The plans are recommended for refusal by the council but will now go before the planning inspectorate
Plans for an 800-home development have been recommended for refusal – but the Planning Inspectorate is to have the final say.
Proposals from Richborough Estates Ltd, a land promotion company, are due to go to Medway Council’s planning committee next week.
The application for a plot north of the A289 Wainscott Bypass was submitted in January and the standard amount of time given to local authorities to decide is between eight and 13 weeks.
On November 28, the Birmingham-based company submitted an appeal to the planning inspectorate on the grounds of non-determination.
This means the authority has not decided in time and so it is passed upwards to a government planning inspector for a final verdict.
Regardless, the council’s planning committee is to debate the application at the December 17 meeting, where officers will set out their case for refusal.
A spokesperson for Richborough said: “Richborough has taken the decision to appeal the planning application at Wainscott to the secretary of state on the grounds of non-determination after Medway Council did not determine the application within the statutory timeframe.
“We now await the secretary of state’s decision.”
The proposals would see 800 homes, 240 of which would be affordable housing, a primary school, community centre and retirement home covering 50 hectares off Lower Rochester Road.
The bid has seen 176 letters of objections, as well as opposition from the Medway Ramblers, Frindsbury Extra Parish Council, the City of Rochester Society, Higham Parish Council, and the Hoo Consortium.
Among the concerns raised was the increase of traffic and the subsequent impact of air pollution, the loss of agricultural land and the lack of GPs and NHS dentists in the area already.
Cllrs John Williams and Elizabeth Turpin from the Independent Group, who both represent Strood Rural on the council, have written to object.
Cllr Williams said: “The land proposed for development is predominantly classified as Grade 1 and 2 agricultural soil, resulting in a significant loss of productive farming land.
“Although this land is not green belt, it is valuable open green space and countryside which would be lost should this application be approved.
“We fear it would set a precedent for further speculative applications on the adjoining agricultural land and open countryside, a vital ‘green space’ between Wainscott, Cliffe Woods and Higham.
“In these times when protecting food security for the country in is the news we should be protecting agricultural land not building on it. Once it has been built on it is gone for ever.
“The impact on the local road infrastructure would be catastrophic with the A289 already congested and causing horrendous traffic problems. This application would only add to the chaos residents endure at these times.
“Local amenities and services are already under extreme pressure with doctors surgeries and local schools at capacity.
“I would ask Medway Council to refuse this planning application that would totally ruin the quality life for local residents.”
And Cllr Elizabeth Turpin wrote: “While I recognise the need for new housing, the proposed scale, location, and lack of demonstrated mitigation make this proposal fundamentally unsustainable and harmful to local interests, environment, infrastructure, and character.
“The large scale development would represent a significant departure in character and the visual intrusion, massing and scale could undermine the local landscape and the sense of openness.
“Additional traffic emissions, combined with loss of green buffers and vegetation, will worsen local air quality, impacting health-especially for future residents, children, and vulnerable groups. I urge Medway Council to refuse planning permission.”
Residents also raised the lack of inclusion of a secondary school in the plan and the risk of flooding due to the increase of impermeable surfaces.
The fact that the new homes would be divided from the main body of Wainscott by the A289 was also considered a problem as objectors believed it would create a separate community because they would not cross the busy road.
Planning officers accept the development would help the council meet its housing targets and could bring social and economic benefits, however they say the location is “unsustainable”.
This is because it does not have viable routes for sustainable transport, would have adverse effects on the character and appearance of the area, would constitute a major loss of agricultural land, and would be an unsuitable location for a primary school.
Planners say the application would be recommended for rejection even before making the consideration of the probable impact on the existing road network, both in terms of congestion and safety.
A likely reason for the decision to appeal on the grounds of non-determination is because the council is currently consulting on its draft Local Plan – a blueprint for what can be built and where – and the Wainscott site is not included as a location for housing.
If the appeal is considered before the Local Plan is adopted, it is more likely to be approved than after, as it won’t have the additional hurdle of the fact the land has been designated for something other than housing.
The committee will make a decision about the planning application on Wednesday (December 17) but only to demonstrate what the council would have decided if it had been able to consider the plans in its own time.
The final decision will be made by a government planning inspector.
