Leisure boat moorings at Land To The South Of Former Upnor Public Convenience, Lower Upnor

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Medway Planning Committee on 6 May 2026.

MC/25/0965RefusedAgainst officer advice

What was proposed

The application sought to retain steps, a ramp pontoon and piles, remove eight piles, add a pontoon and convert a former toilet building for boat users.

“Location: Land To The South Of Former Upnor Public Convenience Including Foreshore And Bed Of The River Medway Lower Upnor Rochester…”

“Proposal: Partially retrospective planning application for the retention of steps, ramp pontoon, and 10no. piles (with some reduced in height to approximately 6m to reflect the height of the control pile), removal of 8no. piles, and provision of an additional pontoon, and use of former toilet building to supply facilities for those mooring boats including provision of WC and shower, drying and storage facilities…”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site lies south of Upnor Road beside the River Medway, within a tidal flood area, Flood Zone 3 and a Marine Conservation Zone.

“Background and principle The site is located south of Upnor Road, in Lower Upnor. The site is positioned to the south of the former Arethusa Venture Centre, with which the wharf has historically been linked. The site lies partly within (the land) and partly outside (the riverbed) of the confines of Lower Upnor as set out on the Proposals map of the Medway Local Plan 2003.”

“The site is within a Tidal Flood Area, within Flood Zone 3 and located within a Marine Conservation Zone. There is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) found on the outskirts of Lower Upnor, however the site does not lie within the boundaries of the SSSI.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the leisure moorings, converted toilet block, reduced piles and ecological measures acceptable subject to conditions preventing permanent residential use.

“Piles are found along the Lower Upnor riverside and, as with the steps, and pontoon, are very much part of the character of the locality. The reduction in the number and height of the piles and the addition of a further pontoon is considered acceptable within this location and the use of the site for the mooring of boats respectful of the character of the wharf.”

“Subject to conditions restricting the use of the site to leisure based moorings with no permanent residential element the proposal is considered to be in accordance with Policies S3, BNE1, BNE2, BNE18, BNE35, L13 T1, and T13 of the Local Plan, the provisions set out the National Planning Policy Framework and the Emerging Local Plan Policy T22. Therefore, the application is recommended for approval.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Consultees raised objections about the riverside character, fishing rights, access, enforcement, visual impact and ecology, while the Environment Agency had no objection.

“Councillors also raise the following additional objections: - Inappropriate Location: There are existing, suitable residential mooring facilities nearby, such as in Hoo and Cuxton. The character and setting of Upnor make it unsuitable for such development. Access Issues: Based on the submitted plans, there appears to be no direct access to the site from land in the applicant’s ownership.”

“Rochester Oyster and Floating Fishery (ROFF) object: - ROFF hold exclusive fishing rights within the River Medway from Sheerness to Hawkwood Stone, established by statute (Acts of Parliament). As a result of the statutes ROFF would have to agree to any works on the riverbed below the high-water mark, ROFF do not agree and therefore also raise an objection primarily on the grounds of infringement of fishing rights.”

Officer report

What residents said

Residents objected to visual harm, houseboat use, river restoration, access, waste, wildlife impacts, piling, parking and the effect on the riverside community.

“The historic river front at Upnor needs to be fully protected and the views of the river unimpeded by new moorings for houseboats etc. The previous, unauthorised piling work should also be removed and the riverbank and bed restored to its original state. Hoo Marina would be a more suitable site The current setup looks awful and not in keeping with the area The boat when previously moored there was an eyesore and spoilt the aesthetic of the area.”

“No provision for waste storage and collection At present the types of vessels in the river are predominately yachts, or small cruisers which are anchored within the river on bouys and we consider this should be the method adopted. The removal safely of ALL the existing piles is essential, to maintain the general and usage of the local river. Parking Conflict of this new proposed venue when you consider 2 such organisations already exist who provide such facilities.”

Officer report

The committee vote

The committee voted on the officer recommendation, which was lost, then discussed ecological impacts and possible damage from waste discharge.

“This record is available on our website – www.medway.gov.uk The Committee then voted on the officer’s recommendation, which was lost. Members then discussed potential reasons for refusal, including ecological impacts and the potential for damage to the river from waste discharge.”

Minutes

The decision and reasons

The application was refused because the proposal would create visual clutter and harm public river views, with insufficient evidence about disturbance to wintering and foraging birds.

“The retention of the piles, creation of the pontoon and its use for mooring of leisure craft would result in cumulative visual clutter that would harm the open and informal character of the Upnor riverside and interrupt public views across the River Medway contrary to Policy BNE1 of the Medway Local Plan (2003) and paragraphs 131 and 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).”

“In the absence of evidence to demonstrate that the use, and the comings and goings associated with the use, would not result in disturbance and subsequent harm to wintering and foraging birds the proposal is contrary to Policies BNE37 and BNE39 of the Medway Local Plan (2003) and paragraphs 187 and 192 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).”

Minutes

The members' reasons

The resolution gives these reasons:

  1. 1 The retention of the piles, creation of the pontoon and its use for mooring of leisure craft would result in cumulative visual clutter that would harm the open and informal character of the Upnor riverside and interrupt public views across the River Medway contrary to Policy BNE1 of the Medway Local Plan (2003) and paragraphs 131 and 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024). 2 In the
Minutes

“Members noted that pilings and jetties had appeared on site, followed by the unlawful mooring of the houseboat.”

“Members further noted that, following the appeal, the requirement for the removal of the pilings and jetties had not been complied with.”

“Members noted that all vessels required some degree of maintenance and expressed concern that, if such activities occurred, they could result in ecological harm to the local area.”

“Members also noted that no prior authorisation had been sought from the Marine Maritime Organisation (MMO) for a marine licence, nor from Rochester Oyster and Floating Fishery (ROFF) for works on the riverbed.”

Minutes

Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.

Sources

  • Medway Planning Committee minutes, 6 May 2026
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Medway's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Medway
Date
Wednesday 6 May 2026
Recommendation
Officers recommended approval
Committee decided
Refused, against officer advice
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)
Application
The application (council website)

This committee's year

50 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 5 against officer advice.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →