Councillors have reacted after a decision on a new garden village was taken out of their hands.

Plans for the Highsted Park development, with 8,400 homes, schools and a hotel, near Sittingbourne, have been in the works for years.

Swale council’s planning committee was meant to decide on the application last night (Thursday) but just hours before the meeting, councillors were told the applications had been called-in by the government at short notice.

The proposals by Quinn Estates are split across two sites, covering land to the south and east of Sittingbourne, stretching to Bapchild and Teynham.

Up to 7,150 homes, community space, a hotel, a new tip, and primary and secondary schools are earmarked for the larger site surrounding Sittingbourne, with two halves named Highsted Village and Oakwood Village.

It also includes provision for a new M2 motorway junction and completion of the Southern Relief Road.

The smaller site, known as Teynham West, is planned to host up to 1,250 homes, sheltered and extra care accommodation, a primary school, and the Bapchild section of a Northern Relief Road - which is already in the local plan.

However, the bid attracted more than 700 letters of objection and opposition from National Highways.

Speaking before the meeting, Carol Goatham, of the campaign group Farm Fields & Fresh Air, said: “Our sewage works are already struggling, we know that our GPs are already struggling – there aren’t enough GPs for the population as it stands and we can’t magic them out of thin air.

“This proposal joins up seven outlying villages on the edge of Sittingbourne between Sittingbourne and Teynham, and there’s a rural way of life here.”

“There’s going to be an awful lot of destruction of the countryside that goes along with that.

“This is not about local need, this is about a developer’s greed.”

Ben Geering, of Quinn Estates, attended the meeting to speak in favour, telling councillors the plan was a “once in a generation game-changing investment’ in the borough.

He also argued: “The council is failing to deliver what is needed – namely housing, infrastructure and jobs” and that in Sittingbourne “meaningful affordable housing has not been delivered for years”.

Planning officers were recommending members vote against the plans, with one at the meeting explaining that it would harm numerous heritage and archaeological assets.

Their report also slated the "urbanising impact" it would have on the countryside.

Cllr Monique Bonney (Swale Ind) told the committee the development “would be an unmitigated disaster for everyone except the wealthy landowners and developers”.

She added: “It would have a ruinous effect on my ward”

“Who is this housing for? Is this for local need?

“Local need is for affordable rented accommodation, not luxury five-bedroom executive housing. Country parks to replace our high-grade agricultural land – quite frankly it is laughable.

Cllr Mike Baldock (Swale Ind) implored members to slate the bid, telling them: "For heaven’s sake it’s time to reject the horror of Highsted.”

A letter explaining the plans have been called-in by the government was circulated at the meeting - with the council only being told at 3pm, only three hours before the planning committee met.

Councillors were not enthused by the call-in, with chairman Cllr Elliott Jayes (Swale Ind) saying: “As such the council has had power of decision on this application ripped out of its hands at the eleventh hour.

“This application has gone on for three years, and we were just about to reach an end to it but obviously it was pulled out from under us.

“Obviously this council spent time and money on this application, which the government has now wasted.”

"Can I just say how disappointing it is that local people are not allowed to make decisions on our own environment,” added Cllr Ann Cavanagh (Lab).

"For someone who doesn't live locally, doesn't know about the area to make this decision is so frustrating"

Angela Rayner MP, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, called for a inquiry into the plans.

Last night’s vote by Swale’s planning committee now does not mean the application has been officially rejected.

Instead, it will inform the case the local authority’s representatives make at the inquiry.

Such inquiries are run like a planning committee, with representatives of developers, the council, and local communities making their case.

The final call will be made by the Secretary of State.

The site is not allocated in Swale’s previous Local Plan, so ordinarily it could be safely refused.

However, the council’s last Local Plan was in 2017, and is therefore considered out of date - meaning that as far as the government is concerned, it cannot demonstrate it has enough land allocated for housing.

This gives developers the ability to seek to build on sites which aren’t officially allocated, with a greater chance of approval.

To see more planning applications and other public notices for your area, click here.

Swale’s planning committee voted unanimously to tell the government they would have rejected both applications if they had the power to decide, and to instruct planning officers to argue the case against the development to the government.

Within the next six weeks, all parties will need to send their case to the Secretary of State, and a timeline for the inquiry will be decided shortly thereafter.