A building blunder has left neighbours feeling like they have the Titanic parked at the end of their garden.

Permission had been granted two years ago for a brick-finished block of 12 flats in Canterbury Road, Whitstable, in keeping with surrounding properties.

But instead, an “ugly” and “out of character” white, modern complex was constructed - and even the developers admit it is a far cry from the approved designs.

Residents have been left in tears at the sight of the “monolith” and say it has knocked tens of thousands of pounds off the value of their homes.

A Canterbury City Council planning meeting heard on Tuesday how neighbours were shocked at the scale of the finished “bulky” building. The authority may now take enforcement action.

Composer Helen Caddick, whose property backs directly onto the new block, said: “I burst into tears when we returned from our holiday in 2022 and saw how enormous the building had become and how high.

“I feel depressed every time I look at it and I no longer enjoy sitting in my garden as the building is overbearing.

“This bulky block of flats is intrusive and imposing.

“It is no exaggeration to say that with its bulk and white façade it feels now like we have the Titanic parked at the end of our gardens.”

She explained how the block has reduced the sunlight their garden gets in the summer by three hours - and how a local estate agent told her the building has knocked £25,000 off the value of their home of 18 years.

Kate O’Donovan also lives right behind the complex, and told the committee “the current build remains in glaring contrast to the approved plans”.

“It is excessively large and out of character,” she said.

“The applicants did not intend to be where they are today...”

She also described the building as “ugly and unsympathetic to existing architecture”.

Chartered Architect of 35 years Michael Shoobridge is a friend of the residents and also came to fight their case at the planning committee.

He argued the block has a “monolithic presence,” adding: “You don’t need to debate over the drawings to see how oppressive this structure is you can go and see it for yourself in three dimensions”.

Pat Mills, of Clague Architects, attended as an agent for the developer Whitstable Nest, which was applying to alter the existing building by changing the front and rear roof elevations.

“The applicants did not intend to be where they are today,” Mr Mills said.

“An application was submitted to vary the scheme before construction. The refusal came quite late.

“They were to a certain degree past the point of no return.

“What has been built isn’t in accordance with the approved scheme - we know that.

“The scheme that’s been submitted for approval looks to vary what’s been built so the building is no higher than what's previously been approved.”

However, councillors were not sympathetic to the bid to alter the as-yet uninhabited block.

“They’ve proposed one thing and built a totally different thing...”

Cllr Dane Buckman (Lab) said: “I just can’t understand how it could get this far before anyone says anything.

“Does anyone ever go out and look at things during development?

“I just think it's awful that it’s got this far with nothing being done.”

Cllr David Thomas (Con) said: “Enforcement isn’t strong enough for this council - it’s not doing the job and it’s not fit for purpose.

“It needs to be looked at and if developers or builders don’t build to plan we do have to set an example and if it’s got to come down it’s got to come down.”

Cllr Thomas also argued that if a retrospective planning application was put in to approve the building as it stands now, the council would likely refuse.

Doubling down on the need for enforcement, Cllr Harry McKenzie (Lab) added: “What is the point of a planning department or even a council if we’re going to let stuff like this fly?

“They’ve proposed one thing and built a totally different thing.

“I do believe if we don’t refuse this now then it sets a precedent for other developers to do this in the future - to promise one thing and then do something totally different.”

Cllr Elizabeth Carr-Ellis (Lab) added: “I want to say I personally didn’t find it ugly but I am a huge fan of brutalist architecture, and Whitstable is not a brutalist architecture town.

“If this was midtown Berlin I’d be saying go for it.”

Permission was first given for the creation of eight new flats and extension of four existing ones on the main road in 2021.

Canterbury City Council spokesman Rob Davies confirmed they are “considering options around enforcement”.

"The original planning permission was granted a few years ago but the building was not constructed in accordance with the planning permission,” he said.

"The planning application that was refused at the planning dommittee on Tuesday was for permission for revised drawings that are largely the same as what has been built, with some changes to the roof.

"The developer made his revised planning application only after our planning enforcement team investigated the case and called out the breach with the developer. While the application was under consideration, the developer was aware that the continued building works he was carrying out were at his own risk.

"Following the committee's refusal, we are now considering options around enforcement, but are not in a position to confirm details about this at the moment."