The Fight Against the Ham Farm Development
Residents near the proposed Ham Farm Development in Faversham, Kent, have faced a long and challenging battle against a 250-home housing project. Initially, they celebrated what they believed was a victory after the Planning Inspectorate rejected the plans. However, this hope was short-lived when Gladman Developments successfully appealed the decision, leading to a shocking turn of events for the local community.
The development, which would see 162 private and 88 affordable homes built on land off Ham Road, has sparked significant concern among residents. They argue that the plan is poorly thought out and driven by profit rather than the needs of the community. One resident described the potential impact of the new homes as creating a “car ghetto” due to the lack of public transport and the narrowness of existing roads.
The area, known for its natural beauty and wildlife, is also at risk of losing an established green corridor that is home to over 200 trees and various species of birds, including bats. Frances Beaumont, Chair of the Save Ham Farm campaign, emphasized the importance of preserving this green space. She pointed out that the corridor acts as a natural flood barrier and that the loss of access to the historic path could affect many residents’ back gardens.
Another major concern raised by locals is the presence of leftover explosive guncotton from a nearby factory and refuse from a landfill site. A 600-page survey of the land revealed a past explosion that killed at least 18 staff members, with bodies and materials thought to be buried in old clay pits on the site. David Cox, a retired academic and engineering expert, highlighted the risks associated with building on such a site, citing the potential for methane gas and explosive materials beneath the surface.
The Save Ham Farm group has been actively involved in the fight against the development. They contributed to the Faversham Neighbourhood Plan, which identified brownfield sites as more suitable for housing. Despite their efforts, the council’s five-year house-building plan shortfall led to the approval of the Ham Farm Development. This has raised concerns about the power of local democracy and the influence of financial interests.
While the decision to proceed with the development seems final, there is still a glimmer of hope. A condition known as the Grampian Condition requires developers to pump surface water onto nearby marshes, which are a Site of Special Scientific Interest. However, the farmer who owns the land has expressed concerns about this, potentially delaying the project.
Residents like Jo Humphrey and Elizabeth Arnolt have voiced their disappointment, emphasizing the negative impact on their community. They argue that the housing shortage is not being addressed effectively, as the new homes will likely be purchased by those with financial means rather than first-time buyers.
Despite the setbacks, the Save Ham Farm campaign remains determined. Nick Mengham, a retired beekeeper, stressed that the project is not only environmentally unsuitable but also logistically challenging. He believes that the developers are primarily motivated by profit, highlighting the need for responsible housing development.
The situation underscores the complex challenges faced by communities when large-scale developments threaten their way of life. While the battle may not have ended in favor of the residents, the fight continues, fueled by a deep sense of commitment to preserving their environment and community.
