150 homes and open space at Meresborough Road, Rainham

What was proposed

The outline scheme sought up to 150 homes, including affordable housing, public open space, landscaping, play areas and access from Moor Street.

“The application is in outline with all matters reserved except for access. The scheme proposed comprises up to 150 dwellings including 25% affordable housing, public open space, landscaping and associated works. Detailed approval is sought for the proposal principal means of vehicular access from Moor Street.”

“The application proposes up to 150 dwellings of which 25% would be affordable (up to 38 dwellings) arranged in three main areas across the site. These residential areas are divided by areas of green space or by retained traditional orchards. A total minimum area of 2.81ha of open space is proposed and this will include a locally equipped area of children’s play (LEAP), 4no.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

The site had no previous applications, while nearby housing schemes had been refused or allowed on appeal and the site was not taken forward for allocation.

“The Site has not been subject to any previous planning applications, however there are a number of recent applications in the local area that are of relevance.”

“The application site was part of a much larger site considered for allocation in the emerging Local Plan as an eastern extension of Rainham. It was included in the potential areas for Suburban Expansion option to accommodate the housing requirement for Medway. The site was not taken forward in the subsequent Regulation 19 version of the Plan, nor the Regulation 22 version.”

Officer report

What residents said

Twenty letters objected to loss of open land, landscape and wildlife, infrastructure pressure, traffic, drainage, pollution, heritage impacts and affordability concerns.

“Active Travel England, Southern Gas Networks, UK Power Network, Southern Water Services, Historic England, Natural England, KCC Police, KCC Archaeological Officer, KCC Biodiversity Officer, Chatham World Heritage and the following Medway Council departments; Landscaping, Urban Design, Flood and Drainage, Highways, Strategic Transport, Environmental Protection, Planning Policy, Affordable Housing, Heritage and Conservation, Youth Services, Library Services, Waste Services,…”

“Loss of open land Loss of land of ecological value Loss of visual separation between built areas Harm to settlement identity Overdevelopment Not in keeping with the character of the surrounding area. Additional pressure on local infrastructure Problems with gas and water supply Increased traffic raising highway safety concerns. Cumulative highway impacts Insufficient detail on how impacts on biodiversity, flood risk and neighbouring amenity would be avoided.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Principal Planner presented the application, and the Chief Planning Officer explained the possible appeal and Secretary of State referral.

Members’ discussion

Members recognised the need for housing and the shortage of housing land but agreed that heritage and landscape harm outweighed the benefits.

“This record is available on our website – www.medway.gov.uk meet the housing delivery test and both these aspects, therefore, carried substantial weight in favour of the application. However, it was considered that the adverse impacts of the development in terms of the heritage and landscape harm particularly would outweigh any benefits associated with the provision of up to 150 more dwellings.”

“The Committee discussed the planning application in detail. Whilst Members recognised the need for additional housing and the current shortage of housing land, they agreed with the officers’ recommendation.”

Minutes

The decision

The application was refused for reasons one to five, with a referral to the Secretary of State before a formal decision could be issued.

“The Chief Planning Officer clarified that the applicant had indicated an intention to lodge an appeal, dependent on the decision of this planning application. He further advised that, should Members be minded to support the officers’ recommendation and refuse planning permission, the planning application would first need to be referred to the Secretary of State before a formal decision could be issued.”

“REFUSED in accordance to reasons 1 to 5 as set out in the report and a referral to the Secretary of State.”

Minutes