More on KentOnline
More on KentOnline
MP Rehman Chishti has been criticised after coming out in support of a controversial plan to build on former tennis courts.
Applications to build seven homes behind houses in Second Avenue, Gillingham, have been refused twice before, in January and in 2019, when residents came together on the streets to object.
Previously Mr Chishti had remained neutral but has since submitted a letter in support, with the new application due to be discussed by Medway's planning committee on March 31.
The move has prompted outrage among opponents, including Oliver Fish, leader of the local residents' committee, who lives in Second Avenue.
"Showing support for this development at this late hour is not staying neutral and is morally unjustifiable, as his comments could sway members of the council committee," said Mr Fish.
"He has lost my vote and many in the community who are long-standing Conservative voters, will never vote for this man again. He hasn't listened to our concerns/objections and we feel like he has stabbed us in the back. He should be ashamed of himself."
The 33-year-old said Mr Chishti's stance was even more unjustifiable considering he had spoken out against an application in Pump Lane in Rainham for 1,250 homes, which would have contributed far more to the need for housing in Medway.
"We do feel betrayed as a community," he added. "He's upset a lot of people. The development is slap bang in the middle of three or four roads, and it's affecting people across the road too because there's an access road that will increase traffic. We're worried about safety because it's already a rat-run and it's dangerous as it is already."
He said there was also a "restrictive covenant" on the property which states there is to be no development on the land, put in place by former owner Phil Manning, and said protesters are now setting up a fundraising scheme to raise enough capital for legal representation.
A public letter written by Mr Chishti, who represents Gillingham and Rainham, addresses the differences between his support for the plans and opposition to plans in Pump Lane.
He wrote: "I gave evidence at the planning inquiry against the Pump Lane development which I am firmly against.
"I was repeatedly asked about Medway Council's track record in building houses, the lack of a plan, the local authority not having a five-year land supply and my position on housebuilding in the area.
"I made it clear I do support housebuilding which should be looked at on a case-by-case basis whilst we move towards having a full housing plan for the area.
"It is with this background I support this application as there is a real shortage of houses and taking into account the local authority has not built the number of houses it needs in line with Government projections."
He added: "The application in my view is of the appropriate size, character and is supported by an appropriate number of parking spaces.
"I note that this revised application now addresses a number of concerns that were previously raised in a prior application."
A further statement from senior parliamentary assistant Sam Lampier added: "Rehman is of the firm view that to avoid having large scale developments being imposed on our green spaces, such as the Pump Lane proposal directly north of Twydall, we need to look at approving small-scale housing developments across the constituency to help meet the appropriate housing target on a case-by-case basis".
"I note that this revised application now addresses a number of concerns that were previously raised in a prior application"
He acknowledged Mr Chishti had previously not commented on the plan, but noted: "There is now a real expectation for the local authority to build the extra 28,300 houses in Medway.
And he added: "Rehman is sorry to hear how Mr Fish feels, but with regards to how individuals may vote in the future, in a democratic process that is entirely a matter for them.
"MPs have to comment on matters with the information available to them at the relevant time, and the comments Rehman has now made on this application at this point in time are with regards to the revised application."
