The government has approved a controversial housing development in a beauty spot previously refused by the Tories, sparking fears of the area being “lost forever under concrete.”

Last year, plans for the estate near Cranbrook were overturned by the then Conservation government for being “generic and suburban.”

Now, the new Labour administration has given it the green light.

Berkeley Homes’ plans for 165 homes at Turnden, near Cranbrook, were originally approved by Tunbridge Wells council in 2021 but were called in by then Secretary of State Robert Jenrick only a few months later.

Minister for Housing and Planning Rachel Maclean, then decided on behalf of Michael Gove to refuse permission for the development.

Documents detail how Mr Gove viewed the plans as “of a generic suburban nature which does not reproduce the constituent elements of local settlements.”

The site to be developed sits within the High Weald National Landscape (previously called an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty).

Under planning law, building in National Landscapes should be avoided except in exceptional circumstances.

However, Michael Gove’s nixing of the scheme was later overturned in a High Court challenge, and so went back to the new Secretary of State for Housing, Angela Rayner.

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government explained: “The decision was made by Minister of State for Housing and Planning, Matthew Pennycook MP, on behalf of the Secretary of State.

“The decision was in line with the recommendation of the independent Planning Inspector.”

Alex Davies, managing director of Berkeley Southern Counties, said: "We welcome the Secretary of State's decision, which underlines the government’s commitment to housing delivery and growth.

“Our proposals, which were approved by the local authority, were carefully designed through close consultation with local partners and reflect the very specific design guidance for the area.”

Local campaigners, however, were not impressed.

Guy Dagger, who lives in the area and has been opposed to the plans since the start, said the move was “disappointing on many levels.

He said: “The area is a designated National Landscape with all those protections.

“Sadly it will now be lost forever under concrete and a precedent is set making other similarly protected landscapes vulnerable.

He continued: “We need social housing and small houses that are genuinely affordable for people on low incomes. Affordable housing does not tick this box.

“The local community rejected this development by 90% when surveyed. These houses are simply the wrong houses in the wrong place.

“We seem to have a government ignoring local views, protected landscapes and local needs for arbitrary national goals.”

Forty per cent of the homes are set to be affordable - with a 50/50 split of shared ownership and affordable rent.

David Mairs, of countryside charity the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, said: “While the details of the case are complex, this decision appears to be a political one, aimed at signalling the new government’s intention to push through more housing under any circumstances.

To see more planning applications and other public notices for your area, visit the public notice portal.

“By approving this development in such a context, we fear the new government is signalling to the development industry that any piece of our precious countryside is now fair game for major developments.”

The site, which covers almost 60 acres between Cranbrook and Hartley, is not allocated for housing in the Local Plan.

It is set to host homes ranging from one-bedroom apartments to five-bedroom houses.

Cllr Hugo Pound (Lab), former cabinet member for housing at Tunbridge Wells council, said he was “delighted” at the approval.

He continued: “Cranbrook deserves and wants new housing, houses and flats that will allow young people to work and live locally, help families to upsize and downsize, freeing up housing elsewhere.

“Tunbridge Wells Borough needs housing and this decision contributes to that need in a positive way".

It is not yet known when work will start at the site, but it must be within three years under planning rules.