Planning and Licensing Committee - Tuesday 17 March 2026, 7:00pm - Folkestone & Hythe webcasting

Planning and Licensing Committee
Tuesday, 17th March 2026 at 7:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 

Welcome to Folkestone and Hythe District Council's Webcast Player.

 

UPDATE - PLEASE NOTE, MEETINGS OF THE JOINT TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND FOLKESTONE AND HYTHE DISTRICT AND PARISH COUNCILS' JOINT COMMITTEE WILL BE STREAMED LIVE TO YOUTUBE AT: bit.ly/YouTubeMeetings. 


The webcast should start automatically for you, and you can jump to specific points of interest within the meeting by selecting the agenda point or the speaker that you are interested in, simply by clicking the tabs above this message. You can also view any presentations used in the meeting by clicking the presentations tab. We hope you find the webcast interesting and informative.

 

Please note, although officers can be heard when they are speaking at meetings, they will not be filmed.

 

At the conclusion of a meeting, the webcast can take time to 'archive'.  You will not be able to view the webcast until the archiving process is complete.  This is usually within 24 hours of the meeting.

Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

This meeting will be webcast live to the internet.
For those who do not wish to be recorded or filmed, you'll need to leave the chamber.
For members, officers and others speaking at the meeting,
it is important that the microphones are used so that viewers on the webcast
and others in the room may hear you. Would anyone with a mobile phone
please switch it to silent mode as they can be distracting.
I'd like to remind members that although we all have strong opinions on matters under
consideration, it is important to treat members, officers and public speakers with respect.
So members, as Chair of this Committee, I would like to make a statement for the benefit
of all Councillors present at this meeting and for members of the public. The applications
before you tonight, and indeed any applications you consider in the future, must be considered
on planning merits only. It is essential that members adhere to this principle and ensure
that their decisions tonight are based on the papers before you and any information
provided to you during this meeting. This is not the forum to discuss any ancillary
issues relating to the planning applications before you. So we will move on. Do we have

1 Apologies for Absence

any apologies for absence, please? Thank you, Chair. We haven't received any apologies this

2 Declarations of Interest

evening. Thank you very much. Councillors, do we have any declarations of interest, please?
I am seeing none, so I will move on.

3 Minutes

Before you, you have the minutes of the meeting held on the 20th of January 2026.
May I sign these as a correct record, please?
Thank you very much.
And before you, you also have the minutes of the Licencing Act subcommittee, which was
held on the 6th of February 2026.
May I sign this as a correct record please?
Many thanks.

5 25/1026/FH - The Manor Office, 43 Castle Hill Avenue, Folkestone, CT20 2RB

So we'll go on to our first application this evening, which is 25 -1026 -FH, which is the
Manor Office 43, Castle Hill Avenue in Folkestone.
Do we have any updates please?
Good evening Chair and members, no updates.
Thank you very much.
And we have one speaker on this tonight, which is the local resident, Mr Paul Knight, on
behalf of the Castle News residents to speak against the application.
Sir, if you'd like to come forward, you will have three minutes from when you speak.
Thank you.
Good evening, Chair, Councillors and Council officers.
My name is Paul Knight.
I live in Castle Mews, which is where these two
proposed houses would be built.
And I'm here tonight to represent the 13 families
who live in Castle Mews, who object to this application.
At the outset, I'd like to thank our board counsellors
for bringing this matter to your attention.
I'd also like to commend the planning officers
for their careful assessment of the application.
Their report reflects a thorough and balanced consideration
of the issues and their conclusion the application
be refused is one that we strongly agree with.
We understand the difficult job you have,
balancing the need for new homes and development
with the impact any development might have
on the local community.
Whilst all communities need the right housing
in the right place, housing that meets local needs
and respects the character and the environment
of the area, we believe that this proposal does not
meet those objectives.
Members will see from their papers a substantial number
of objections from local residents.
The level of concern reflects a shared view
that the proposal is not really about appropriate
or sustainable housing for local people,
but rather a scheme to maximise profit for the landowner
through the construction of two large four bedroom homes
on what is a relatively small space with little regard
for their impact on the local residents.
The objection submitted by residents clearly set out
numerous material planning concerns.
These include harm to local environment,
the loss of habitat and biodiversity,
and the impact on the privacy of the existing residents.
Our homes would be overshadowed and directly overlooked
by two three -storey houses literally yards away
from our bedroom windows, including windows of young children.
These concerns we have and we contend are material concerns that impact permanently
on our environment in Castle Mews.
The land in question is currently a green open space.
With the recent development of the garden centre and indeed Castle Mews, much of the
local green space has gone.
This is the only remaining area in the neighbourhood and the loss of it, whilst it is not a land
large area would we believe be detrimental to local wildlife and indeed
to the quality of life for the residents. Also this application is likely to
imperil the trees on and around the site because of the close proximity of the
proposed houses to existing trees that have tree protection orders upon them. We
therefore feel that it would be beneficial to the whole local
environment to retain this green space. It was originally designated in a
planning application as a green space, ideally meadowland, to try and make up for the loss
of green space when the garden centre and the area was developed.
So we as a resident are simply asking you as the elected members to support the opinion
or the recommendation of your officers and to reject this application.
We know that every community needs new housing, but as we said, it should be the right housing
and the right place.
Thank you, sir. You're three minutes is up if you could finish your sentence. Thank you.
I thank you very much for your time and attention this evening. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. So, councillors, over to you. Would anyone like any clarification? Councillor Thomas.
Yeah, thank you, Chair. Just like to echo the residents' support for the report.
the report another excellent report makes it done so easy for us when we come to to look at it and
I think Keith couple key things come out for me
7 .2 to the report says that the application would not meet the statutory requirements section 66
661 and 72 one and will not preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area
On the tilted balance it says in section 753
Although a modest contribution to the housing supply,
it is two houses, the identified impacts
are not capable of mitigation,
and significantly and demonstrably outweigh
the identified benefits.
And again, it goes on in the report in 8 .3,
demonstrable and significant harmful impacts
upon the character and appearance of the street scene
and visual amenity, as we've heard from the local residents,
weighs significantly against the granting of permission.
and finally in 8 .4 adverse impacts significant in demonstrably outweigh the benefits.
I think on that basis I'd like to move the officer's recommendation to refuse the application.
Thank you, Councillor Thomas. I already have a seconder to my right.
Would any other Councillor like to speak on this application?
Councillor Hinsley.
Yes, thank you. I agree with everything that's been said by Councillor Thomas.
I would also like to thank the speaker.
He was very clear and very concise
and clearly set out material reasons for refusal,
which often doesn't happen by people who are actually speaking.
So thank you very much indeed for that.
But I think that there is no doubt
that it does, in fact,
It doesn't actually enhance the character of the area.
In fact, it does the opposite.
For that reason, I'd be quite happy to go along with the refusal.
Thank you.
Would any other Councillor like to speak?
Councillor Goddard.
Thank you.
Just to echo Councillor Thomas about the report, he's an excellent report.
He's easily made your mind up.
I haven't got a fault with the dwellings.
Dwellings are lovely dwellings.
credit to RBA but in obviously the wrong place.
So hopefully they can, you know, crop up somewhere else
in a different area where they're needed.
But again, excellent report and it's easy
to make your mind up and with the word and the report.
So fully support the officers on this.
Would any of the council like to speak?
I'm not seeing any and I'd like to also support
all of the comments that have just been made,
especially to our speaker this evening who was very precise and spoke very well. Thank
you. So, Committee, we have one proposal that has been seconded and that is to accept the
officer's recommendation to refuse this particular application. All those in favour of supporting

6 25/2080/FH Lower Leas Coastal Park, Lower Sandgate Road, Folkestone

So we'll go on to our second application of this evening, which is 25 -2080 -FH, which is
the Lower Lees Coastal Park, Lower Sandgate Road. Do we have any updates, please?
Thank you, Chair. Good evening, Councillors. I do have one update. Following receipt of
the additional photos, KCC Ecology has confirmed that they consider that the site is exempt
from mandatory biodiversity net gain. Thank you.
Sorry about that. So I do have one update. It's from KCCI Ecology. They have confirmed that the site is not liable for biodiversity net gain. Thank you.
Thank you and we have no speakers on this.
I think we should just go with the officer's recommendation because the children are all missing their play times down there.
And it was quite evident this weekend when it was a nice day with no children down there as such.
So I think we should go with the recommendations and pass this as quickly as possible so the work can commence.
We have a proposal. Do we have a seconder?
Yes, absolutely support the recommendation.
My children had a wonderful time growing up in the coastal park and I'd love to see many
more children having that time too.
Would any other Councillor like to comment or ask any questions?
I'm not seeing anything.
So we have a proposal to accept the officer's recommendations on this application.
All those in favour, please raise your hand.
And again, I can see that's unanimous.
It's a very short meeting this evening.
thank you so much for travelling in for this because every application deserves to be heard
when it comes through. Thank you and until the next meeting, good night.