Hoo Development Framework
Search form responses
Results for Mr Alexander Cameron search
New searchI can see no evidence in these documents which demonstrates there is a solid and robust need for the proposed development of this scale. I fear it is driven by a political agenda (and potentially by friendly developers) rather than by a carefully considered analysis of the needs across Medway. The impact of such a development on our town for many years ahead and cost of providing not just the core development but all the key elements of infrastructure (including those this plan does not fully consider) is likely to be much larger than envisaged in your optimistic costings. Much more work is needed to demonstrate this is a necessary development for Medway alongside a much more robust and fully costed (and realistic) detailed implementation plan. I see little evidence that the developments fully consider all the environmental and climate change risks and potential impacts we can expect to see over the next few decades. For example, sea level changes and the funding needed to implement a more robust set of flood defences for Medway would seem to be a strategic element of need which is perhaps not adequatle covered or understood. Sadly, the council has an extremely poor record of accomplishment in the delivery of Medway friendly infrastructure and development programs and most Medway residents have become very cynical as a result. The potential for years of blighted landscapes (e.g. Strood and Rochester Riverside is a good example) and badly conceived developments (current Chatham town centre blocks of yet more flats) is a real concern for many. It might be a better plan to focus on improving those areas the council have allowed to become run down and completing existing developments before embarking on a development for which there is no clear definition of need.
The principles stated do not appear to provide any linkage to a well-developed set of needs that this development will deliver solutions for. Simply stating there is growth strategy without defining a purpose for the growth and a definition of the metrics used to assess the delivery of that strategy seems foolhardy. The development proposed seems out of scale for the area and risk decades of blight for the communities that live there today and may live there in the future. Surely the key principles must include a definition of the specific needs that this development enables set in the context of the local area and the wider Medway perspective. The document seems light on costings, funding allocations and a well-developed roadmap for this activity set within a Medway wide Roadmap. The output of such a roadmap enables a realistic understanding of the strategic intent and the place of this development within that roadmap. Such a roadmap would also form the basis of a realistic local plan, sadly lacking at this time. It would therefore seem prudent to halt all work on this development framework until such strategic roadmap is in place and a formal local plan is adopted. I note that it seems unlikely that the levels of government funding available will deliver the infrastructure vision laid out in these documents whilst the overall cost and timescale for the whole development is undefined. This significantly extends the timescales for this development and the impact on the people who live in this part of Medway. One see's parallels with other developments across Medway which are often poorly conceived, inadequately researched and are allowed to drag on for decades. At this time there is a strong perception that the only beneficiary of the proposed development will be a small number of major development companies, the value for the people of Medway (and the people who live in Hoo) is undefined.
It is not a plan as I understand the meaning of a plan. It comes across as the output of a top-level study where content and conclusions have been watered down to fit the needs of this consultation with some padding to deliver a page count. One would hope significantly more in-depth information and analysis is available to back into this document. The various sections present a wide range of possibilities and opportunities and some of the barriers (but not all) that must be considered. But I can see little that constitutes a formal plan, with limited assessment of risk and benefits of alternate approaches, little content on delivery timeframe and the metrics that are planned to measure progress and little content on funding and other resources required to deliver this plan. Much more information on the HIF should have been presented, as it forms a key enabler for the rest of the development and the risk attached to delivering the HIF for a funding stated. From a cursory assessment It seems unlikely that the full extent of the HIF will be delivered within the funding avilable, it would be useful to understand the contingency planning for such risks that sit within the plan. The document comes across as a marketing document for the proposed development rather than as a serious development plan. I realise that this might be a deliberate approach to tailor the document down to an audience but for me it suggests a lack of depth and an attempt to manipulate for a political of commercial end goal.
To be clear, the definition of neighbourhoods using existing place names is an artificial construct designed to soften the reality that the existing communities and countryside will be sacrificed as part of the creation of a new urban landscape (town) . The document paints an idyllic image of new “village like” communities but the reality is essentially a number of housing estates dumped on top of existing landscape and communities. In the absence of a time phased and costed plan, it seems reasonable to assume that the necessary infrastructure that enable the suggested quality of life (so much more than a few roads) will come along in later phases (if at all) after the developers have finished the profitable phases of the develo0pment. The outline information presented is simply one vision of what could be and (as is usually the case) seems unlikely to be realised as outlined. Agin, it feels like a marketing document rather than a realistic proposal for such a significant development.
In summary the proposal does not demonstrate a strategic need for this development, at least not at the scale suggested. I can see no evidence of a strategic roadmap that shows how this development links to the wider Medway context. Ther lack of an agreed and well considered Medway Plan is a major barrier for any development activity of this nature. It would therefore seem prudent to halt all work on this development framework until such strategic roadmap is in place and a formal local plan is adopted. The proposal is incomplete and does not identify funding and resources needed, timescales, identification of risks and contingency plans and the full extent of the environmental impact. It might be a better plan to focus on improving those areas across Medway that the council have allowed to become run down and to complete existing developments before embarking on a development for which there is no clear definition of need.
