Policy T1: Promoting High Quality Design

All new designs must include provision for water recycling and use of solar panels.

High Quality usually means high price, not affordable homes.
Greenery great but who will maintain it, will these developments have stipulations on what a resident can or can't do to improve their home ( extend for example)
Parking ????? why is this not mentioned, Clear your vision for the end of the Car, what about disabled developments??No mention of homes for them

it all sound like a utopia vision, but in reality will it actually be achievable.

I can not see how this can be achieved by adding to the population. Main roads are clogged already as there is little alternative routes. Cars on pavements, reduce flow through side roads. Not sure how that achieves net zero. By contemplating building on greenfield or reducing farmland will drastically reduce wildlife and the space people have to relax and destress. Antisocial behaviour, littering etc will increase. Attractions need excellent public transport and/or parking facilities. Good quality of life also includes decent housing, not rabbit hutches, feeling safe to walk out after dark, a functioning hospital, GPs and dentists etc.

Again light pollution should not just be about new builds in special places.
Light pollution negatively affects our health, nature and biodiversity, crime rates and amenities like stargazing.
It would be cheaper and reduce crime to work towards dark skies across Medway.

Support. High quality design should be prioritised. Doesn’t mean expensive materials but does mean the proposals should be in proportion, uniform in form and window/ balcony placement. Should also fit into character of the areas

Support all points. Would suggest implementing design codes for all areas of Medway asap. Keeping this up to date. Shame poor design publicly and praise good design. There needs to be an incentive to design well. Current the market doesn’t require developers to do so, therefore the council and residents need to ensure they have the ability to enforce good design. Has the council considered a ‘good design panel’ formed of independent professionals as a paid for and required pre app service? Harlow in Essex has a similar scheme which has worked very well!

Unfortunately the houses being built are not of a good quality. The 9 houses in Binney Road built last September are not of a good design to blend in with the local landscape. They have poor parking spaces, no garage and very small gardens. They are also not affordable to our youngster. There is also insufficient spaces for the children at our local school. Our other school in the next village was closed 2 years ago and that village sent all its children to our school. The road between villages has no footpath and therefore is dangerous

We strongly support the inclusion of sustainable urban drainage solutions within this policy. However, we suggest some additional wording to help ensure this policy is effective in delivering appropriate surface water management.
Requested additions:
We note the following wording in this policy, and suggest additional wording for your consideration here:
• The proposal works with the topography of the site and the inventive incorporation / use / interpretation of existing natural features. Existing surface water flow routes and drainage features within the site should be identified and preserved wherever these contribute to sustainable drainage eg ditches, seasonally dry watercourses, historic ponds.

Further explanation and justification:
Southern Water supports all policy requirements which seek to ensure that surface water is appropriately managed, as close to source as possible and has made representations across related policy. We also need to ensure that design of developments will not mean that existing surface water drainage routes are not impeded to result in flooding elsewhere. This is in line with paragraph 167(c) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2023) that requires:
using opportunities provided by new development and improvements in green and other infrastructure to reduce the causes and impacts of flooding, (making as much use as possible of natural flood management techniques as part of an integrated approach to flood risk management)
Southern Water is working across our region to remove surface water from our networks in key areas. Even as we deliver this work, development continues to increase surface water run-off. To be resilient to the evolving impacts of climate change we must plan to ensure that rainwater is separated from wastewater in the design and construction of our communities. For more information on our work, and the root causes of releases from storm overflows, please see –
https://www.southernwater.co.uk/our-region/clean-rivers-and-seas-task-force/pathfinders/
https://www.southernwater.co.uk/our-performance/storm-overflows/storm-overflow-task-force
In terms of community resilience to the impacts of climate change into the future, better rainwater management through SuDS is the preferred approach. Retrofitting sustainable drainage solutions can be challenging. By showing the way with new development we can reduce the implementation costs of these measures whilst securing truly sustainable development.

The area along Watling Street / Rainham Road has noticeably improved due to the impact of a few individuals taking care of the frontages of their houses. It appears at least to have led to less fly tipping and the general appearance / feel of the area. Encouragement for the care of an area may well benefit the well being of the residents living within them. Taking pride in your area can lead to better mental health for those living within it.

When considering any new build whether residential or commercial it is very important that the impact of existing homes and businessess are taken into consideration. There is no point in agreeing to the develeopment of a new commercial business that would have a material impact on an existing operation, rob Peter to pay Paul scenario.

No comment

Policy T1: Promoting High Quality Design. A policy to support design proposals is supported. However, a policy that has been drafted as a ‘catch-all’ to respond to every eventuality is considered to provide a risk of making some schemes unviable. It specifically does not respond well to different sized schemes, for example, as drafted the policy requires all schemes to provide public art, which would not normally be expected of smaller sites.
A further example is that the following criteria is considered to be unnecessary when all development is required to be ‘sustainable’ by preceding strategic policies. The criteria itself is also not quantifiable- “There is demonstration of provision and/or access to essential services and facilities sufficient to support existing and new growth”.
It is considered that the 21 criteria within the policy could easily be streamlined, and the policy would not be any less impactful. This is especially the case when there is a further Housing Design policy, set out at Policy DM5 (discussed further below).

I don’t think it’s possible to put up so many houses that will be quality design. They won’t fit in a rural area. They will have space for 2 cars so doesn’t allow for vans/children’s cars/visitors. Everything will be congested. Emergency vehicles will not have access at certain times of the day. Whatever they look like they will be unsafe

Please see covering letter from The Planning Bureau dated 6th September.

What are the most important issues for you in planning new developments?

For the RSPB, it is to ensure that the allocation of residential sites is well away from sensitive areas such as Chattenden Woods and Lodge Hill SSSI, and sustainable locations close to existing transport links and community facilities are prioritised.

In addition to the important issues specific to Medway that we have raised in this response, the RSPB recommends that the following steps are taken from the RSPB’s Nature Friendly Design – the Essential Checklist document. This will help ensure that people and nature can thrive together These five steps are as follows, with key measures summarised:

1.Considering nature from the outset: Ensure that ecology and landscape design is reflected in proposed schemes from the very beginning, including playing a pivotal role in masterplanning and pre-application discussions.

2. Drainage and water management that works with nature: Schedule 3 of the Flood Water Management Act should be mandated to deliver better Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) design and adoption to better mitigate for extreme weather events, increasing in frequency and intensity due to climate change. Sustainable Drainage Systems should prioritise above ground soft landscape rather than hard engineering solutions such as pipe to basin.

3. Planting for people and wildlife: development landscape schemes should be specifically required to provide greater climate resilience, public amenity, and biodiversity value and benefits.

4. Design features for target species: specific design elements should be required to be installed in new developments providing homes for target species and allow free passage through the urban environment. All new houses must include integral nest and roost provision for Swifts and bats, and garden boundaries must not act as a barrier to ground dwelling wildlife.

5. Ensuring long-term maintenance and stewardship: nature-friendly measures incorporated into design of new developments and their landscaping, together with monitoring of the delivery and success of Biodiversity Net Gain and Urban Greening Factor measures post-development, must be suitably funded by the development.

Urban regeneration also brings opportunities to improve biodiversity, development should design with nature from the outset. These could include mandatory swift bricks for all new buildings of two storeys or higher (apart from rare exceptions) as has been effectively included in other Local Plans e.g. Brighton and Hove, SUDS pond/drainage schemes, native and locally-sourced planting or natural regeneration where appropriate, allowing less managed areas in places with paths through and edges trimmed to show they are deliberate, planning around green spaces, connecting through green corridors, limiting light pollution, and making these aims clear in policy wording. The importance of wildlife and green spaces to also contribute to human wellbeing should be recognised. It is also essential that the value of brownfield sites is properly captured as these can support high biodiversity and potential of rare species. 

The RSPB recommends that the following steps are taken, from the RSPB’s Nature Friendly Design – the Essential Checklist document: 1.Considering nature from the outset 2. Drainage and water management that works with nature 3. Planting for people and wildlife 4. Design features for target species, such as Swifts 5. Ensuring long-term maintenance and stewardship

What are the most important issues for you in planning new developments?

For the RSPB, it is to ensure that the allocation of residential sites is well away from sensitive areas such as Chattenden Woods and Lodge Hill SSSI, and sustainable locations close to existing transport links and community facilities are prioritised.

In addition to the important issues specific to Medway that we have raised in this response, the RSPB recommends that the following steps are taken from the RSPB’s Nature Friendly Design – the Essential Checklist document. This will help ensure that people and nature can thrive together These five steps are as follows, with key measures summarised:

1.Considering nature from the outset: Ensure that ecology and landscape design is reflected in proposed schemes from the very beginning, including playing a pivotal role in masterplanning and pre-application discussions.

2. Drainage and water management that works with nature: Schedule 3 of the Flood Water Management Act should be mandated to deliver better Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) design and adoption to better mitigate for extreme weather events, increasing in frequency and intensity due to climate change. Sustainable Drainage Systems should prioritise above ground soft landscape rather than hard engineering solutions such as pipe to basin.

3. Planting for people and wildlife: development landscape schemes should be specifically required to provide greater climate resilience, public amenity, and biodiversity value and benefits.

4. Design features for target species: specific design elements should be required to be installed in new developments providing homes for target species and allow free passage through the urban environment. All new houses must include integral nest and roost provision for Swifts and bats, and garden boundaries must not act as a barrier to ground dwelling wildlife.

5. Ensuring long-term maintenance and stewardship: nature-friendly measures incorporated into design of new developments and their landscaping, together with monitoring of the delivery and success of Biodiversity Net Gain and Urban Greening Factor measures post-development, must be suitably funded by the development.

The houses and flats will just be another eyesore no matter how you lay them out and as for child friendly spaces, really? More yobs to untidy the area

Agree

Fully support this policy

there should be a mix of housing including bungalows

High Quality design is subjective but so far with some of the flats along the riverside this hasn't really been followed with some of them just looking like boring boxes.I would like to see a more colourful look as they have in Holland .

Policy T1: Promoting High Quality Design. A policy to support design proposals is supported. However, a policy that has been drafted as a ‘catch-all’ to respond to every eventuality is considered to provide a risk of making some schemes unviable. It specifically does not respond well to different sized schemes, for example, as drafted the policy requires all schemes to provide public art, which would not normally be expected of smaller sites.
A further example is that the following criteria is considered to be unnecessary when all development is required to be ‘sustainable’ by preceding strategic policies. The criteria itself is also not quantifiable- “There is demonstration of provision and/or access to essential services and facilities sufficient to support existing and new growth”.
It is considered that the 21 criteria within the policy could easily be streamlined, and the policy would not be any less impactful. This is especially the case when there is a further Housing Design policy, set out at Policy DM5 (discussed further below).

We support this policy, but would like the following points considered. Housing across Medway is losing it vernacular image, and we are concerned that a cut and past house design is creating a new repetitive narrative that does not align to the history of the areas and has a long-term negative impact to the area (just another housing estate). This approach does not help developments build communities which we believe is essential to addressing local resilience and support networks, if people don't speech, they don't engage, if we don't engage we cannot support each other, meaning we rely on the council to do so. We wish this to be considered in the design of housing and developments.
We would also like to see, renewable energy integrated into development designs, battery and EV chargers as standard across all new developments, with rainwater harvesting and a wider understanding of soils ability to absorb water undertaken in developments to reduce water runoff and developments impacts of flooding.
In wider areas of place marking and low speed roads, we would like to see more green / blue infrastructure, reduction in asphalt and hard materials that absorb heat, to reduce localised heat islands, and enable use of community areas on hot weather periods.

Why is there no mention of solar panels in this section? Many other countries have accepted that building with Solar in the roof is a great way to spread the generation of electricity and reduce demands on the grid.
Also, the provision of EV chargers has already occurred in several small developments around Medway. I think it should be mandatory.

The council may promote high quality design but those builds that have gone up in recent years have shown that the councils have failed miserably. This is from both sides of the political divide as both sides had a vote on what to approve.
It has also been shown that developers will promise one thing but deliver another making a nonsense of the system.

There is not sufficient provision, despite Government requirements (Self-Build and Custom Housebuilding Regulations) within Medway for the setting aside of land for those who wish to build there own homes. These are usually high-quality, high energy-efficient builds by private individuals and land should be set aside in these Plans for such developments.
I have been on the self-build register for Medway for several years now with only one, small, expensive site promoted in Upchurch.
This has been done successfully in other parts of the country such as the Development Corporation of Milton Keynes.
Let Medway be a leader !

The proposal claims to respect neighbouring amenity by considering light levels, overshadowing, privacy, and other factors, yet the new builds often lack privacy and have inadequate car parking, accommodating only one car or at most two. The quality of these new developments is subpar, as supported by relevant statistics. Additionally, while the reports suggest adequate provision of essential services and facilities, those for Allhallows are misleading and inaccurate, reflecting poorly on the Council’s research. This demonstrates a lack of thorough investigation and consideration for the actual needs and conditions of the local area.

An impressive list. Will the proposals be available for local consultation? ?ow will the developments be monitored to ensure compliance?

Lots of excellent points.
Again, I fully approve of the use of trees and consider them a huge benefit, but the long-term maintenance cost has in the past led councils to remove them. Visually they make all the difference to a street.
If not enough parking is provided to make new developments not overly car-dominated, the area may end up appearing more car dominated because of random parking.
The final sentence 'compliance with the principles of nationally recognised standards...', should this take account of any of the Grenfell Tower recommendations?