Plans for 95 new homes in a village have been rejected three years after they were submitted.

A proposal was put forward to Swale council for the properties in Bapchild, near Sittingbourne in March 2021.

Developers Provectus Holdings hoped to build the houses on an L-shaped plot on farmland between the A2 Fox Hill and School Lane.

However, the local authority has now declined permission for the 11.7-hectare project.

Planning officers said the proposal would have represented unsustainable development within the village and failed to protect its countryside.

They noted potential flooding issues due to the developers not including sufficient information on issues such as drainage.

It was also claimed future residents would have been reliant on cars when accessing public services.

Had the application been given the green light, 57 private and 38 social homes, two to four bedrooms in size, would have been built.

A total of 190 car parking spaces would also have been provided.

Access to the site was presented as being off the A2, with a second entry point coming from School Lane.

It comes six years after a separate application was refused by the council for the same plot of land.

A total of 80 homes were proposed by APM Services in November 2017, however the application was rejected five months later.

Officers once again noted concerns surrounding the development failing to both protect the countryside and safeguarding an “underdeveloped area”.

Provectus though said the most reccent application would have helped Swale council meet its housing targets.

The company said: “The delivery of 95 high-quality dwellings at the site will make a valuable contribution to meeting the council’s current shortfall in housing supply.

“The proposal will support the rural economy the development includes a range of dwellings providing opportunity, diversity and choice in the housing market.

“[It] will narrow the ‘gap’ between the built-up areas of Sittingbourne and Bapchild, [and] re-balance Bapchild around the historic Church of St Laurence whilst ensuring views of the church spire are conserved, and the Grade I-listed building remains a distinct feature.”

Residents had already cited their concerns about the development.

Yvonne Dartnall, of School Lane, wrote on the application’s planning portal: “The impact of such a residential development to this area has a detrimental effect on this unique historical village, its residents, wildlife, safety, and lack of resources to support such a large introduction of families.”

Meanwhile, resident of St Laurence Close, Laura Hobday, added: “The traffic is a nightmare already without any of these new houses being built.

“Is every field now going to be built on?

“I moved to Bapchild to bring my children up in a quiet village.”

Find out about planning applications and other public notices in your area by visiting PublicNoticePortal.uk

Bapchild Parish Council and campaign group The Sittingbourne Society were also against the plans.

The latter wrote: “The proposed development would destroy the rural gap between Bapchild and Sittingbourne and destroy productive agricultural land.

“[It] would give rise to higher traffic levels on the A2 into Sittingbourne, causing increased congestion and air pollution problems.”