5.53

Comment

Representation ID: 366

Received: 26/09/2023

Respondent: Mrs Jill Lovell

Retaining flood plains?

Comment

Representation ID: 411

Received: 05/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Jason Tillman

While there may be room for additional housing in Cuxton, there must consideration of the impact any development would have on the neighbouring nature reserve, and the additional traffic at Junction two of the M2.

Comment

Representation ID: 539

Received: 20/10/2023

Respondent: Francesca Baylis

There is no case for development in the AONB and the impact on the landscape cannot be mitigated. The Vineyard site was turned down on the same site due to the impact on the AONB and that was to be largely underground. There is absolutely no way that housing would be less obtrusive, especially a site that is considerably bigger than the rejected development and in clearer view from Brockles field (a key viewpoint) which the planning inspectorate agreed would be seriously damaged by development in this area. This would be a tragedy for future residents.

Comment

Representation ID: 633

Received: 25/10/2023

Respondent: Mrs Daniela Baylis

I do not think that Medway Council would be able to put forward any landscape impact mitigation's that would compensate for the loss of Greenbelt land in the AONB. Development in these areas would not meet the exceptional circumstances required by the NPPF. Development areas for 38,000 homes have been put forward for a need of 19,000. There is therefore no need to consider green belt land.

Comment

Representation ID: 657

Received: 25/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Matthew Wells

Medway Council is required to provide 28,500 new homes by 2040. The potential capacity excluding Green Belt release is 35,567. Green Belt release is therefore unnecessary. Why is the Vineyard Farms site at Cuxton being considered as a potential site ? Is it the revenge of Vineyard Farms for having their development proposals refused on appeal ? This site is probably the best protected in the whole of Medway, being Green Belt, an A.O.N.B. and adjacent to a conservation area. The site is completely unsuitable for development. Local resistance to any such proposal would be fierce and determined.

Comment

Representation ID: 697

Received: 26/10/2023

Respondent: Ms Catriona Jamieson

Who is this housing aimed at? Local need or London migration?

Comment

Representation ID: 833

Received: 27/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Brian McDonald

The recent decision from the planning inspectorate regarding the inappropriate winery development should be heeded. Inclusion of this area in the draft local plan is an insult to due process and the local community and appears vindictive and vexatious.

Comment

Representation ID: 903

Received: 28/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Keith Harrison

Once again this must be avoided.

Comment

Representation ID: 1137

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Medway Council Climate Response Team

consider rewording to say “…how landscape impacts could be mitigated and compensatory environmental improvements made to the Green Belt land.”

Comment

Representation ID: 1149

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Medway Green Party

It is an act of self-deception and misleading Medway residents to suggest that development impacts on the countryside can be mitigated, they can’t in any real sense.

Comment

Representation ID: 1195

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Mr Keith Slucock

AONB development of a £30m Foster-designed winery at Upper Bush in Cuxton has been rejected by both the planning committee and the planning inspectorate as inappropriate. How can releasing this area for housing therefore be considered appropriate for an AONB? This area should not be considered as part of Medway's housing plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 1256

Received: 30/10/2023

Respondent: Ms Jane Cook

Building on designated green belt land is irreversible. I think cross boroughs should support each other to protect this vital green lung. Once built on this changes the landscape and character forever. Significant weight should be attributed to the AONB.

Comment

Representation ID: 1420

Received: 31/10/2023

Respondent: Ms Bridget Fox (Woodland Trust)

Development which would result in the loss of ancient woodland, aged or veteran trees should not be permitted. The Woodland Trust would object to the allocation for development of any sites which have a direct impact on or are adjacent to identified areas of Ancient Woodland.

The Ancient Tree Inventory (ATI) for the area may be incomplete. We recommend an exercise to complete the ATI (which lists ancient, veteran and notable trees outside woods) across sites allocated or proposed to be allocated for development, in order to comply with the requirements of the NPPF for the protection of irreplaceable habitats.

Comment

Representation ID: 1611

Received: 31/10/2023

Respondent: Mrs Marilyn Stone

AONBs serve an important purpose, Medway Council should not try to persuade otherwise.

Comment

Representation ID: 1680

Received: 31/10/2023

Respondent: Mr john williams

All AONB's must be protected from house building and any indirect effect of building else where.