Medway Liberal Democrats - Response to Future Hoo –Consultation 2021 – Second Round

Future Hoo -Consultation 2021 - Second Round

10^th January 2022

Dear Hoo Consultation Team,

Below is the response on behalf of Medway Liberal Democrats (MLD) to the Second-Round consultation on the proposed infrastructure to enable the growth of Hoo. Medway Liberal Democrats welcome the significant developments to the environmental portion of the brochure. However, we are disappointed with the lack of development of the rail section since the First-Round and that there are still issues with the highways section that have not been resolved. The details of our findings and our alternatives are provided in detail below.

It remains our concern that the preliminary design of the highways section has still not had a rigorous level of design. The alternatives still don't fully address the traffic growth that shall be generated through the proposed development of Hoo.

A new concern is that much of the infrastructure that is not part of the road, rail and environment is still to be determined and is to be described in the Hoo Development Framework (c.f. pg. 5). This makes the criticisms of the HIF Second-Round document more difficult as we cannot make objective comments against the locations of some arterial roads. In addition to this concern, we note that the Draft Local Plan has still not been published and thus this too affects objective criticisms of the brochure. The delay in publishing the Draft Local Plan is of significant disquiet. The plan was to be issued in Summer 2021, and certainly by late Autumn 2021, yet it still hasn't been published.

MLD understand that money not spent or invoiced by April 2025 shall have to be returned to Central Government. This could significantly affect the finances of Medway, as much of what is proposed in the brochure will likely not have been constructed by that date. Thus, the funding of the completion of the HIF work in addition to the buildings needed for the Hoo Development Framework shall have to be funded by Medway local authority. And with its current financial situation shall mean that Medway having to borrow the money to complete the work prior to the housing being constructed.

The lack of references to consultancies within the body of the text and the lack of appendices raises unease regarding the development of the proposed plans.

Our response raises concerns over the following matters:

• The significant delay in the completion and publication of the Draft Local Plan
• The lack of improved junction design along the Wainscott Bypass
• The lack of design development of the proposed rail infrastructure
• The lack of identification where the housing is to be placed for the provision of arterial and feeder roads
• The omission of a station that could serve Cooling, Cliffe and Cliffe Woods
• The lack of improvements to pedestrian and existing cycle routes
• The lack of new cyclepaths in the infrastructure plan
• Lack of time to complete the design and instigate the construction phase before the period of grace for spending the grant money has passed - and the potential knock-on effects
• The lack of indicative budget costs for the proposed schemes within each of the allocated ring-fenced sub-funds
• The poor prioritisation of the proposed works in order to alleviate some of the existing traffic issues
• Air Quality has not been given adequate consideration for the long-term effects of the design and during construction the phase. The area is already in a AQMA zone and this Air Quality impact should be a key concern
• CO2 emission impact not available for consideration
• Approach taken to consultation

The initial rush to publish the HIF driven Hoo - New Routes to Good Growth has resulted in a long period of reflection and potential design, but only the environmental projects have been significantly developed. The highway design still has some poor junction design. And the most perturbing part of the brochure is the lack of rail design development.

Rather than just being critical of the current proposals, we have described what we would do in terms of design and implementation for the three "ring-fenced" sub-funds to ensure the best value return on the infrastructure improvements for the Hoo Peninsula and the eastern end of urban Medway.

Yours faithfully,

Cllr Andrew Millsom BEng(Hons) BA(Hons) PgD CEng MICE MIStructE