Vision states the Medway's farmland will produce good quality local produce; that there will be conservation of the natural environment; will make best use of brownfield sites. I don't think that choosing the preferred option will deliver the vision and neither will the option that only builds on green land because farm produce will be greatly reduced and the existing natural environment will not be conserved. The brownfield option will conserve the farming land, the environment and will concentrate on brownfield.

The overarching Vision for Medway in 2041, the Strategic Objectives (‘the SOs’) and the Spatial Development Strategy (‘the SDS’) fail to fully demonstrate the need for good housing growth, and an identification of the locations where this housing can be accommodated. Full details are provided in the representation submitted on behalf of Berengrave Lane 2 Ltd in relation to Land at the rear of Berengrave Lane, Rainham

We are CPRE, the countryside charity. Formed in 1926, CPRE is a registered charity and one of the longest established and most respected environmental groups in England, with over 40,000 members and supporters living in our cities, towns, villages and the countryside. CPRE Kent is the largest of the CPRE county branches.

Our vision is of a beautiful and thriving countryside that enriches all our lives, and our mission is to promote, enhance and protect that countryside.

We believe that the planning system is a toolbox for achieving better – for people, nature and the economy – while supporting the delivery of more badly-needed homes to end the housing crisis.

In general, CPRE Kent supports a development strategy which meets the following criteria:
1. Brownfield first, especially in urban areas and not in rural areas where it would result in unsustainable patterns of development
2. Development should result in sustainable communities
3. Provision in rural areas where there is an identified local need and the scale of development is appropriate for the size of the settlement
4. The plan should promote development in locations:
a. that are well supported by, or that will support, sustainable transport and active travel.
b. that are well served by regular public transport services and social and community facilities, that are in safe walking and cycling distance or would support, or result in, a sustainable settlement.
5. Ensuring our unique English countryside landscapes are protected and valued for the benefit of current and future generations.

Overall, it is our position that local planning authorities should seek to ensure that the impact of development on the countryside, both directly and indirectly, is kept to a minimum and that development is sustainable in accordance with national planning policy.

Our detailed comments on the 2024 Regulation 18 consultation are as follows:

2.1 Vision for Medway in 2041
CPRE Kent considers that overall, the vision appears to be a comprehensive and ambitious vision with positive goals.
However, running to more than two pages of text it is very wordy and not easily digestible. Headings and bullet points would help in terms of presentation.

This development is a shambles, you are taking away green belt land needed for wildlife and plantation, just so some vile, greedy man can get even richer. Saying you will put in open spaces in these new housing estates does not cut the mustard. We need fields, not a concrete jungle and we are supposed to be the garden of England?

[TO BE READ ALONGSIDE FULL REPRESENTATIONS SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL ON 06/09/24]
3.1 The overarching vision within the LP2041 seeks to increase the quality of life for residents of Medway by meeting its growth needs, in full – including housing, employment and community facilities, alongside the necessary infrastructure to support this. The vision aims to create a healthy place to live and work, where communities are connected and located near to services and facilities to meet their day-to-day needs, whilst preserving the character of settlements and the countryside surrounding these.
3.2 Catesby Estates supports the Vision identified by the Council and we consider this is best achieved through the adoption of an up-to-date Local Plan.
3.3 The LP2041 is supported by a range of strategic objectives and a spatial development strategy, which together seek to achieve the Council’s vision for Medway. These include measures such as providing the variety of homes needed to meet demand; delivering new places, including open spaces to reduce inequalities in health; strengthening sustainable transport opportunities; preserving important nature and landscape assets; and respecting distinct identifies and characteristics of Medway’s settlements as they grow.
3.4 Whilst the spatial strategy identifies a priority for regeneration and best use of previously developed land, it concludes at paragraph 3.1.5 of the LP2041 that “…urban regeneration cannot deliver the full quantum and mix of development needed to support the needs of Medway’s communities and businesses”. Accordingly, it accepts that development will be required in a range of locations across Medway in order to meet growth needs in full. This includes, as referenced in the strategy, expansion of suburban neighbourhoods and villages, where the principles of sustainable development can be met.
3.5 It is noted that the Plan period has been extended to 2041 – an additional year from the previous Regulation 18 consultation. This reflects Paragraph 22 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2023 (the “Framework”) and the requirement for strategic policies to provide a minimum period of 15-years post adoption. Notwithstanding, we suggest that the Council should continue with this approach and further extend the Plan period if necessary; for example, it is noted the LP2041 is now not likely to be submitted for Examination until 2025, which may have implications.

What are the key issues that you want the local plan to address, and how?

The global and local effects of the twin climate change and biodiversity crises are becoming increasingly clear. We believe it is therefore imperative that Medway Council does its part to help reverse these trends (and deliver on its enhanced biodiversity duties under the Environment Act) by ensuring that development coming forward under a new Medway Local Plan is located in the most sustainable locations. This means firstly prioritising less harmful locations over sites located close to important areas for biodiversity and, where impacts cannot be avoided, establishing robust and sustainable mitigation strategies to protect designated wildlife sites. It also means taking steps to help restore nature in line with local nature recovery strategies.

In particular, we wish to see the new plan steer housing development away from the Chattenden Woods and Lodge Hill Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), and establish a robust strategic approach to ensure that the UK’s most important site for breeding nightingales is safeguarded from the damaging urbanisation effects (such as cat predation and recreational disturbance) arising from any essential residential development that cannot be located in less sensitive areas. Such a strategic approach is critical to delivering an effective, sustainable policy for this unique natural asset (for which Medway Council have a particular responsibility to protect), offering clarity for developers and security for Medway Council.

We would also like to see the new plan address increasing residential pressures arising from new housing developments close to important coastal areas for wintering and breeding waterbirds in Medway. Given the significant increase in volume of new housing planned across the Hoo Peninsula, it is particularly important that the plan establishes clear policies to ensure that measures are in place to prevent new residential development from adding to the pressures on these important bird populations. Location of non-residential development in these sensitive locations will also need to be carefully considered in terms of sustainability and impacts of associated transport infrastructure.

Finally, we wish to see the new plan address the need for ecological corridors to connect sites and key populations of declining birds, such as nightingales and farmland birds, and to ensure these corridors are designed based on relevant data and are given robust status in planning.

There are many good ideals so let us hope that they will be kept.

However, when Westminster pulls the strings the labour council will dance - no matter what damage is done to the residents or the environment of the towns - and especially the villages on the Peninsula.

Very short sighted and out of touch with reality. Whilst we do have a wealth of beautiful nature sites and open spaces, they will not last long with all the building that is planned. There are too many contradictions and inaccuracies.

I have developed my Vision to avoid building on greenfield rural areas if possible, and to develop jobs and infrastructure first. I propose investigating the idea of viticulture mentioned in section 7-Medway could have an appellation controlee. Climate change is coming. Kent already has 50 vineyards (Source: GoogleAI).

This plan is the worst thing to happen to Hoo Peninsula since 40% of the development will take place there and transform it from a predominantly rural area into an urban one. No plan that builds housing on this scale can ever achieve a reduction in carbon emissions. Total environmental catastrophe.

I attended the consultation at Allhallows on Tuesday 3rd Sept. I found the information provided to be very limited and out of date,
there was nothing available to show any forms of ideas about how transport infrastructure could cope with any increase of population on the peninsula, I was directed by staff there to the website, which I later checked and could find nothing about the transport infrastructure, I did find a map showing amenities in the Northwest section but this document was dated 2015 and is so out of date that it was a useless, in Allhallows it showed we have a Doctors surgery which we do in name only there's been no doctor at it in over five years, it shows a dentist at the same location but that's not been there for over five years, it shows we have three pubs, the last on shut before the covid lockdown, there is not indication of emergency services that might be needed for any given increase of population, I also asked staff about how much utilities (gas, electric, water, sewerage and drainage) capacity was available for new builds, medway council hasn't even asked the question to the utilities companies, they have not even done any of the basic work before putting this out to consultation.

The plan is not sustainable, current infrastructure doesn't support the growth and current population without increasing it further. With no respect for the wider rural communities and ecology.

The plan is not sustainable the infrastructure cannot cope and the health facilities are non existing. The use of grade a farming should not be used for building.

Forcing a reduction in car usage is not the solution. People do not work in their local area - they commute. It seems you are justifying your ignorance of the infrastructure probem by stating their will be less car usage.

I’d like to see a more interconnected Medway especially regarding the river Medway. More focus on local Food in the health & thriving within communities & more infrastructure.

This vision sounds excellent but we are so from it at present l cannot imagine how we have the resources to meet all these wonderful dreams . Where will the funds come from to improve/retrofit our old housing stock for a start?

Medway is a diverse land. The villages amongst the farmland, marshes and valued landscapes and habitats have a different QoL to the successful urban developments. Outside of Hoo it is impossible to meet all everyday needs without access to a car - and these villages accept this. We don’t have easy access to shops/organised leisure/takeaways/nightlife. We accept this and have natural open spaces, marshland and nature reserves to enjoy instead. We lack access to mains sewerage, fast broadband with frequent cuts in utilities. New development must have solar panels, fast broadband, mains sewerage and pavements for safe non car travel.

It is difficult to see how Medway can improve air quality and freedom of movement if the Capstone Valley isn't protected.

Building on this scale will be detrimental to both wildlife in the area and also Medways green lung. The people of medway have fought for years to stop this area being concreted over due to the thousands of extra cars causing more pollution and essential trees being decimated. The infrastructure is not sufficient to support this amount to traffic and our hospital and Dr's are already on their knees. Real "looking after Medways future" would be to put funding into our health care, start providing excellent services for the people of medway and protecting our Green spaces.

The draft Local Plan states in its strategic objectives that growth will be directed to the most suitable locations. We submit the strategic objective itself is too vague to serve its purpose – it is unclear what it would or would not justify and is not a proper basis for alternative testing or assessment of soundness. Further, in relation to employment, critical economic infrastructure, and lack of proper alternative testing, the strategy would not put the growth in the most sustainable places. There are a number of inconsistencies with the NPPF, detailed further in the full representation provided to planning.policy@medway.gov.uk

The draft Local Plan states in its strategic objectives that growth will be directed to the most suitable locations. We submit the strategic objective itself is too vague to serve its purpose – it is unclear what it would or would not justify and is not a proper basis for alternative testing or assessment of soundness. Further, in relation to employment, critical economic infrastructure, and lack of proper alternative testing, the strategy would not put the growth in the most sustainable places. There are a number of inconsistencies with the NPPF, detailed further in the full representation provided to planning.policy@medway.gov.uk

If the river is so important why are you trying to close Chatham docks where there are high quality jobs as you outline as necessary in your plan . Surely not more houses WHERE'S are the HOSPITALS DOCTORS TEACHERS to service the rising population from the other areas. The NHS is falling to bits as it is. Medway maritime hospital cannot cope it has to serve a population of 500 000 as it . What you are suggesting is ludicrous. One more factor is the development planned by Maidstone borough Council just over the border which hospital is nearest .

As has been expressed before protected areas of environmental importance must be protect from
any development that will detrimental effect on them.
Rural areas and their unique character must be valued and protected at all cost.
We do need to get the most of our beautiful river for social and economic growth I think it is a
not fully utilised resource for Medway.

Paragraph 1.2.8:- We support the statement that ‘Housing-led growth can support wider investment in services and businesses and contribute to shaping the character of new and existing communities’. The allocation of site HHH19, with employment land to the east and west would support this.

Site HHH19 is located between existing development to the east and west, giving the potential for ‘infill development that will prevent isolated development and create a neighbourhood area which would meet the aspirations of sustainable development.

The vision is acceptable a statement of the obvious but without the how I remain sceptical that the housing will be delivered in parts without the necessary infrastructure to make it work for existing residents and those who will move into the area.

Most of those working will do so outside of Medway requiring cars as well as other forms of reliable public transport that actually runs, convenient to those that use it. on time at a reasonable cost.

Medway is defined by its people first and then by other factors such as environment.

If local resources and infrastructure are in place before any major building starts as most of the needs are not taking into account or just left once the development has finished leaving no resources to cope.

No mention of protecting wildlife and consideration of mental health issues for people residents.
How will carbon emissions be reduced when you continue to build developments.
No statistics to prove carbon emissions will be reduced in fact there will be an increased number of deaths due to poor air quality and heavy congested traffic causing accidents.
The plan is to desi crate an area of nature and beauty that already has biodiversity and benefits to the air quality in order to improve air quality .....by destroying it, as usual plans to do not make sense.

Gillingham town centre has been left behind the other towns and needs urgent investment and renew.

The Strand the the Great Lines could be great assets to the area but need a plan to make them better and more appealing to attract locals to use them.

No more fields should be ripped up for housing as the towns are congested enough as it is, and it will be impossible to make the infrastructure improved enough to match the increase in housing.
Urban renewal would be a better option. The intra area has a lot of potential.

From what I can tell, the vision for Medway is to just to make it one concrete jungle. I live in Hempstead and currently enjoy for my well being, access to green spaces, one of which is Capstone Park. The surrounding fields will be concreted over (Gibraltar Farm already been approved) resulting in more people which equals more cars, more noise, more litter and more antisocial behaviour. Why are we not looking at the current brown/grey sites which has existing infrastructure? Do not ruin a pleasant area for everyone to visit for the sake of misery and traffic jams.

The building on brownfield sites makes perfect sense with the need for more accommodations. However building on any farmland/green spaces must be considered unnecessary. There is already health condition with pollution and this with greatly increase with traffic pollution. With climate change happing we are already seeing increased flood risk without additional farm land loss and concrete areas. The areas of lordswood and rainham being built in will certainly increase this risk putting more pressure on road and risking people's homes. Damage to the environment will not be repaired and makes Medway an in reading unpleasant area to live.

The properties being built will not be for medway residents and are being designed to advertise and appeal to those moving out of London. They are not affordable to local residents.
This is not for the benefit of medway residents and your vision will have detrimental life changing for current residents and future generations. We must stop any plans to build on green spaces.