Divisive proposals to build a sprawling “parasitic” housing estate on the outskirts of a town have been postponed once again in the site’s long-running planning saga.

Developer Catesby Estates plans to create 220 homes, a shop and a park-and-ride off the Old Thanet Way in Whitstable – despite fierce backlash since they surfaced in 2023.

Critics argue the homes have been designed for “non-Whitstable residents and commuters” travelling to London and Canterbury.

Despite raising objections, councillors at Canterbury City Council’s (CCC) planning committee voted to defer the application for the 37-acre site, which will be known as Benacre View.

It is the latest snag in the project’s now-lengthy history, which saw it originally approved two years ago, before being brought back to the committee, as CCC grapples with housebuilding targets.

Conservative councillor Robert Jones said: “I understand we need housing but the loss of grade three agricultural land will turn this rural land into an urban site. It doesn’t sit right.”

Fellow Tory Cllr Ian Stockley also raised concerns about the park-and-ride service becoming a white elephant.

“What we don’t want is a 300-space car park which nobody is going to use,” he said.

And Liberal Democrat Dan Smith said he was “struggling” with the application.

“It is a shame as the developer has put forward nice homes but it is the wrong place,” he said.

The field where the development could be built was earmarked in the council’s draft Local Plan, which is the authority’s proposed housing blueprint up to 2045.

In dozens of objection letters, residents suggested local school and GP services are already oversubscribed and would not be able to cope with more residents.

Writing to the district planners, an NHS representative clarified the new homes would generate an estimated 581 new patient registrations.

“There is currently limited capacity within existing healthcare premises to accommodate growth in this area,” they said.

“The need from this development, along with other new developments, will therefore need to be met through the creation of additional capacity in general practice and other healthcare premises.”

In a nine-page objection letter, Green councillors Clare Turnbull and Steven Wheeler argued the scheme does “not meet local needs in any way” and “is simply designed for external commuters and is too high priced”.

However, recommending the bid for approval in documents prepared before the meeting, CCC planners said it is necessary to boost housing supply in the area.

They wrote: “There would be a clear benefit in granting permission for this site, which is allocated in the emerging local plan, and as such boosting our housing supply to support the delivery of both market and affordable housing in the district.

“This approach would also be consistent with the new growth-focused approach to the planning system recently announced by the Chancellor.”

The application was approved in 2023 when the council had to favour development after failing to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply and was delivering less than 75% of its housing target.

But this was lifted last year so the application was brought back to the planning committee.

However, the council has failed again to meet government housing targets which means the presumption in favour of sustainable development now applies again.

A CCC spokesperson said: "We are in presumption (as of December 13, 2024) because the government published the 2023 Housing Delivery Test (HDT) measurement where we scored 67%. This is below the 75% that councils need to pass.

"This means, in general terms, that planning permission will be granted unless there are adverse impacts on protected areas or assets, or any adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

"When determining the balance of effects, the council will have particular regard to providing affordable housing, effective use of land and ensuring development is well designed and in sustainable locations."