Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 1947
Received: 12/08/2024
Respondent: Phillip Ivory
Council should consider whether any parcels of the green belt fulfil the purposes as set out in the nppf.
Council should consider whether any parcels of the green belt fulfil the purposes as set out in the nppf.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2024
Received: 18/08/2024
Respondent: Francesca Baylis
I agree with the councils position of restricting development within the green belt. It is so important, especially with the increasing sprawl of developments on the Medway boundary.
I agree with the councils position of restricting development within the green belt. It is so important, especially with the increasing sprawl of developments on the Medway boundary.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2375
Received: 04/09/2024
Respondent: Mr John Conner
As with National Landscapes these areas should be fully proptected, with a population within Medway that is nearly twice the size of any other council in Kent it is extremely important that such areas in Medway should not be developed upon as such action only lines the pockets of the few and will have a material adverse impact on the vast majority.
As with National Landscapes these areas should be fully proptected, with a population within Medway that is nearly twice the size of any other council in Kent it is extremely important that such areas in Medway should not be developed upon as such action only lines the pockets of the few and will have a material adverse impact on the vast majority.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2437
Received: 04/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Sergio Nogues
No comment
No comment
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2492
Received: 04/09/2024
Respondent: Medway Labour and Cooperative Group
Affirm
Affirm
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2513
Received: 05/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Jon Emery
Fundamental to maintain and not see it eroded!
Fundamental to maintain and not see it eroded!
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2578
Received: 05/09/2024
Respondent: Barratt David Wilson Homes
Agent: Lucy Morris
Please refer to responses to Questions 7 and 8 alongside our full submission for further details.
Please refer to responses to Questions 7 and 8 alongside our full submission for further details.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2627
Received: 05/09/2024
Respondent: Mrs Helen Selleck
Building loads of houses in Allhallows will destroy the green belt, production of food, country pursuits, habitats, physical and mental health, the space and enjoyment had by both the very young and old. Not to mention increasing pollution, traffic etc
Building loads of houses in Allhallows will destroy the green belt, production of food, country pursuits, habitats, physical and mental health, the space and enjoyment had by both the very young and old. Not to mention increasing pollution, traffic etc
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2679
Received: 06/09/2024
Respondent: Mrs Louise Putnam
I support Policy S7. The protection of the Green Belt in the west of Medway is important to prevent urban sprawl. However, we need to be pragmatic with our choices for more housing, preferably locating it in urban areas rather than the open countryside.
I support Policy S7. The protection of the Green Belt in the west of Medway is important to prevent urban sprawl. However, we need to be pragmatic with our choices for more housing, preferably locating it in urban areas rather than the open countryside.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2753
Received: 06/09/2024
Respondent: CPRE Kent
Agent: Mr Richard Thompson
In response to Q7
Yes
In response to Q7
Yes
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2754
Received: 06/09/2024
Respondent: CPRE Kent
Agent: Mr Richard Thompson
In response to Q8
No
In response to Q8
No
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 2799
Received: 06/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Anthony Rees
This must be the worst one yet, you are allowing Attwood to take it all in Lordswood and Lidsing. Us residents feel extremely betrayed and let down by you and you haven't done yourselves or Attwood any favours in giving him the green light to go and build on it all. We're not going to just sit back and watch it happen
This must be the worst one yet, you are allowing Attwood to take it all in Lordswood and Lidsing. Us residents feel extremely betrayed and let down by you and you haven't done yourselves or Attwood any favours in giving him the green light to go and build on it all. We're not going to just sit back and watch it happen
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3106
Received: 07/09/2024
Respondent: Ms Catriona Jamieson
Given that this is a local plan I think we should say what we want for Medway rather than being beholdent to a changing national policy. No development on green belt.
Given that this is a local plan I think we should say what we want for Medway rather than being beholdent to a changing national policy. No development on green belt.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3111
Received: 07/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Matthew Wells
Less than 5% of the land area within Medway falls within the Green Belt and it is therefore vitally important that it is given the highest level of protection. The Council should uphold the directive that development is restricted and that the land should remain permanently open. "Enhancing land for beneficial uses in the Green Belt" must not include major developments.
Less than 5% of the land area within Medway falls within the Green Belt and it is therefore vitally important that it is given the highest level of protection. The Council should uphold the directive that development is restricted and that the land should remain permanently open. "Enhancing land for beneficial uses in the Green Belt" must not include major developments.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3210
Received: 07/09/2024
Respondent: Miss Jackie Forrest
No development should be done on greenbelt or green field sites there is no excuse that warrants development on these areas
No development should be done on greenbelt or green field sites there is no excuse that warrants development on these areas
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3232
Received: 07/09/2024
Respondent: Mrs Yvonne Forrest
agree
agree
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3481
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mrs Frances Grigg
I strongly support this policy but would like the statement in 4.12.4 to be included in this policy.
I strongly support this policy but would like the statement in 4.12.4 to be included in this policy.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3580
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Andrew Lawrence
No building on the Green Belt!
No building on the Green Belt!
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3619
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Miss Alison Temple
Again I fear that this is all "lip service" and there is nothing in the proposed plan that secures green belt areas, in fact appears that this plan serves to mislead the public. There is no evidence of which areas will be considered preserving, I suspect not much.
Again I fear that this is all "lip service" and there is nothing in the proposed plan that secures green belt areas, in fact appears that this plan serves to mislead the public. There is no evidence of which areas will be considered preserving, I suspect not much.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3660
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Graham Crawford
If the Lidsing Garden Village goes ahead and also Gibraltar Farm development then you will have a sprawl right across the southern flank of medway this surely is not managing urban sprawl. In short hands off green belt .Lookin at 4.12.6 with regard then the above
effectively disregards it. Though I note that medway is continuing discussions with neighbouring LPAs as to impacts on it.
If the Lidsing Garden Village goes ahead and also Gibraltar Farm development then you will have a sprawl right across the southern flank of medway this surely is not managing urban sprawl. In short hands off green belt .Lookin at 4.12.6 with regard then the above
effectively disregards it. Though I note that medway is continuing discussions with neighbouring LPAs as to impacts on it.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3662
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mrs Maureen Wade
I believe that the council should not only maintain the existing green belt but also work to conserve the greenfield strategic gaps that separate settlements not only between Medway and neighbouring authorities such as Maidstone and Halling but between smaller settlements withing the Medway boundary such as Rainham, Lordswood, Gillingham etc. Residents see themselves as distinct communities within Medway and it appears the council are seeking to erode these identities.
I believe that the council should not only maintain the existing green belt but also work to conserve the greenfield strategic gaps that separate settlements not only between Medway and neighbouring authorities such as Maidstone and Halling but between smaller settlements withing the Medway boundary such as Rainham, Lordswood, Gillingham etc. Residents see themselves as distinct communities within Medway and it appears the council are seeking to erode these identities.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3689
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Ian Proctor
The following wording "The Council's position is to adhere to a policy of development being restricted in the Green Belt, in line with national policy, to ensure that the land remains permanently open." should be included in this policy.
The following wording "The Council's position is to adhere to a policy of development being restricted in the Green Belt, in line with national policy, to ensure that the land remains permanently open." should be included in this policy.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3691
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Miss Rachael Selleck
We do not want Medway to be closely linked with London through extensive development; instead, our focus should be on improving public transport. Enhanced transport options would significantly improve access to job opportunities and educational institutions, such as universities and colleges, in London. By increasing transport availability, residents of Medway would have easier access to a wider range of employment and learning opportunities, fostering personal and professional growth without compromising the local character and environment. This approach supports both economic and educational advancement while maintaining Medway’s distinctiveness.
We do not want Medway to be closely linked with London through extensive development; instead, our focus should be on improving public transport. Enhanced transport options would significantly improve access to job opportunities and educational institutions, such as universities and colleges, in London. By increasing transport availability, residents of Medway would have easier access to a wider range of employment and learning opportunities, fostering personal and professional growth without compromising the local character and environment. This approach supports both economic and educational advancement while maintaining Medway’s distinctiveness.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3828
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Brian McDonald
Inappropriate development in the Green Belt must be prevented. The Local Plan should support this and work with neighbouring authorities to safeguard the integrity of the GB. Simultaneously the GB should be a focus for nature recovery and sustainable land use. The findings o f the Public Inquiry into the failed winery at Upper Bush should be honoured and a clear message to developers made in the new local plan.
Inappropriate development in the Green Belt must be prevented. The Local Plan should support this and work with neighbouring authorities to safeguard the integrity of the GB. Simultaneously the GB should be a focus for nature recovery and sustainable land use. The findings o f the Public Inquiry into the failed winery at Upper Bush should be honoured and a clear message to developers made in the new local plan.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3931
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mrs Alison Gray
It would have been good to have recognised in the Policy statement that the section of Green Belt between Gravesham and Medway is the narrowest section of the entire Metropolitan Green Belt and therefore requires additional care; also to have stated in the Policy that the Council will continue to discuss Green Belt issues with neighbouring LPAs.
It would have been good to have recognised in the Policy statement that the section of Green Belt between Gravesham and Medway is the narrowest section of the entire Metropolitan Green Belt and therefore requires additional care; also to have stated in the Policy that the Council will continue to discuss Green Belt issues with neighbouring LPAs.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 3987
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Robert Wyatt
Welcomed
Welcomed
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 4063
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Ian Hargraves
The Green Belt is particularly narrow to the West of Medway and must be protected at all costs. Therefore, there must be a presumption against any development in this area especially where it lies within the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty National Landscape. Any development that will spoil the existing views from the Kent Downs by being totally out of character or causing light pollution must not be permitted.
It should be noted that The Greenbelt is also very narrow between Cuxton and Gravesend and therefore must be maintained to ensure protection for the rural village of Cuxton.
The Green Belt is particularly narrow to the West of Medway and must be protected at all costs. Therefore, there must be a presumption against any development in this area especially where it lies within the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty National Landscape. Any development that will spoil the existing views from the Kent Downs by being totally out of character or causing light pollution must not be permitted.
It should be noted that The Greenbelt is also very narrow between Cuxton and Gravesend and therefore must be maintained to ensure protection for the rural village of Cuxton.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 4072
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Miss Rosamund Beattie
Kent is the garden of England. We have many AONB, SPA/Ramsar sites and large parks. The green belt must be protected so we do not end up as a suburb of London. It is all too easy to nibble away at it. If the nibbling does not commence, and it is fully protected, then we conserve the natural world and areas of beauty for the future generations.
Kent is the garden of England. We have many AONB, SPA/Ramsar sites and large parks. The green belt must be protected so we do not end up as a suburb of London. It is all too easy to nibble away at it. If the nibbling does not commence, and it is fully protected, then we conserve the natural world and areas of beauty for the future generations.
Comment
Medway Local Plan (Regulation 18, 2024)
Representation ID: 4088
Received: 08/09/2024
Respondent: Mr Lewis Marshall
Green Belt is Green Belt. It ceases to be Green Belt if you build on it.
Green Belt is Green Belt. It ceases to be Green Belt if you build on it.