Locals Furious as Angela Rayner Takes Control of Controversial 8,400-Home Development Plans
Angela Rayner has sparked outrage among residents in Kent after taking over the final decision-making power for a controversial 8,400-home “garden town” near Sittingbourne. The move has left locals and councillors feeling sidelined, as they had been actively working to block the development, reports the Daily Mail.
The proposed plans include 7,150 homes, primary and secondary schools, a hotel, and an additional 1,250 homes featuring sheltered housing, care accommodations, and a motorway relief road. Despite receiving over 700 letters of objection, the decision was taken out of Swale Borough Council’s hands when, just three hours before a scheduled vote, officials received a letter confirming Rayner’s intervention.
Many fear that Rayner will approve the plans, overriding local opposition. Conservative councillor Julien Speed expressed his frustration, saying, “The Government has completely pulled the rug from under our feet and taken that decision away from us. I just think it’s totally unacceptable”, according to the Express.
Residents argue the development would destroy agricultural land, strain local resources, and fundamentally alter the area’s rural character. “We’re totally against development on the best and most versatile agricultural land,” said Ms. Goatham of the Farm Fields & Fresh Air campaign group. “Sittingbourne already has a problem with GP services. To think that it could all be concreted over sets an awful precedent.”
The project is part of Labour’s broader goal to build 1.5 million new homes in the next five years. Rayner defended the plans, rejecting claims that Britain is overcrowded or running out of countryside. “The vast majority of England is still very green and will remain so,” she said.
Developers Quinn Estates argue that the proposed “garden town” is a sustainable and transformative project. Planning documents describe the development as “entirely suitable for the site in terms of land use, amount of development, access, layout, and appearance.” The firm claims the project will add “regionally significant benefits” and become “the most sustainable development in the south-east.”
However, parish councils and local residents remain deeply opposed, citing concerns about preserving the area’s rural nature and the strain on local services. The controversy has left the community divided and anxious about the future of the region.
As Rayner prepares to make her decision, the debate over the development underscores the tension between national housing goals and local opposition to large-scale projects.