By Hayley Robinson

A gipsy site will remain in Upchurch despite strong opposition.

Swale council's planning committee were split over whether or not to approve the planning application for the Orchard Park site, in Oak Lane, when members met last Thursday.

Among the issues raised were concerns about the cost implications if the application went to appeal.

In the end a casting vote by chairman Cllr Richard Barnicott sealed the deal and the retrospective application was approved.

Residents sent 58 letters of objection to the council about the application.

Members originally voted against the planning officer's recommendation to approve it when it went before them last month. The decision was then deferred so officers could prepare a report about the implications of their decision but planning officer Jim Wilson still recommended it be approved when the committee met at Swale House last week.

The council's U-turn has angered resident Peter Freeman, of The Poles, Upchurch.

The retired 65-year-old said: "I feel we've been badly let down by our borough council and we appear to have been led up the garden path by planning officers who are clearly intent on encouraging these particular developments because it ticks the boxes and meets the quota from central government for gipsy sites.

"There's absolutely nothing further that I'm aware of that I or we can do about it.

"In my opinion that [original] vote should have stood.

"They're working on the basis the applicant will appeal.

"This is one of the most influential decisions taken by the planning committee in years and the implications are manifest."

Speaking on behalf of the residents at Orchard Park Phien O’Reachtigain, representative of Irish traveller support group Pavee Advise Assist Direct (PAAD), said: "We felt this application wasn’t getting turned down because it didn’t fit the criteria but because the applicants were travellers.

"It has since come out that the council has turned down so many applications that it is facing nearly half a million pound costs.

"I believe that’s the only reason they approved it - the fear of the financial costs. It’s a very shallow victory.

"The application should stand or fall on its own merit not on the culture of the people putting forward the application."