Medway Local Plan (Regulation 19, 2025)

Object

Representation ID: 4642

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Increases in air pollution should not be considered acceptable.

Object

Representation ID: 4643

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Failure of Medway and Gravesham to be transparent about duty to co-operate meetings.

Inappropriate threats made by Gravesham Council representatives and misuse of duty to co-operate.

Failure of Medway Council to protective Green Belt and interests of its residents.

Object

Representation ID: 4644

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The independant review of the Green Belt Review has not been published so the public are not able to consider its findings in responding to this consultation.

Object

Representation ID: 4648

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Inappropriate response by Medway to threats from Gravesham Council representatives.

Exceptional Circumstances are not valid.

Failure to Publish the Medway Duty to Co-operate Report.

Object

Representation ID: 4649

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The Medway Green Belt Review 2025 is flawed and not accurate (I have commented extensively on this in other responses) and should be disregarded.
The Exceptional Circumstances claimed are not valid (I have commented extensively on this in other responses).

Object

Representation ID: 4650

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The draft plan proposes that the Green Belt providing the separation should be re-classified as Grey Belt which will promote coalescence. Note that [REDACTED] the positioning of the A289 by-pass was chosen to avoid the temptation to develop on Green Belt land and avoid "bridging" the gap between Gravesham and Medway. We now face an attempt to remove that very Green Belt. This represents a long term process of "salami slicing" the Green Belt and eventually remove it. Once this Green Belt is removed developers will simply move to the next area.

Object

Representation ID: 4651

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The 2025 Medway Green Belt Review is flawed and does not justify the release of land to the west of Strood, the Exceptional Circumstances quoted are not valid (I have commented on this extensively elsewhere in my response).

Object

Representation ID: 4652

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? No

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? No

This paragraph does not give sufficient emphasis to Medway Council's obligations to strongly represent the views of residents.

Object

Representation ID: 4653

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The Medway Green Belt Review 2025 is flawed (I have commented on this extensively in other parts of my response).

The Duty to co-operate is being mis-used to effectively bully Medway into sacrificing Green Belt land.

Object

Representation ID: 4654

Received: 08/08/2025

Respondent: Mr Kevin Smith

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The duty to co-operate is being mis-used, the current Green Belt land in Strood should be retained.