The steady stream of bright green protest signs is unmissable. Proudly displayed outside people’s homes, they make clear a fierce battle is being fought in the usually quiet residential streets of Whitstable.

Lismore Road, situated less than two miles from the north coast of Kent, has many more cars parked along it than is usual. Next to a huge patch of farmland at the street’s south end, a large crowd of locals has gathered. Winter weather has set in but, wrapped in coats, hats and gloves, the campaigners refuse to let the chill stop them from making their presence known, so anxious are they that the character of their seaside community is at grave risk.

One gentleman stands with two border terriers. He, like others, has taken the opportunity to combine a dog walk with the chance to voice his opposition to a new housing development on the exact land where we are standing.

It is a development with 1,400 houses, the largest-ever one in Whitstable. And for a town of only around 30,000 people, famous for its oysters, it will be an unrecognisable increase.

The protesters have called their campaign group Save Brooklands Farmland. They have a long list of concerns, top of which is interference from Whitehall who they fear will ultimately decide their fate.

Last week it was revealed how Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner plans to force councils to allow building on large swathes of green belt land by reclassifying huge areas as “low quality green belt” or “grey belt” so Labour can meet its target of building 1.5 million homes by 2029.

If green-lit, the Brooklands Farm development will be built over agricultural land outside nearby Chestfield, a village essentially already swallowed up by Whitstable. The plans include a primary school, SEND school and new slip roads onto a dual carriageway.

Residents in Whitstable say the overhaul of planning laws is being enforced already in the nearby town of Sittingbourne, which could set a dangerous precedent as communities risk losing their identities, more of which later.

When the Daily Express arrives on an overcast Tuesday in early December, the large crowd is waiting to hear a campaigner speak but it’s not long before they’re sharing their concerns.

Semi-retired local resident Jackie Hutton, 57, who works in financial services, is one of them. She cites one estimate by campaigners that 3,000 more cars will be on local roads if the new homes are approved. “There’s a traffic overload,” says Ms Hutton. “Everything is north of Chestfield. So Chestfield Road will be absolutely, totally and utterly overwhelmed.”

But, worse, she fears a “horrendous” sewage impact. Back in October, residents of a different housing development, Whitstable Heights, just two miles west of Chestfield, watched in horror as human waste flowed down the street. One disgusted resident filmed it on her phone.

Housing association bosses blamed the incident on locals flushing nappies down the toilet. But Ms Hutton believes there is already a massive problem with flooding that can’t be ignored.

“Whitstable Heights, which is only partly built, has human poo in the street,” she says. “We’re a coastal town so quite dependent on tourism. We already have problems with sewage going into the sea quite frequently, and it’s just going to get worse. Southern Water hasn’t got the capacity from a sewage point of view. They’re struggling as it is.”

Responding to the concerns, a spokesperson for Southern Water later told the Express that the blocked manhole in question wasprivately owned and the responsibility of the housing company and developer. “However, we helped resolve this issue as it was polluting oursurface water network and impacting the local area,” they said.

The spokesperson added that the bathing water quality off the town’s Tankerton Beach has been classified as “excellent” by the Environment Agency, with neighbouring West Beach Whitstable classified as “good”.

“There have been no recent storm overflow releases impacting bathing water in this section of coastline. Nevertheless, we are committed to playing our part in protecting and enhancing water quality in the Whitstable area moving forward, alongside a range of partners – led by the Environment Agency,” they said.

Lesley Cox, 72, was born in Chestfield and is a retired research assistant at the University of Kent. Keeping warm in her pink coat and staring at the fields, she says: “Losing the whole site is horrific. It’s all our open spaces that are going and what concerns me, apart from the houses, is the wildlife. We’ve got skylarks over these fields, and hares and rabbits. Where do they go? There are hardly any butterflies or bees – not even many wasps.” She’s perplexed as to why other nearby developments also have homes “standing there empty”.

The residents of Whitstable aren’t alone with their worries. Housing has become a hot potato as the Government relaxes planning laws to get to grips with the housing shortage crisis.

Housing Secretary Ms Rayner has revamped England’s planning rules to allow her party to deliver on its new housing targets. Her reforms included new mandatory local housing targets, the ability to build on “grey belt” land, and new powers for local authority planning officers to rubber-stamp development proposals without permission from council committees – as long as they meet locally agreed plans and national regulations on standards.

Chestfield resident Liz Robertson, 66, voted for Sir Keir Starmer’s party in this summer’s general election. But the former retail worker now firmly regrets her decision because of her concern over the impact on Whitstable should Brooklands Farm be approved.

“This could be a case of it not getting agreed on a local level but the Labour Government doing it anyway,” she says.

Consequently, Ms Robertson is vowing to cast her ballot differently next time. “I think we needed a change,” she explains. “But I think they’re just going feet first without really considering the implications. If you came and looked at this, you’d say, ‘Why do you want to build housing on it?’”

Darrell Back, 52, a self-employed builder, has more immediate concerns about sewage, traffic and the water supply. Drainage ofsurface water on the site, he says, could have “implications with properties further on down the way in Chestfield”. A nearby brook, if it takes surface water from Brooklands Farm, could see homes flooded, he fears.

Ron Kentish, 71, a retired BT technician, moved to Whitstable from London 22 years ago and is worried about the noise on the proposed site, which would block his countryside view. He also worries that if he tries to move, he will end up with something worse. “I just think we’ll have to put up with it, whatever happens, really,” he says, grim-faced.

Residents who traditionally oppose new housing developments are sometimes labelled “nimbys”, a pejorative acronym standing for “not in my backyard”.

Canterbury Green Party campaigner Stuart Heaver says there is a need for the “right houses in the right places” butquestions the developer’s plans.

“Are they the right houses when built on beautiful, prime farmland, in beautiful green spaces, and they’re five-bedroom executive boxes?” he says.

They should be on brownfield sites. Small, accessible, social housing. Housing for old people who are downsizing, housing for young people trying to get on the housing ladder. That’s what there’s a need for – not a multi-million-pound national developer making more profits for shareholders. That’s the agenda. It’s not homelessness, it’s not housing.”

Lyn Koukoulis, 68, a retired mobile hairdresser and builder, believes developed brownfield sites are a better option as the South East of England is already “overloaded”.

So too does self-employed Ali Tappenden, 56, who has lived in Whitstable, on and off, for 53 years. “There are a million places where houses could be built throughout the UK,” she says.

At this point, Ms Tappenden mentions a potential intervention from Ms Rayner, over the proposed development of 8,400 homes in another nearby Kent town, Sittingbourne.

Earlier this month, Sittingbourne hit the news after it came to light that planning officers had recommended Swale Borough Council vote against the project. Campaigners say that the homes would overwhelm current infrastructure and harm the environment.

But developer Quinn Estates claims the proposals are “entirely suitable” and would bring “significant benefits to the surrounding area as a whole”.

The planning decision has been delegated to the Government, with Ms Rayner expected to make a final decision in February.

Ms Tappenden is indignant about thesituation. “That sets a dangerous precedent for the whole of the country,” she says. “If we’ve got this, for instance, and Angela Rayner comes along and goes, ‘Yeah, we’ll build there’, it takes democracy out of it. It takes any care for our local community out of the question.”

“I feel completely worthless,” she adds. “As an individual living in this country.”

Responding to locals’ concerns about Brooklands Farm, a spokesperson fordeveloper Hallam Land told the Express that Whitstable had been classified as a “key sustainable settlement that is well placed to deliver growth to meet identified needs” under Canterbury Council’s future development proposals.

Along with implementing “the necessary infrastructure” alongside the new homes, the developer said it had consulted the views of local people through public events and a website and feedback would be “carefully considered”.

Most Popular Comments

“Claire Rayner does your NVQ cover planning for this .Forests absorb heat wind and water are being cut down on mass by companies building houses …” 20

“The only problem I see is where are all the gp’s coming from with these extra people, …” 16

“Labour detests Britain and by hook or by crook will bring it down” 14

JOIN THE DEBATE

A spokesperson for Canterbury Council, now controlled by a Labour and Liberal Democrat coalition, said it carried out an extensive consultation about its local development plans and had received “thousands of comments” including about the Brooklands Farm proposal.

The spokesperson added: “No decisions have been made on any of the housing sites or proposals in the draft plan. We are currently assessing all of the responses and the issues raised during the consultation and have kept our residents updated on theprocess and what is happening.

“As a result of changes nationally, we are now working to a new Local Plan timetable and have a bit more time to make sure we get the process right, digest the feedback thoroughly and think carefully about where our larger housing sites should be.

“We have also put out a new call for sites with an emphasis on brownfield land to make sure we are taking advantage of as many of these types of sites as possible. This came out clearly in the consultation as apriority for our residents.

“This is a long running process which we are determined to get right and we are committed to making sure residents are communicated with properly throughout.”