Gleeson Land's outline plan for up to 100 homes on the pear orchard between Higham Road and Buckland Road was refused on 7 September. The six reasons, the housing mix lost, and what happens next.

Medway Council has refused outline permission for up to 100 homes on the commercial pear orchard south of Higham Road in Cliffe. The decision notice was issued on Monday 7 September, and the committee record explaining why was published this week.

The applicant was Gleeson Land, acting through the agent Marrons. Application MC/26/0194 covered a 5.18 hectare rectangle of farmland between Higham Road, Buckland Road and the back gardens of Symonds Road, directly across Buckland Road from the Eternal Lake nature reserve (Medway Council planning portal).

What was proposed

The application was in outline, meaning only the access from Higham Road was fixed and everything else (appearance, layout, landscaping and scale) would have followed later. The indicative scheme in the officer report was 75 market homes and 25 affordable homes, with this mix:

  • 42 three-bedroom houses
  • 26 four-bedroom houses
  • 19 two-bedroom houses
  • 10 one-bedroom flats
  • 3 two-bedroom flats

Of the 25 affordable homes, seven would have been one-bedroom flats, three two-bedroom flats, four two-bedroom houses, seven three-bedroom houses and four four-bedroom houses. The report describes a 3.7 metre shared footway and cycleway at the site entrance and a new southbound bus stop.

Bar chart of the housing mix in the refused Cliffe scheme: 42 three-bedroom houses, 26 four-bedroom houses, 19 two-bedroom houses, 10 one-bedroom flats and 3 two-bedroom flats, 100 homes in total
Chart by Medway Live. Source: Medway Council planning committee officer report on MC/26/0194, 26 August 2026.
Share this chartFacebookWhatsAppX

The six reasons for refusal

Officers recommended refusal on five grounds. The planning committee, meeting on 26 August, agreed all five with amendments to reflect the new National Planning Policy Framework published on 17 August, and added a sixth (record of the meeting). In summary:

  1. Wrong place under the plan. The site is unallocated greenfield land outside the settlement boundary. The emerging Local Plan 2041 plans for growth at Cliffe but not on this site.
  2. Harm to Higham Road residents. The proposed footpaths and the shifting of parking into an on-site car park would damage residential amenity and the rural feel of the street.
  3. Landscape harm. The scheme would detach the village from its rural setting and urbanise its edge, contrary to the Cliffe and Cliffe Woods Neighbourhood Plan.
  4. Loss of farmland. All 5.18 hectares are Grade 3a, which counts as best and most versatile agricultural land, with no overriding need shown.
  5. No section 106 agreement, so no secured affordable housing or infrastructure contributions.
  6. Protected birds. The application did not address its impact on the Thames Estuary and Marshes and Medway Estuary and Marshes Special Protection Areas, either through an appropriate assessment or a contribution to strategic mitigation. This was the reason the committee added.

Who objected

The portal records 124 objections and no letters of support from 126 public comments, with 31 neighbours consulted directly (comments tab). The officer report counted 139 letters of objection at the time it was written. Cliffe and Cliffe Woods Parish Council “strongly objects”, citing ecology, unsafe pedestrian access on Higham Road, car dependency and pressure on services. St Mary Hoo Parish Council also objected. Cllr Michael Pearce wrote in twice against it, and ward councillor Cllr Mrs Turpin submitted two representations of her own.

At the committee, Cllr Turpin spoke for residents and for her fellow ward councillor. The record notes members’ concern about school places: 67 applications had been received for 30 places at the local primary school.

Why it was close to being approvable

The case was not one-sided, and the officer report says so. Medway cannot currently show a five-year supply of housing land. The report puts the figure at under three years, and notes the council delivered only 72 per cent of its target in the government’s Housing Delivery Test. That triggers the “tilted balance” in national policy, which means permission should be granted unless the harms significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

Officers concluded they did. National Highways raised no objection. The applicant had promoted the same site for allocation in the emerging Local Plan and it was assessed and not selected.

What it means for you

  • Cliffe residents: the orchard stays for now. Gleeson Land can appeal to the Planning Inspectorate, and a refusal on an unallocated site in a district without a five-year land supply is the kind of case developers do take to appeal. Watch the portal entry for a related appeal case.
  • The other Cliffe scheme is separate. The 250 homes at Church Street already have outline permission on appeal and are at the detailed design stage; nothing in this decision affects them.
  • Anyone tracking Medway planning: the committee’s added sixth reason, on protected bird sites, appeared on two refusals at the same meeting, this one and a Gillingham HMO. Our planning applications page explains how to comment on live cases.

Sources