use. Easy access to high street shops could improve lives of elderly residents, as long as flats are made accessible, and night-time antisocial behaviour is controlled.
Development along Capstone Valley would be disastrous for wildlife, increase pollution by traffic, demands on schools, health facilities + roads, reduce air quality through loss of trees, deprive Medway of green lung, beauty spot, area for walking, all highly valued during Covid.

Comment

Representation ID: 1667

Received: 31/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Roger Brown

Green Belt destruction is unacceptable. We should not only have urban regeneration. We need rural regeneration which consists of rewilding land which has been deliberately degenerated by greedy farmers and landowners.