A developer has been told to make changes to new homes which were built too tall and in the wrong place.

Councillors were “appalled” to discover they had been given “inaccurate” designs, and slammed the housing association behind the scheme after it came to light it was the second time the company had flouted planning permission in the borough.

Existing homeowners in Lydbrook Close in Sittingbourne say they no longer have privacy in their living rooms and back gardens due to the new-builds, by housing association Moat.

But now the developer faces being told to tear them down, if they cannot come up with acceptable improvements.

Work on 49 homes on an old chalk quarry - which later became home to Nicholls Transport - began in 2019.

Almost five years later, with some construction still underway, Moat applied for approval for a minor material amendments as part of its previously approved development.

But members of Swale council’s planning committee and those living near the new development say there is nothing minor about it.

Ann Smith, who lives in one of the Lydbrook Close houses that is being overlooked by plots three to five on the development, spoke at the council’s planning committee meeting on April 11.

The 78-year-old said: “Lies, lies and more lies - that is what we have been told since we first raised our concerns about how close the houses on plots three to five were being erected.”

Residents first contacted the planning department in June 2020 regarding the lack of landscaping and their loss of privacy.

She added: “Over the past four years, we have been told, on numerous occasions that plots three to five are in the correct, approved position.

“Now, according to the planning officer's report, plots three to five have been moved closer to our property by 1.4 metres, which they consider to be an insignificant amount. We disagree.”

Ann explained that her and her husband’s patio window is only around nine metres from their boundary and approximately 17 metres from the nearest window of plot three.

She said: “With no landscaping or screening plan which would protect our privacy, plot three has an open view straight through our living room.”

The most recent planning application submitted to the council by Moat was for minor material amendment to allow changes including to approved site levels and landscaping.

Permission for the 49 homes was originally granted back in 1997 and 2001.

Upon gaining permission some foundations were dug and then covered over and the site continued as a transport yard for several years.

The council confirmed that the development had been lawfully commenced and could recommence at a later date - work began in 2019.

A planning officer at last month’s meeting said: “The original application included a series of site levels showing how the levels would be designed across the site.

“The current application has essentially been built on higher levels and the levels have been increased from Lydbrook Close to Hobart Gardens and the difference is between a rise of 100 millimetres up to 1.8 metres.

“That’s the key change for this minor material amendment.”

As a result of this, the application was presented to members of the committee for approval.

Homewood ward councillor, Simon Clark (Lab) explained it isn’t the first time Moat has built houses higher than permitted in the borough.

In October 2016 councillors and residents on Sheppey were left stunned after an independent planning inspector gave the go-ahead to the Seager Road housing development in Sheerness.

Moat had appealed to the inspector after Swale council ordered it to demolish 35 properties that were 11.19m instead of 9.75m tall, and overlooking neighbouring gardens.

Although the independent inspector admitted there was a “significant divergence” from the approved plans in design and height he said: “Enforcement action should not be taken simply because a development does not have permission or fails to comply with the terms.”

Referring to this Cllr Clark said: “We’re asked to look at these as minor material amendments, but a c*** up of 1.8 metres is not a minor material amendment - it is a major consideration.

“This is the same developer which this council took enforcement action against in Seager Road a few years ago.

“Moat Housing - there seems to be a pattern going on here. Moat seems unwilling or unable to comply with planning permission and site levels.”

Shelley Cheesman, also a Labour ward councillor for Homewood, said she’d stood in the upstairs room of plot three and looked through the window into the lounges of the houses in Lydbrook Close.

She said: “It has been built too close. I sat in the front room of one of the houses in Lydbrook Close and every time I turned my head all I could see out of the patio window were plots three to five imposing on me.”

Planning committee chairman, cllr Mike Baldock (Swale Ind Alliance), said: "I am appalled that this committee was provided with a set of inaccurate designs on which it made a judgment.

"That is really unacceptable."

Members of the planning committee voted against the officer's recommendation to approve the application.

However, following an adjournment, a motion was tabled to give delegated powers to officers (in collaboration with ward members) to negotiate improvements on the homes’ impact on neighbouring houses.

If these amendments aren’t made, then the application will be refused. Members voted in favour of this motion.

Sarah Butler, director of development and sales at Moat, said: “These 49 new homes will provide affordable housing for local residents desperately in need of them, so we’re committed to working with Swale council’s planning officer to meet planning requirements.

“Our planning application was deferred while we resolve overlooking of three homes on Lydbrook Close.

“We want to make sure our new homes have no unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties, so we’ll soon be submitting plans to improve privacy for these residents.”

A Swale council spokesperson confirmed the authority is discussing potential revisions with the developer.

He said: “Should the application be refused, the applicant will have the opportunity to appeal upon receipt of the decision notice.”