Plans for a 97-home estate have been given the green light despite fears the access road could be “extremely dangerous”.

Proposals for a development at Orchard Farm, Kennington, first came to light several years ago when the scheme was meant to comprise self-build homes.

Buyers would purchase plots before developing and building their own homes based on a design guide defined by the approved planning permission.

However, a revised outline application for the site off Canterbury Road was submitted to Ashford Borough Council (ABC) earlier this year for up to 97 homes on the site, with the self-build aspect dropped.

In the bid, developers describe the location as “5.7 hectares of derelict farmland situated on the north-eastern edge of Ashford”.

ABC’s planning committee met on October 23 to make the final call on the application, with council planning officers recommending approval.

As an outline application, specific permission was only sought at this stage for the development’s access roads - the layout, design and the final total number of homes on the estate will be dealt with through a later planning application.

As such, one planning officer told the committee: “I consider that fewer dwellings than the figure of up to 97 may well need to be proposed at the reserved matters stage in order to be approved.”

Adam Roake, the applicant, spoke in favour, telling the committee: “We’re confident that the masterplan demonstrates a policy-compliant scheme for up to 97 dwellings can be delivered.

“The proposal would have a lower density than that approved at [neighbouring] Conningbrook Park, which is the remaining larger element of the site.”

Cllr Chris Morley, of Kennington Community Council, objected, taking issue with the proposed location of some of the sewage facilities on site.

“It is highly undesirable on health and amenity grounds to have housing in such close proximity to the processing of human waste,” he said.

“Sewage treatment is never odour-free and this surely would be a recipe for a future statutory nuisance.”

However, a planning officer stressed that the exact location of those facilities will be decided through future applications.

Councillors mainly expressed fears about the access road from Canterbury Road.

A previously approved planning application on the same site said that 25 houses could use the proposed access road - but in this newest version, developers propose that 50 of the 97 could use it.

Cllr Steve Campkin (Green) said: “I park in front of that gate, and if anyone wants to go through that gate, I have to move my van, that is how narrow it is.

“I’m not convinced that if an emergency vehicle needs to get through, they can mount the kerb.

“It’s about accessibility – I think this is extremely dangerous and not very good.”

However, Kent County Council’s highways department had raised no qualms with the plan.

“It’s very difficult to oppose the access on the grounds stated, though I hear the concerns and frankly share them,” said cabinet member for planning Cllr Linda Harman (Ash Ind)

“But if Kent Highways don’t back us up, and they're the highways authority, then I ask members to think about what that might mean.”

A council planning officer agreed, suggesting that refusing the development on those grounds would be difficult to defend if the developers appealed against it.

A motion to refuse the development was voted down by nine votes to four.

Instead, a subsequent motion to approve it was passed with nine in favour, three against and one abstention.