New vote on 450 Shottendane homes plan after developer raises affordable housing to 15%

Development at the farmland off Shottendane Road Photo Sarah Bowers

An outline proposal for 450 homes on arable land in Margate which was sent back to the drawing board due to concerns over the small percentage of affordable housing will be reconsidered on Wednesday (June 23).

In April councillors on Thanet’s planning committee voted against moving forward with the application for the development on land off Shottendane Road because only 10% – instead of the recommended 30%- of properties would be affordable housing.

Other concerns were raised about the impact on medical services – with Thanet already suffering from a shortage of GPs and hospital staff – extra traffic despite planned road improvements and the building on agricultural land which is also at risk of flooding.

The development, submitted by Gladman Developments Ltd, proposed to build the homes, a new distributor link road connecting Hartsdown Road, Shottendane Road and Manston Road, two new roundabouts, public children’s play areas and recreational routes.

The 19.53ha site is made up of two arable fields -Tyrells’s Top and Tyrell’s Bottom – either side of Shottendane Road. Wheat is cultivated on the land.

Thanet council’s planning manager said the reduction in affordable housing  was considered fair because of the cost and complexities involved with the site which resulted in an exclusion area to preserve archaeological finds, areas which would be green space because flood risk meant housing could not be built on those spaces and extra costs for the link road and junctions work. A viability assessment said the development would be at a ‘deficit’ if 30% affordable housing was demanded.

However, a majority of the committee members disagreed.

Gladman Developments is now offering 15% affordable housing, meaning a rise from 45 to 68 properties on an 80% affordable rent and 20% shared ownership mix. There would also be approximately £4.9million in contributions to community and highways infrastructure.

A report to councillors says: “The benefits from the application, including but not limited to the provision of housing, new road infrastructure, contributions towards community infrastructure and 15% affordable housing, is considered to demonstrably outweigh any harm created by the development, including not achieving the target for on-site affordable housing.”

Members are being advised to delegate the application to officers for approval.

But, it is understood that councillors Candy Gregory, Pauline Farrance, Bertie Braidwood and Reece Pugh will speak against the development. Councillors Gregory, Farrance and Pugh had also raised objections at the April meeting.

Cllr Gregory and Cllr Farrance say the development will create too much pressure on health services. A developer contribution of £338,000 to health bosses would still not attract medical staff to Thanet, they said.

Part of the site Image CSA Environmental/Gladman Developments

Westgate & Garlinge Action Group also object to the development. The group says the highways proposals carves up even more land belonging to a farmer who had not been consulted over the plans.

They say numerous concerns include the loss of farmland, the increased risks of flooding – demonstrated this week by water gushing along Shottendane Road – the inability of soakaway to deal with an additional 2,000 homes that are planned by developments on the stretch from Shottendane to Quex and the financial viability of the scheme.

The group’s objection says the rise to 15% affordable housing is “laughable,” adding: “Thanet needs affordable housing and if this site cannot deliver that then should it be in the Local Plan?”

The group also questions a lack of biodiversity assessment, saying: “There is no breeding bird survey and the developer has provided no farmland bird mitigation.  Skylarks are prevalent on this site – we’ve seen and heard them since February this year, and these birds have been here for decades and probably centuries.  Ignoring their presence is failing to follow policy guidelines.”

Farmland at Shottendane earmarked for housing development

A question of possible contamination of water at Tivoli Brook, which could then run into Margate Harbour is raised and the group say an overage agreement would indicate that Thanet council benefits financially from development at the site and so has a pecuniary interest.

The group’s objection says: “We are aware of the overage agreement that TDC have on this site and TDC appear to benefit from 50% of the increased value between the existing value of the land, (agricultural and agricultural land used in connection with farming and farming residence) and the value of the land following a consent to change use.”

The action group also says climate change – and the impact on weather- also needs to be considered.

A letter sent to councillors says: “Our drainage system was never built to cope with this type of weather – we’re getting tropical style deluges more and more frequently. And we are warned that this is likely to be the norm. We must prepare for much wetter and (conversely) hotter, drier weather in between. This has been the pattern for the last few years but we are not ready. We are not even preparing. Adding 17140 houses (the total housing planned up to 2031) onto a system that already cannot cope is complete and utter madness.”

The group has pledged to: “scrutinise every aspect of this site, and its development at every step of the way until councillors and developers finally accept it is not a viable development. “We will endeavour to highlight and monitor the issues flagged  until our voices are heard.”

The planning committee will discuss the application at the meeting on Wednesday (June 23) which starts at 7pm.

Back to drawing board for 450 Shottendane homes development after councillors refuse to back proposal

Campaigners continue fight against ‘decimation’ of Thanet agricultural land

72 Comments

    • Many years ago the Victorian people used to swim in that area,so how could you develop there,it’s crazy,it will leave very weak house foundations and even collapse!!!!

  1. It is not so-called affordable housing that is needed (affordable to whom unless you come from London?) but social housing is badly needed for many locals from Thanet.
    None of those houses will be “affordable” to any local family on Thanet wages!

  2. Agree ton, but under new tory housing bill , councils will have no veto over planning applications, that’s why tories are losing seats in the south

    • Snowflake labour councillor Lewis says about Tories losing seats, but continues to forgot that the Tories have almost consigned Labour to history when they was battered in local and national elections when people voted Tory.

      Your completely wrong over the new bill Barry. As always. Nothing changes.

      • The Bill proposed by this Tory government will remove many powers from local authorities. That’s one reason why rock-solid Tory Amersham voted LibDem the other day.

        Hmm. 10% to 15% affordable housing, 30% recommended?
        Send it back again.

  3. When is it going to end farmers selling of arable land to make a quick buck-yeah dont blame them, but all these houses are just benefitting the out of towners not local people who are desperate to rent at a sensible price befitting the wages in the area is that too much to ask. traffic in Thanet is never ending where ever you go now, took me 35 mins to get from Manston to Margate last week via the lights at coffin corner crazy or what?

  4. Farmers keep saying they don’t make any money , so by selling land we end up buying food from other countries ,stop selling our farmland and put a stop to buying in,we worked the land in war time to provide let’s do it again, stop selling our land for housing,

    • As a direct consequence of BREXIT, the government has entered into a trade agreement with Australia, opening up our markets to cheap beef and lamb. Our livestock farmers will go out of business.
      Any suggestions as to what they might do with their fields in order to make money?

      • nothing to do with Brexit Andrew it is the fault of greedy landowners every time, and if our supermarkets were to buy British produce we would have no need for imports from anywhere let alone Australia and if some of our farmers weren’t so shortsighted heaven forbid they could even think bout growing food for the country on their empty fields I’m sure there are Government grants available to help

        • Lesley supermarkets look for the lowest cost as consumers won’t pay high costs and they also need to make a profit for shareholders. Unless we as consumers are prepared to pay higher costs British farmers are going to struggle. With Brexit we have shunned the market our farmers sold to just across the water and are now making deals with a market on the other side of the globe where our farmers cannot compete due to less food standards. It’s no surprise farmers are selling up. Plus farmers and other industries are complaining they don’t have the staff to work the fields, another consequence of Brexit. Has the penny dropped yet or are you still blind to the fact you were lied to? Plus there is a great big brownfield site at Manston that could have taken a lot of these homes but yet again people believed the lies that a multiple times failed airport could be revived. I feel like England has gone into a trance duped by racist bating red top tabloids run by billionaires and MPs who are just in it for their own gain. Take off the blinkers people!

          • Realistic Girl moan moan moan and wtf has Manston and racism got to do with the price of beef/lamb? our supermarkets are to blame for not sourcing the products they sell from this country stock British and people will buy British me included whether its more expensive or not people will buy what they can afford and regarding fruit pickers if some young people were not so afraid of hard work there would be no problem they want everything handed to them on a plate these days without having to do the work for what they want. Like many older people did when they were younger we went fruit picking and potato picking although the latter today is in the majority done by machine only gleaners benefit from tatties left behind so I am afraid none of your arguments will wash with me Brexit will see us right underBoris he believes in this country more than lot of you do and before any of you start I am not a conservative voter get a life and as some would say suck it up

      • Andrew. I think Jupiter means in actual pounds? Well you tell Jupiter and I much are affordable houses on this proposed site pounds and pence please? I know you are such an expert on everything including BREXIT, Australian exports of meat etc.

      • Marva Rees actually, I could not give a toss whether you do or do not have a passport as much as you might hate Brexit having happened it happened and we are no longer part of that corrupt club get over it

    • Reply to Jupiter
      This is a boring answer, sorry, but may be informative.The charity Shelter posts this as of the UK Govs definition of ‘affordable housing’.
      Affordable Housing (with a capital A and H) doesn’t directly take into account what the person occupying the home can actually afford to pay, given their income and dependants. Instead, it focuses on what type the home is. It basically defines Affordable Housing as any home that is not private market housing, i.e. not a home bought privately or a home that’s rented from a private landlord. They include:
      Social rented housing – low rent, secure housing prioritised by need (declining).
      Affordable Rent housing – higher rent, less secure housing prioritised by need
      Shared ownership – housing that you buy part of and rent part of
      Intermediate/Affordable Rent homes – set at 80% of market rate, but higher than social housing as does not take account of need.
      They are set by the National Policy Planning Framework but The Affordable Housing Commission (2020) concluded that “many” of these products “are clearly unaffordable to those on mid to lower incomes.”
      So, basically, imo, empty promises, smoke and mirrors by Gov for developers!

      • Reply to Lesley Peeling- I like the BBC and don’t think it’s biased. I don’t remember taking much notice of Cameron and Osborne.

        • see Marva it’s catching you’re at it now telling fibs of course you listened otherwise how would you have known which way to vote?It has been proven that the BBC were biased over Brexit respected presenters on popular news shows who no longer have anything to lose have spoken out about the bias of people at the top, why do you think people have called it the biased broadcasting company?goodnight

          • I repeat. I don’t think the BBC is biased. I don’t think I took much notice of Cameron and Osborne.I have always thought it’s a good thing to belong to a co-operative union.

  5. Once a developer gets the green light to build. Most of there promises are chucked straight in the bin. Never trust a developer the ££££££££ are the most important part. They create modern day expensive getos.

  6. Prediction: Under public pressure the planning committee will refuse the application, the developer will appeal, win & build the houses & TDC will have to pay £££ in legal fees.

  7. Too many houses on agricultural land that is not suitable is a disaster waiting to happen.
    The green wedges should not even be built on anyway and the country lanes are not suitable for the increase in traffic to and from these estates. Where all the new houses are being built off Nash Lane it will be a traffic nightmare on the country lane. Until new roads are built that are efficient to cope with all the extra traffic these homes should not be built. Councillors must not allow the planning manager to keep passing these developments willy-nilly with no care for the environment, community and infrastructure.

  8. People shouldn’t have voted for the Tories, who only want to cosy up to their housing- developer mates who donate lots of money to the party.

    • Martha, you and the other sore remoaners need to grow up and stop throwing unsubstantiated accusations. Suck it up.

      Farmers have a right to sell their land. We don’t live in a Labour dictatorship, so thankfully they can sell if they want to. You have no right to say otherwise.

      Brexit, the election, manston airport reopening (not a matter of if but when), trade agreements and Tories being put back in control of TDC, are the best things to have happened.

      • I am not a “sore remoaner” and I expect neither are the many thousands of people who did not vote to leave the EU.

        By the way, you have misspelt my name.

        • Marva, Labour can not decide what way to go on anything Blair took us us in to a war to just cosy up to the Americans Brown sold off our gold reserves at a ridiculously low price and the note left in the till to say there’s nothing left which of course led to years of austerity by the Conservatives and don’t start with Corbyn could never have run a bath let alone a country he was verging on being a commie and now we have have an opposition leader that is so wet and such a liar he will agree with Boris on camera but off it he will deny everything that he said he is your typical wilt and deserves to be thrown out of anywhere let alone a pub Labour party for the working class ? not any more they’re not why would anyone support a party that is unable to decide whether to be in or out of the E U and before you Labourites start in I am not a Conservative voter neither have I ever voted Labour the other main parties do not represent me either so I think I am what’s called a floating voter and if any of you don’t like it your problem not mine,they are a waste of space and public money

  9. I remember when I worked for the farmer who rented the ground from shottendane farm. One year it flooded with hundreds of gallons of water which layed in the hollow for a few weeks before draining away. When it did finally clear it contaminated the water in Margate harbour. This valley which runs from Woodchurch is a natural water course with an underground stream which local farms tap into for their irrigation. This ground has a history of flooding and will flood again in the future.

  10. all they are doing is increasing the bribe to get what they want , with that amount of money invovled they wont stop until they get thier way. once they have covered that area , i wonder where they next parcel of land is , my advice to a young person today would be – dont get a job = get yourself on the council !

        • control over our own country money,laws the right to strike trade deals with any country we like and not be dictated to by corrupt EU officials oh and we had the covid vaccine before any crummy EU country,had both of yours have you Phyllis? trouble is you remainers want everything overnight and it just doesn’t work like that we have our sovereignty back but obviously that is of no concern to EU luvvies try supporting your own country for a change instead of that pile of poop dictated to by Merkel and Manny Macron

          • Had we lost our sovereignty? I don’t seem to remember reading or hearing anything about it, if so.

  11. We need proper roads before we build anymore properties , Westwood cross and surrounding areas are absolute shit to navigate and certain times in day ! More doctors as well ! Also these new builds are built on the rush with shoddy workmanship that sees in a couple of years leaks , boiler issues and poor quality building causing problems for the owners .

  12. Still no! Its farmland & there has to be limits to concrete creep. Once its gone it gone. Then it will be time to build over something else.

  13. I think this is a good one for planing they would like all homes to have electric cars and all them homes have not got garages so you can not charge it over night so the rice people can have electric cars but the poor people will have to walk to work good thinking on the planing
    can some one plan a head of time NO

  14. Marva you would not know a joke if it smacked you in the face Mrs Peeling shut you up with her Labour comments though didn’t she? no arguing the facts is there? and don’t bother answering because you will be talking to thin air.

  15. Were there any facts in Ms Peeling’s comments about Labour?

    No need to call anyone a “wazzock”, surely.

    • Marva everything Lesley Peeling said about the Labour party was true no one in their right mind would cosy up to them they re as rotten as the rest of them perhaps if you didn’t listen only to Radio 4 you might learn a bit more about what is going on in the world or learn more about Brexit other than what you have heard on the radio now go away Marva and please do not bother me any more I will say it again in case it hasn’t sunk in GO AWY AND LEAVE ME ALONE

Comments are closed.