First phase of a 214 home development on agricultural land in Minster approved

Housing plan for Minster (Image David Wilson Homes/Carlton Design Partnership)

A reserved matters application for the first phase of a 214 home development on agricultural land in Minster has been approved.

Outline planning permission for the scheme was granted permission in September 2021 despite councillors’ concerns over traffic, school places, adequate medical facilities and the number of houses on the site.

The total application area is 34.67 acres, with proposed residential development and associated open space and services on approximately 32.27 acres and a reserve site of 2.40 acres proposed for the future extension to Minster Cemetery.

The land on the west side of Tothill Street, Minster, is owned by St. John’s College Cambridge and Spanton Farms Limited. The site is on a Special Protection Zone.

Barratt David Wilson Homes plan to carry out the first phase for 133 dwellings at the northern area of the site which will be accessed via a new junction onto Tothill Street.

The site in Minster Photo by Minster’s Future Matters

An application for  the layout of development, its scale and appearance, and the landscaping for the first phase was discussed by councillors last night (June 14).

Amendments to the plan include options for retaining the bridleway and hedgerow rather than infilling; height reduction on properties backing onto Fairfield Road and an increase in one bed flats from two to six. There will also be eighteen 2-bed houses, seventy-two 3-bed houses, and thirty-five 4-bed houses.

During the meeting the issue of Southern Water capacity was raised. The council planning officer said the aim was to have basins at the bottom of the site and swales along the boundary that would allow surface water to be contained until it was moved to the combined sewer system.

She noted that Southern Water had raised concerns over capacity in the area and would be carrying out a design assessment to outline where improvements to the network needed to be made. The developer would be responsible for paying for those improvements in regards to the new housing.

Cllr Mike Garner

Cllr Mike Garner said  there would be an ‘adverse impact,’ adding: “I am very concerned about that and it would be nice if (Southern Water) could supply a bit more of a detailed report to outline how to deal with this extra sewage and what impact it might have on sewage release into the sea already around our coast.”

Cllr Becky Wing also raised concerns about sewage and water capacity. She said: “We know the villages are serviced by their own water treatment plant and there are already capacity issues.

“(With) a significant percentage increase in the number of dwellings in the village of Minster we are heading for greater capacity issues and I would welcome greater details from Southern Water before making a decision.”

Cllr Wing said the requirement for sewer network reinforcement work at phased stages – with no occupation of properties until the issue is dealt with – was like “putting the horse before the cart” and questioned why the work could not be identified before building starts.

The development site in Minster

Senior planning officer Iain Livingstone said the water network issue was one that was dealt with under the Water Industry Act and agreements over the works  would be made between the developer and Southern Water

Some 49 letters of objection from the public were received.

In 2021 councillors raised concerns that there would not be sufficient school places at Minster and the plan for new youngsters in the village to go to a proposed Manston Green primary school was inadequate with the risk that that school may not be built in time – or at all.

Councillors had also raised concerns that traffic mitigations to add an extra lane at the Tothill roundabout and pay £166,000 for junction work at Spitfire Way were not adequate to cope with a possible 200-300 more vehicles trying to enter and exit the village.

The phase one application was approved by councillors last night with 12 in favour, one against and one abstention.



  1. What is the point of Special Protection Zone.?
    Yet again we are building on prime agricultural land, over crowding our small villages and not putting the infrastructure needed.

  2. Are the developers paying for more GP’s, Dentists & Police? Of course KCC & TDC will be rubbing their hands at more income. Shocking decision to even consider this application.

  3. It really does beggar belief doesn’t anyone listen to those who live in the vicinity of the build other councillors who are reiterating southern waters concern about the problems with servicing the extra housing with both water and sewage treatment/removal and the fact that they are building on a special protection zone and more grade 1 farm land I don’t live in Minster but I am with the village people and if I had the money I would take each of the new builds on farm land which has been granted permission to build to court because it’s ludicrous not because I don’t want new housing on my doorstep we have to build on brown field sites and areas not suitable for farming of any sort whybecause we are going against the worlds fight to lower climate warming and our government is in agreement with this the less land there is for farming means more food stuffs get imported that means more planes as goods are perishable more lorries to transport each will be increasing the co2 into the atmosphere warming up the planet in turn prices will probably go up even if they don’t cost more to get it to the supermarket you can bet they will set the price high so you think your getting a bargain when on sale tesco are the worst even though I know we get most shopping there it is shotting ones self in the foot so to say. I have to praise southern water on there concerns as I. Slating them in next story and it has to be fair to them it’s not about only commenting when suits it’s give and take.

  4. Excellent!! More housing so families like mine aren’t relocated cause of section 21s and a lack of houses for the young.

  5. I don’t have eco anxiety – I have eco bereavement!
    Our local aggregate and cement company Brett’s who pays well below the market price for despoiling the Port of Ramsgate earns anti-environmental profits by helping concrete over good land and all of the bio-diversity it supports.

  6. More money AGAIN for Cambridge University.
    Never mind loss of the best arable quality land in England & Wales for a quick buck.
    No attempt at siting housing close to areas already supporting infrastructure, or brownfield sites previously used.
    Thanet is becoming hideously overcrowded. All the villages are running into one another, with no self identity remaining. A thousand years of farming history swept away for profits for an institution in another part of Britain.
    Time for more co-ordinated objections, there was enough when it came to Manston.

  7. These developers could not give two hoots about lack of infrastructure and facilities. They build these houses,fill them with people and do not care about lack of sewage and water facilities. At this rate water will be in such short supply we will be wslking miles to fill any suitable container. This is such bad news for an already overcrowded Thanet.

  8. Ooh! This would be perfect opportunity for more buses!! And trains perhaps!?

    Don’t install driveways on these new houses or adequate parking outside the new homes. This will force the residents to think twice about having a private motor vehicle. Then they’ll have to use lovely public transport.

      • Sorry thanet egg. My comment was satire as a certain individual(s) likes to comment on every single thanet news article about how much they love buses.

        Of course they need drives or adequate parking.

    • It certainly is high time to improve public transport-partly by bringing it back into public ownership- and to incorporate bus routes into new housing developments.

  9. 250,000 empty homes in the UK, why destroy a beautiful village with an already crumbling infrastructure and clogged up roads. What about all the empty buildings in Canterbury and other brownfield sites.

  10. London now has more empty properties then anywhere in the UK. So why are they still building here, it’s to offset there own building plan. They own the land so it counts as there area.
    It’s all a con

  11. This flatly contradicts the decision made pre-election to ‘pause’ approval of large estates (TDC joining c 60 other local authorities).
    The new Departmental philosophy is for ‘locally led’ plans and the new Housing Minister has emphasised ‘brownfield first’ and the ever greater importance of preserving agricultural land for food security – Thanet is all Grade One. The Water Act may not take account of our corner not being q1uite the wettest part of the country faced with not quite the wettest of decades and an incapable water supplier. But we do have twice the national average of long term empties and an uncontrolled growth of AirBnBs but a deficiency of executive jobs for executive homes + executive cars.
    Resources might be more intelligently applied to underutilised existing resources with greater sustainability chances as the government seems to intend with its densification priorities. A pity the Planning Committee is more concerned with CEO bonuses in the construction industry than national priorities let alone local amenities ??? Beware pre-election forked tongues ???

  12. The fact we’re facing routine hosepipe bans every summer at the same time as building thousands more houses across the region strikes me as not being particularly joined up thinking.

    We will get to the point one summer where we have to line up at standpipes in the street as there isn’t enough drinking water to go round.

  13. Thanet get its potable water from aquifers not resouvours, so there should not be any need for hosepipe bans here after all the rain we had earlier in the year!

Comments are closed.