Dear Planning Department,

We are copying the Planning Inspectorate and Kelly Tolhurst MP into this petition and representation regarding planning application MC/20/3264 ("Cockham Community Parkland").  

We are local residents of the Hoo Peninsula and we strongly OBJECT to this planning application to convert high-quality, very productive and top grade (Grade 1) agricultural land into "Cockham Community Parkland".

Medway Council's/the applicant's proposal for "Cockham Community Parkland" exists solely to enable and offset the unsustainable development of a staggering 12,000 new homes on the Hoo Peninsula - the vast majority of which will also be on Grade 1 agricultural land. The £4.5m proposed "parkland" is being paid for out of a £170m pot of money called the Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF).

Grade 1 agricultural land directly adjacent and north of the proposed "Cockham Community Parkland" is allocated for nearly 2,000 homes (part of the 12,000 mentioned previously) according to Medway Council's Strategic Land Availability Assessment (SLAA) 2019. Yet, this dependent development is not even mentioned in Medway Council's planning application (MC/20/3264).

The proposed "parkland" will be adjacent to ancient woodland and SSSI sites such as Chattenden Woods & Lodge Hill SSSI and Tower Hill to Cockham Wood SSSI. These areas of protected habitat will worsen with the introduction of public space next to these precious wildlife areas, as well as the dependent development which will be built next to "Cockham Community Parkland".

Medway Council's/the applicant's proposal violates the following sections of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) February 2019:

Section 83. Section 83. (A). Section 83. (B). Section 83. (C).

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, does not support a prosperous rural community. In fact, the application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, will destroy the local rural community in Hoo and Chattenden.

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, will destroy the opportunity for the expansion of rural businesses, destroy the development and diversification or opportunity of land-based rural businesses and destroy sustainable rural tourism and the character of the countryside in Hoo and Chattenden.

Section 84.

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, is not well served by public transport, is not sensitive to its surroundings, does have an unacceptable impact on local roads and is not physically well-related to existing settlements.

Section 170. Section 170. (A). Section 170. (B). Section 170. (C). Section 170. (E).

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, does not conserve and enhance the natural environment. In fact, the application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, will destroy the natural environment and put sensitive sites such as local SSSI and ancient woodland areas under immense pressure and threat.

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, will destroy an important and very valued landscape and ALLI, and will destroy and put pressure on sensitive sites, ancient woodland (including ancient soils), SSSIs and sites of biodiversity.

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, does not recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and in fact will destroy and put pressure on local natural capital and ecosystems.

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, will destroy the best and most versatile agricultural land (top grade/Grade 1) and will destroy the character of the undeveloped coastline.

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, will put unacceptable risk on and adversely affect and increase local soil, air, water and noise pollution and make land unstable, and will worsen local air and water quality.

Footnote 53.

The application, and subsequent applications for dependent development, strongly does not comply with Footnote 53 of the NPPF as these applications will destroy the best, most versatile and top-grade/Grade 1 agricultural land.  

Unfortunately, due to the applicant being Medway Council itself, we have no confidence in the local planning process and therefore we're also informing the Planning Inspectorate and Kelly Tolhurst MP of our concerns.

The planning application (MC/20/3264) should be refused.

Kind regards,

The Undersigned.