Campaigners gathered outside Thanet council’s offices last night (September 4) for the first of two planning committee meetings to discuss a 1600 property development on Birchington farmland.
The development, which includes a primary school, shops, care home, expansion of Birchington medical centre and a community park, is earmarked to take place on land off the Canterbury Road and was first proposed by Ptarmigan Land and Millwood Designer Homes in 2019 with a planning application submitted in December 2020.
Millwood Designer Homes is no longer part of the scheme. The joint applicants are now Ptarmigan Birchington Ltd, Places for People Homes Ltd, landowners The Master Fellows and Scholars of the College of Saint John The Evangelist in the University of Cambridge and The Birchington Pool Trust.
Members of action groups for Birchington and Westgate and Garlinge , as well as Save Minster Marshes, were among those to attend the meeting.
Gina McCready, of Birchington action group against housing development, was also one of those to speak at the meeting against the application.
Gina urged the committee to either refuse the application based on less than 30% affordable housing being offered; defer it so more time could be taken to consider the proposals or refer it to the Secretary of State for determination.
Gina raised concerns that the 600 pages of planning documents barely mention Thanet’s chalk aquifer, run off into the water table or water protection zones and the cumulative impact of development across the isle.
She also said: “It is put to the planning committee for approval with only six full days for councillors to read, understand and interpret over 600 pages of complex information.”
She added: “This enormous development spanning both sides of the A28 into Birchington has far reaching consequences for Birchington and Thanet as a whole.
“It is likely the most significant and complex application the planning committee has ever had to consider and I believe this timeframe is insufficient for councillors to make an informed decision and that it is unreasonable to expect them to do so.”
Gina said she was concerned councillors may “feel pressured” to go with the officer recommendation to defer the decision to officers meaning it would not receive the scrutiny Birchington residents deserved.
Ahead of the meeting Gina said: “I have lived in Birchington for more than 50 years and I am trying to save it for future generations.”
Other speakers against the application were Rod Giddens, reading out a statement from resident Craig Solly, which highlighted that councillors were being asked to make a decision despite the application not including a masterplan and documents being “contradictory,” and Birchington Parish Council chairman Nick Blankley who outlined numerous concerns around the site footprint; making decisions in advance of understanding the costs of the North Thanet breaches of planning policy and numerous design issues.
Resident Anne Ray also spoke of the “negative and overbearing impact” the development would have on Birchington with “4,600 residents” joining the current population of 10,000 “in one fell swoop.”
Councillors George Kup, Phil Fellows, Emma Dawson, Reece Pugh, Bertie Braidwood, John Worrow and John Davis also spoke against the application.
Cllr Fellows branded the scheme “utter madness,” noting how the allocation for development in the village had risen over the decade from 1,000 properties to 1,600. He accused “greedy developers with pound signs in their eyes” of wanting to destroy the landscape and questioned why a development that will not deliver the expected 30% affordable housing should be considered.
He added: “The impact on our countryside and wildlife is unimaginable. We cannot keep concreting over Best and Most Versatile, grade 1 agricultural land. The council must make a stand against this and it can start right now.”
Councillors raised issues including the loss of BMV land, a lack of masterplan, insufficient affordable housing, uncertainty over finding for the North Thanet Link Road to be built, inadequate design, traffic congestion and a lack of GPs to serve the almost 50% increase in village population.
Cllr John Worrow branded the Link Road proposals as “Champagne ideas with beer money” while Cllr Braidwood emphasised how planning policy meant the application could be refused due to the benefits of development not outweighing the harm to BMV agricultural land.
Craig Neilson, on behalf pf Ptarmigan, said the proposals would benefit both new and existing residents with millions in developer contributions, affordable housing of between 15 and a half % and 23%- dependent on the funding required for the Link Road- expansion of the medical centre and green space equivalent to 44 football pitches as well as 1600 “much needed housing.”
Officers explained the details of the application during the rest of the meeting.
Tonight (September 5) councillors will debate the issue and will be required to make a decision on the application.
Campaigners will again demonstrate outside the council offices from 6pm.
Development desecration in an area where water is already short and the sea full of turds as the sewerage system can’t cope with the existing waste.
The part of Thanet that is above sea level currently appears to be permanently lost to spurious developments at the expense of both farming and biodiversity.
I hear that views are important to planning so why appease land owners greed to permanently destroy the character of Thanet on the back of an out of date and ill-conceived local plan and a decreasing population.
Why should Thanet become a sprawling suburban expansion of Greater London to house those who are cashing in on the unearned increase in prices of their London properties at the expense of in my opinion criminal damage to this island.
Local people are still unable to afford to buy homes and the rents increase according to the area as people say ‘being on the up’. My reply to them is up yours!
The sea , along the Thanet coast,is not “full of turds”. Especially at Ramsgate Main Sands.
The property developer’s always promise a new school and a doctor’s surgery etc ect ,don’t they get it WE DON’T WANT THE HOUSES, we want the farmland for food, that thing we need ,we don’t have enough water for the area as it is ,can’t keep building on prime land ,build on old trading estates, old shopping centres, no they won’t build there because the developer will have to pay to clear the site first as for farmland there isn’t any cost to clear because there isn’t anything to clear so bigger profit all round.
its going to need a BIG envelope to get this one through , and no doubt the developers will have thier way , just as they have all over thanet , concreting over prime farm land that some countries would give thier right arm for
If the Local Plan
(enthusiastically argued for by the burgers of Birchington) has this area marked out for housing development, then TDC has no option other than to accept this proposal.
You’re confusing the place with Ramsgate. There are no burgers here.
Surely a targeted campaign against Cambridge University as the landowner is needed as I’m sure they will not like the bad publicity!
Perhaps the campaigners should hire a coach or two and demonstrate outside St John’s College, as that’s the college which owns the land.
You comment on this, yet you don’t comment when Ramsgate High Street shops go bust. Why is that? Or don’t you care about your local businesses (apart from ‘Spoons)?
How good to see all those ‘ I’m alright jack I’ve got my house ‘ protesters who can’t remember who built the house they live in but are not in favour of houses for our youngsters. If you are serious your protest should be all about what type of property is planned hopefully social housing and that the infrastructure is in place before building starts.
I fear this is just about not in my back garden, ’I voted Tory or more than likely Reform,’ sad really, there would have been a time when we would be glad to see housing being provided for the next generation but, as I mentioned ‘I’m alright Jack’ is now where so many are after years of Thatcherism and mad Buffoon Johnson me first. Have a think about it people….!
What a load of bull ,it won’t be local people who would be able to afford the homes ,it will be DFL lot and local people will still be without somewhere to live as usual
I think it’s quite sweet, Seen it all before, that you think these houses would be being built for our youngsters!
Who’s organising the coach to Cambridge?
Well, you could.
Did any Labour cllrs oppose this?
Build on Manston. Largest brownfield site in Kent.
Oh yes!
why should the town of Birchington escape the building madness when the rest of Thanet is getting covered,Personally I think enough is enough ,no more houses to be built,Really all the new houses should be for people on the waiting lists in this area ,let London build their own
Should people who were born in Thanet be allowed to move out of it?
It should be compulsory for the Loopites.
The developers would gain far more kudos if they kept it as farmland and developed new production methods to increase yields. That would gain attention for the right reasons and keep feeding the population. Otherwise Cambridge University and cronies should hang their heads in shame.
Hugh,Pugh, Barney Mcgrew, Cuthbert,drivel and Worrow, add in dangerous Davis, and you have full house of the never knowingly,modest. People who have an opinion on everything,most of it wrong.Still I suppose they can wear a suit and tie, while standing upright at least most of the time.
Here’s a thing though.The UK wastes 9.5 million tons of food each year.Most of it ends up as landfill,creating methane that has to be managed.Our food waste would feed 30 million people, yet we have 8.4 million persons in food poverty.Not a bad record for the 5th biggest economy in the world.
So before more is written about farmland, remember who owns most of it, yes farmers.
We need more housing, but it needs to be well constructed energy efficient social housing, not 4 bedroom estate houses or affordable houses, and if we must build houses for sale, can we build them, with more craftsmanship and design.
As for DFL’S they have always been here, so cut the nativism and accept they are part of life in East Kent.
It’s a good job they’ve got a pensioner taking a break from his jigsaw puzzle advising them on the internet.