Planning and Licensing Committee

Planning and Licensing Committee
Tuesday, 15th July 2025 at 7:00pm

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Twitter

Forums

Speakers

Feedback

Votes

Speaking:

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.

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Cllr Jackie Meade
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 1
FHDC Officer
Cllr Jackie Meade

2 Declarations of Interest

Share this agenda point

Declarations of Interest

Cllr Jackie Meade
Cllr Clive Goddard
Cllr Jackie Meade
Cllr Paul Thomas
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
Cllr Jackie Meade

3 Minutes

Share this agenda point

Minutes , 17/06/2025 Planning and Licensing Committee

Cllr Jackie Meade

4 Minutes of the Licensing Act Sub-Committee

Share this agenda point

Minutes , 02/06/2025 Licensing Act Sub-Committee

Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 2

6 24/1405/FH - The Cottage, School Hill, Bodsham, Ashford

Share this agenda point

Slide 3
Slide 4
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 5
Slide 6
Slide 7
Slide 8
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 9
Slide 10
Slide 11
Slide 12
Slide 13
Microphone Forty
Slide 14
Slide 15
Slide 16
Slide 17
Slide 18
Slide 19
Slide 20
Slide 21
Slide 22
Slide 23
Slide 24
Slide 25
Slide 26
Slide 27
Slide 28
Slide 29
Slide 30
Slide 31
Slide 32
Slide 33
Slide 34
Slide 35
Slide 36
Slide 37
Slide 38
Slide 39
Slide 40
Slide 41
Slide 42
Slide 43
Slide 44
Slide 45
Slide 46
Slide 47
Slide 48
Slide 49
Slide 50
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 51
Slide 52
Slide 53
Slide 54
Slide 55
Slide 56
Microphone Forty
Slide 57
Slide 58
Slide 59
Slide 60
Slide 61
Slide 62
Slide 63
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 64
Slide 65
Slide 66
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
Slide 67
Slide 68
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 69
Slide 70
Slide 71
Slide 72
Slide 73
Slide 74
Slide 75
Slide 76
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 77
Slide 78
Slide 79
Slide 80
Slide 81
Slide 82
Slide 83
Slide 84
Slide 85
Slide 86
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 87
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 88
Slide 89
Slide 90
Slide 91
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 92
Slide 93
Slide 94
Slide 95
Slide 96
Slide 97
Slide 98
Slide 99
Slide 100
Slide 101
Slide 102
Slide 103
Slide 104
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 105
Slide 106
Slide 107
Slide 108
Slide 109
Slide 110
Slide 111
Slide 112
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 113
Slide 114
Slide 115
Slide 116
Slide 117
Slide 118
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 119
Slide 120
Slide 121
Slide 122
Slide 123
Slide 124
Slide 125
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 126
Slide 127
Slide 128
Slide 129
Slide 130
Slide 131
Slide 132
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 133
Cllr Nicola Keen
Cllr Nicola Keen
Slide 134
Cllr Nicola Keen
Slide 135
Slide 136
Slide 137
Slide 138
Slide 139
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 140
Slide 141
Slide 142
Cllr Nicola Keen
Slide 143
Slide 144
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 145
Cllr Jeremy Speakman
Slide 146
Slide 147
Slide 148
Slide 149
Slide 150
Slide 151
Slide 152
Slide 153
Slide 154
Slide 155
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 156
Slide 157
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 158
Slide 159
Slide 160
Slide 161
Slide 162
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 163
Cllr James Butcher
Slide 164
Slide 165
Slide 166
Slide 167
Slide 168
Slide 169
Slide 170
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 171
Slide 172
Slide 173
Slide 174
Slide 175
Slide 176
Slide 177
Slide 178
Slide 179
Cllr James Butcher
Slide 180
Slide 181
Slide 182
Slide 183
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 184
Cllr Tony Cooper
Slide 185
Slide 186
Slide 187
Slide 188
Slide 189
Slide 190
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 191
Slide 192
Slide 193
Slide 194
Slide 195
Slide 196
Slide 197
Slide 198
Slide 199
Slide 200
Slide 201
Cllr Tony Cooper
Slide 202
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 203
Slide 204
Slide 205
Slide 206
Slide 207
Slide 208
Slide 209
Slide 210
Slide 211
Slide 212
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 213
Slide 214
Cllr Jackie Meade
FHDC Officer
Slide 215
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 216
Slide 217
Slide 218
Slide 219
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 220
Slide 221

8 23/0782/FH - Land adjoining Pepperland Nursery, Straight Lane, Brookland

Share this agenda point

Slide 222
Slide 223
Slide 224
Slide 225
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 226
Slide 227
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 228
Slide 229
Slide 230
Slide 231
Slide 232
Slide 233
Microphone Forty
Slide 234
Slide 235
Slide 236
Slide 237
Slide 238
Slide 239
Slide 240
Slide 241
Slide 242
Slide 243
Slide 244
Slide 245
Slide 246
Slide 247
Slide 248
Slide 249
Slide 250
Slide 251
Slide 252
Slide 253
Slide 254
Slide 255
Slide 256
Slide 257
Slide 258
Slide 259
Slide 260
Slide 261
Slide 262
Slide 263
Slide 264
Slide 265
Slide 266
Slide 267
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 268
Slide 269
Slide 270
Cllr Jackie Meade
Cllr Clive Goddard
Slide 271
Slide 272
Slide 273
Slide 274
Slide 275
Slide 276
Slide 277
Slide 278
Slide 279
Slide 280
Slide 281
Slide 282
Slide 283
Slide 284
Cllr Jackie Meade
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
Slide 285
Slide 286
Slide 287
Slide 288
Slide 289
Slide 290
Slide 291
Slide 292
Slide 293
Slide 294
Slide 295
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 296
Slide 297
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 298
Slide 299
Slide 300
Slide 301
Slide 302
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 303
Slide 304
Slide 305
Slide 306
Slide 307
Slide 308
Slide 309
Slide 310
Slide 311
Slide 312
Slide 313
Slide 314
Slide 315
Slide 316
Slide 317
Slide 318
Slide 319
Slide 320
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 321
Slide 322
Slide 323
Slide 324
Slide 325
Slide 326
Slide 327
Slide 328
Slide 329
Slide 330
Slide 331
Slide 332
Slide 333
Slide 334
Slide 335
Slide 336
Slide 337
Slide 338
Slide 339
Slide 340
Slide 341
Slide 342
Slide 343
Slide 344
Slide 345
Slide 346
Slide 347
Slide 348
Slide 349
Slide 350
Slide 351
Slide 352
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 353
Slide 354
Slide 355
Cllr Tony Cooper
Slide 356
Slide 357
Slide 358
Slide 359
Slide 360
Slide 361
Slide 362
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 363
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
Slide 364
Slide 365
Slide 366
Slide 367
Slide 368
Slide 369
Slide 370
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 371
Slide 372
Cllr James Butcher
Slide 373
Slide 374
Cllr Jeremy Speakman
Slide 375
Slide 376
Slide 377
Slide 378
Slide 379
Slide 380
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 381
Slide 382
Slide 383
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 384
Slide 385
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 386
Slide 387
Slide 388
Slide 389
Slide 390
Slide 391
Slide 392
Slide 393
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 394
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 395
Slide 396
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 397
Cllr Paul Thomas
Slide 398
Slide 399
Slide 400
Slide 401
Slide 402
Slide 403
Slide 404
Slide 405
Slide 406
Slide 407
Slide 408
Slide 409
Slide 410
Slide 411
Slide 412
Slide 413
Slide 414
Slide 415
Slide 416
Slide 417
Slide 418
Slide 419
Slide 420
Slide 421
Slide 422
Slide 423
Cllr James Butcher
Slide 424
Slide 425
Slide 426
Slide 427
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 428
Slide 429
Slide 430
Slide 431
Slide 432
Slide 433
Slide 434
Slide 435
Slide 436
Slide 437
Slide 438
Slide 439
Slide 440
Slide 441
Slide 442
Slide 443
Slide 444
Slide 445
Slide 446
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 447
Cllr Adrian Lockwood
Cllr Tony Cooper
Slide 448
Slide 449
Slide 450
Slide 451
Slide 452
Slide 453
Slide 454
Slide 455
Slide 456
Slide 457
Slide 458
Slide 459
Slide 460
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 461
Slide 462
Slide 463
Slide 464
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 465
Slide 466

7 25/0232/FH - Middle Park, Green Lane, Lyminge, Folkestone

Share this agenda point

Slide 467
Slide 468
Slide 469
Slide 470
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Slide 471
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 472
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
Slide 473
Slide 474
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 475
Slide 476
Slide 477
Slide 478
Cllr Jackie Meade
Slide 479
Slide 480
Slide 481
Slide 482
Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:00:00

This meeting will be webcast live to the internet.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:00:03

For those who do not wish to be filmed or recorded, you will need to leave the chamber.

For members, officers and others speaking at the meeting,

it is important that the microphones are used so viewers on the webcast and others in the room may hear you.

Would anyone with a mobile phone please switch it to silent as they can be distracting.

I would 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 the 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'll move on. Do we have apologies for absence please?

FHDC Officer - 0:01:18

Thank you chair, yes we have received apologies from Councillor Fuller and also from Councillors

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:01:26

Mike Blakemore and Polly Blakemore. We have Councillor Butcher and Speekman here as their

Do we have any declarations of interest please councillors?

2 Declarations of Interest

Councillor Goddard.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:01:34

Thank you, good evening Chairman.

Cllr Clive Goddard - 0:01:36

Just the Brooklyn application 230782

on the ward member for that.

Councillor Thomas.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:01:48

Yeah, similarly for 231810,

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:01:53

Brickfield -Kilfields, I'm the ward member for that.

Thank you.

Councillor Huddingsby.

Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:02:04

Sorry, I obviously misheard you.

I'd better declare then. I'm the ward councillor for 25023 2H FH and also 2414 05 FH.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:02:30

Thank you. Councillors I don't think we actually need to declare when we are awarded council.

I think it's taken for granted but thank you very much. Would anyone else like to declare

any interest at all this evening? No I'm seeing nobody. Thank you. So before you committee

3 Minutes

you have the minutes to consider and approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting

held on the 17th of June 2025. May I sign these as a correct record please?

4 Minutes of the Licensing Act Sub-Committee

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:03:02

Thank you very much and you also have the minutes of the Licensing Act subcommittee to consider and

approve as a correct record. The minutes of the subcommittee held on the 2nd of June 2025. May I

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:03:19

also sign those as a correct record? Thank you very much. So with that we will move on to our first

6 24/1405/FH - The Cottage, School Hill, Bodsham, Ashford

application this evening which is 24 -1405 -FH The Cottage, School Hill, Bodsham in Ashford.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:03:38

Do we have any updates please? Thank you Chair, yes I have a couple of matters

just to quickly clarify in terms of the proposal. The solar panels to the main dwelling actually

constitute permitted development and have therefore been removed from the proposal.

There's also an error at 3 .1.

The solar panels have not yet been installed on the garage roof.

That part is not retrospective.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:04:01

And our first speaker this evening is Councillor Tem Burge who is speaking on behalf of Elmsdidge

Parish Council.

If you'd like to come forward please and you will have three minutes from when you start.

Thank you very much.

Microphone Forty - 0:04:26

Madam chair, councillors, the parish council has concerns about both parts of this application,

both changes to the garage and the building of a shed, albeit for different reasons.

Dealing with the garage first, original consent was granted for the garage to be converted

on condition that the conversion was carried out in complete accordance with the original

submitted plans. It wasn't. The applicant ignored that condition and made three

substantial changes without permission. The first was the installation of velux

windows to a roof that overlooks the neighbour's garden into a roof space

where he already has two large dormers letting light in. The second was the

structure of the external staircase now affords clear views over the same

neighbour's garden and thirdly he's dug out the bank between him and the same

neighbour to create a side return between the side of the garage and the

neighbour which has undermined the land on which the neighbour's oil tank sits.

All of these unauthorised changes to permitted plans we think are unnecessary

deliberately in breach of the strict conditions that were imposed on the

original consent and are causing his elderly neighbours considerable stress

and worry. They worry about the lack of privacy into their own garden and the effect that

will have on the value of their home and they're worried about the strength of the unsupported

bank between them and the applicant's property and the possible loss of their oil tank if

the bank collapses. The planning officer has proposed various conditions including that

the velux in the roof space be glazed with frosted glass and be kept shut and also that

the view into the neighbors gardens from the external staircase be obscured by the construction

of a 1 .8 meter high screen at the top of the staircase. In our view we have concerns that

both of those proposed conditions are no more enforceable than the previous condition was

and experience shows that the applicant has been prepared to breach such conditions in

the past. That unfairly leaves the interests of his neighbors and their rights to enjoy

their garden unprotected either from him or from a subsequent buyer of his house.

So for those reasons the parish council objects to the application for retrospective permission

for the changes that he's made.

Dealing with the proposed application for a shed which is 18 feet long by 12 feet wide

by nearly 8 feet deep.

The planning officers report says it will have a flat roof and timber cladding but the

Plange on the website show that it has two glazed roof lanterns, floor to ceiling bi -fold

doors along one elevation and green steel cladding. It's a very big and elaborate shed

and we have concerns about what it may become used for once it's been built. His previous

dealings with planning applications and conditions leave us with no confidence that we're getting

his true intentions.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:07:34

Thank you very much and spot on time. Thank you. The next person to speak is Simon Gumm

who will be speaking on the application. Do we have Simon Gumm here? Oh, would you like

come forward and you'll have three minutes from when you start sir.

Microphone Forty - 0:08:03

I would apologize to the planning committee that the matters which have come before you

I thought were minor amendments to the previous granted permission. I appreciate the concerns

the neighbours but I think they've all been adequately dealt with by the recommendations

of the Planning Officer to whom I'm grateful for her guidance on the process. I'm willing

to accept that the permission be granted in accordance with the Officer's suggestions

in their report.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:08:38

Thank you very much Sir. We have no other speakers on this so over to you Councillors.

Would anyone like to ask for clarification or raise any points at this time please?

Councillor Thomas?

Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:08:55

You were Councillor Hollingsby go first, she's the ward member.

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:09:01

Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:09:01

I was just going to ask the comments that the parish council have made.

What part of that might apply to the application?

Because it seemed as though the solar panels are permitted development,

but then you said something about the change

that wasn't part of the existing application.

So I just wonder if you could clarify in terms of what the parish council said,

what might apply in terms of planning legislation?

Thank you, Councillor, of course.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:09:44

So the solar panels to the House roof would constitute permitted development and that's

what's been removed from the proposal here.

In regards to the bank clearance, this wasn't picked up by myself on site, but it is something

that we could raise with enforcement after planning to put it together.

It was not included in the proposal and it's not a matter for this application.

The materials, I have made a mistake in the report, they are steel cladding with two roof lanterns, but the measurements and everything else remain as per my report.

Just asking, what about the shed in terms of the bi -fold door?

There are bi -fold doors on the front elevation of the shed, so that would be facing into the applicant's own garden.

Councillor Toit.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:10:35

Thank you, Chair.

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:10:41

Again, just picking up on what Councillor Bird said, has there been any enforcement

action with regard to failure to comply with conditions from the previous application?

Thank you, Chair.

Good evening, members.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:10:59

Well, there has been an enforcement investigation which has resulted in the submission of this

Government guidance on enforcement sets out for where planning permission might be

granted for development. Local authorities should request an application be submitted,

and that's that's what's that's what's before members tonight.

So in in terms of.

Enforcement if if members were satisfied that the recommendation is correct,

the development is acceptable and the conditions are necessary and appropriate, the planning

authority would be able to enforce those conditions.

The fact that we haven't left straight to enforcement action in respect of the work

that's undertaken isn't indicative of a lack of enforcement action by the authority.

The fact that the application is before members tonight in fact is itself an example of our

enforcement team carrying out their work.

Thank you for that.

I suspected that might well be the case.

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:12:05

I just wanted to make sure that we were all on the same page with respect to that.

Thank you very much, Rob.

Just one more question, if I may.

There are no conditions, again this is something that was raised by Councillor Burge, there

are no conditions associated with the future use of the shed.

and we wouldn't...

Is there anything... I couldn't see anything in the report

which related to services and other things which are connected to there,

which in itself might lend itself to change of use

at some point in the future. Thank you.

I think if members are concerned,

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:12:45

it could be put to a use that would be a material change of use

than for general domestic purposes, it's open to members to recommend imposing a condition.

In my view it's not necessary, it's very clear what the Development proposed is for, it's

for a domestic outbuilding, so any use of that that would amount to a change of use

would require planning permission and could be the subject of enforcement action.

Just one final point if I may, just to pick it up on that.

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:13:17

I think that's the subject, that's the concern of the local council,

is the fact that the applicant has demonstrated

that he hasn't complied with planning conditions previously,

so why should he now?

That was the question that was put to us as a committee.

So again, I just think that whatever we can do

to support the residents in the area,

to make sure that those things are as robust as we can make them,

then I think we would then be doing our job here,

in terms of challenging that,

to say that those things that are put in place are reversed

and are future -proofed in that respect. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:13:54

I take your point, Councillor Thomas.

Of course, as a planning authority, we're not here to pass judgement

on the character of any applicants or any other interested parties,

but if members are concerned

and they feel that it is a belt and braces approach,

it would be sensible to impose suitably worded condition restricting the use of the outbuilding

to purposes incidental or ancillary to normal domestic use then that option is open to any

member who makes a proposal.

Thank you.

Councillor King.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:14:29

Thank you Mr Chair.

Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:14:32

The bank.

Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:14:34

Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:14:35

What are we going to do to make sure that bank is safe?

I mean, in my ward we've got the Hill of Remembrance, as they like to call it now, that's LID.

So how are we going to make sure that that bank, the rain that we have and the changing

on our weather, isn't going to do the same?

Because that is going to be the thing that's going to change my vote.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:15:01

Well, any unauthorised works, engineering works of the site, don't form part of this

So it isn't a matter that's before members tonight.

But certainly our enforcement team can take the matter forward.

Can we make sure that's done?

Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:15:18

Because I'm quite worried about that.

Having seen that slide down the hill of remembrance, I wouldn't want to see that slide in someone's

house.

Councillor Speakman.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:15:30

Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:15:34

Yes, I was just looking for clarification regarding the Velux window, which is I'm looking

of the photograph of that building, looking towards the road I suppose, where the car

is parked.

So the bellows windows on the other side, but there's a high sort of trees there, is

that right?

So you can't see.

Are those trees, I mean is the issue that those trees could be, they belong to the property

so technically they could be cut down and then there would be a view.

Is that a potential concern?

Thank you Councillor, yes that's correct.

We cannot rely on vegetation as a mitigation for loss of privacy.

Right, so that vegetation, it belongs to the property owner,

so they could change that.

I'm not aware who the vegetation belongs to.

It's something that we can't rely upon to mitigate any overlooking.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:16:26

Councillor Torliss.

If I may, sorry, I think Councillor Butch would...

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:16:32

OK. So I think based on what Rob said earlier,

I'd like to propose that we move the officer's recommendation

with the wording of the condition

that the shed is for domestic use,

incidental to the use of the main property,

the words that Rob had.

That would be my proposal, Chair.

We have one proposal. Do I have a seconder?

Councillor Goddard.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:16:57

and Councillor Butcher.

Cllr James Butcher - 0:17:06

It was really just a pick up on the conditions that was raised by the parish council and

has been raised here too when we talk about we're going to protect privacy through these

conditions.

How realistic is that really?

So it's fine to put conditions in place and reassure us, to ensure residents but is that

is it plausible that those conditions will be sustainable over the longer term?

And that's what I have some doubts about.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:17:40

These sorts of conditions are commonly imposed on planning permissions.

More often you'd see them in tightly knit urban areas

where overlooking can be more of a problem,

but they're generally applied to secondary windows

serving habitable rooms that could potentially overlook neighbours.

They are eminently enforceable.

I've seen it done very successfully at my previous authority

and I'm sure it's been done here as well.

They're very straightforward.

If a window isn't obscure glazed and isn't fixed shut,

they're in breach of condition and the council can take action.

Cllr James Butcher - 0:18:23

I guess there's can do. It's kind of whether that actually happens and whether when it

comes to it it's deemed sufficiently serious thing to take action and so on and so on.

Because there's plenty of cases where we bump up against that. Yes there's a conditioning,

yes it's been breached but it's the reality that will be enforced.

Councillor Cooper.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:18:44

Thank you, Chair.

Cllr Tony Cooper - 0:18:50

Would it be at all possible if we were to put conditions in place here, to put a condition

to make sure that the bank was stable or was kept stable?

Would that be at all possible?

No?

It doesn't form part of the application.

So something our enforcement team will take forward separately.

Okay.

If we're talking about conditions then in respect of domestic use, etc. this shed, can

we insert a condition to the effect of, for example, it's not to be used in the future,

as an annex or for example like a climbing flat, etc.?

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:19:22

Well, you can do that. Members are entitled to do that.

You'd need good planning reason for doing so.

So, I mean, the shed that's there at the moment could be used as an annex

without requiring planning permission.

So, my recommendation to...

Well, my suggested wording to members earlier

was for uses in stent or ancillary to the dwelling house, which would include uses and

annex members have genuine planning concerns about the use of the buildings and annex mean

just leave out the word ancillary and leave it as for purposes incidental to the use of

the dwelling house. But like I said, members would need to demonstrate good planning reasons

for doing so because any condition that's imposed could be the subject of an appeal

to the Planning Inspector. Thank you for that, thank you.

Cllr Tony Cooper - 0:20:14

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:20:19

I'm not seeing any other Councillor wishing to speak. We have one proposal that has been

seconded and that is to accept the Officer's recommendations but to include a condition

regarding any non domestic use of the shed and also there are conditions there to ensure

that the privacy is improved and I also believe our enforcement team will be going out to

look at this bank because I too am very worried about that.

So, with the proposal and the new condition and the conditions, all those in favour please

raise your hand.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:21:13

Those against.

Abstain.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:21:19

FHDC Officer - 0:21:23

Thank you chair, there's nine in favour, one against and one abstention.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:21:26

Thank you very much, that application has passed with the conditions. Thank you.

8 23/0782/FH - Land adjoining Pepperland Nursery, Straight Lane, Brookland

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:21:35

So we move on to our second application which is 23 -0782 -FH which is the land adjoining

Pepperland Nursery in Straight Lane, Boardland. Do we have any updates please?

Thank you, Chair. I have no updates for this application.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:21:54

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:22:02

Thank you and we have one speaker on this and this is Tiziana. I think I got the name

right. Thank you. Tiziana Morey to speak on the application. If you'd like to come forward,

We'll have three minutes from when you start.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, dear Chair and members of Committee.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Microphone Forty - 0:22:36

I'm the agent and the architect on Tizia Amori for this application.

So we worked hard for over two years to address every issue raised by the officers.

We, access were redesigned, we got approval from national highways after we redesigned the access to the new development.

And we had a letter from the parish which was supportive back in 2023,

where they were saying they were supportive with the proposed scheme.

We addressed the ecology issues. My client joined the great Crested New District Level Licensing Scheme

and he got an impact assessment and conservation payment certificate together with a location map from Natural England.

The site was claimed to be a receptor site for the neighbour application.

The application was 22 -1786 -FH and has been claimed as a receptor site for this application,

but it can't be because this has never been authorized by my client, who is the owner of this land.

So I don't know how this has happened.

There were also some comments on the design.

We believe we address the design with a high quality design.

The design has been crafted specifically to reflect the rural agricultural setting

using barn -style forms, especially for the detached house,

which is the front detached house facing the main roads.

If members have concerns about the material,

visual details, they can be controlled of course by condition. The materials used for the detached

houses timber cladding and we use some local material for the detached houses at the back.

And so just to give a bit of a history of for this land, this land had planning permission back

in the 80s and which was renewed twice and it was purchased directly from my client from British

telecom and the planning permission was given for a telephone exchange. So we have a lot of

support from the community. We had no objections from the neighbors. We are happy to collect

letters to support this application. We really believe in this application. We work very hard

giving any sort of information, announcement about landscape, creating biodiversity pockets

all around through the site.

And so we believe that what we are delivering

is very high quality, sustainable,

and so we are hoping that we will be successful.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:25:27

And that's the only speaker we had on this particular application.

So over to you, councillors.

Would anyone like clarification or to raise any points, please?

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:25:41

Cllr Clive Goddard - 0:25:44

Councillor Goddard. Thank you chair, yeah the quality excellent design but I think in

the wrong place. Mark Quinn obviously there's other developers in the area but

Mark Quinn and a nice estate just off the roundabout, I forget the name of the road

I should know the road, thank you and you know purchase traditional build that's

that's slipping there quite well.

And I think if they were the same as this,

I wouldn't have had too much of an issue.

I'm not doubting that, but like I say, in the wrong place,

perhaps if they were in Hyde, somewhere like that, it would be better.

But no offence to Hyde,

just saying that's sort of buildings they have in Hyde, but mainly white boxes.

But perhaps, like I say, similar to Mr Quinn's order,

The other search has been recently developed to the other end of that lane,

that again, path grip, path cladding or tile hung,

a traditional build for that sort of area,

then I wouldn't have too much of a problem.

Thank you, Councillor Holmesby.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:26:50

Thank you.

Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:26:53

I was very interested in what the applicant's agent was saying,

and I think from what she was saying,

they've certainly gone to great lengths

in trying to come up with a proposal

that would be recommended.

I tend to agree with my colleague,

Councillor Coddard, but at the end of the day,

the design actually is very subjective, isn't it,

in terms of what you think is actually appropriate

for that area.

I mean, it is quite a brave design in a way

for the entrance to the village.

But I've got...

I've got...

reservations about turning it down,

because I think it actually is quite a good application,

but I'll wait to hear what other people have said.

Councillor Thomas.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:27:49

Thank you, Chair. A couple of questions, first of all.

So, just in terms of what the agent raised

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:27:56

about the reptile reception area here.

How do we unpick that if that wasn't agreed by the owner in terms of this being a site

that could receive the reptile load that it's designed, it was forecast to, isn't it?

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:28:21

I have to admit members, it's the first time I've come across a situation like this.

I suspect it's probably not an issue that we can unpick quickly.

We would need to liaise with the applicant for the application where, which has stipulated

this site as a receptor site.

We would also need to discuss with the applicant for this current application.

But I think as it stands,

there is a planning Commission that

requires this site to be receptive.

So I don't have the details

of that application before me,

but I would expect that officers in

approving that application would

carry out due diligence and ensure

that the site is either in the same

ownership or that the owner had given consent.

And of course it's not the

only reason for refusal here,

So I think if members are minded to accept the quality of the design,

I would suggest that the application should still be refused

on the basis of the loss of the receptor site,

because as I said, that planning permission stands

until it's quashed by the courts effectively.

Thank you very much for that clarification.

There's a couple of things.

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:29:53

So in section 2 .3 of the report, it says this is on a 60 mile an hour road potentially.

I know you'd struggle to do 60 along that road to be perfectly honest with you, with

no pedestrian footpath.

And that's not unusual in and around Brooklyn and Brenton.

Anyway, that's quite normal.

but again, I think the fact that it's been raised in the report

suggests that there are concerns from the planning officer

with respect to that.

Southern Water have actually said there's no public foul

or surface water drains in the area.

And so again, in terms of the removal of surface water

and waste water from the site,

there would have to be some means of doing that

and it's not clear from the report how that would be achieved.

I know normally there's a condition associated with that

to go and sort that out a little bit further down the road.

But it is a very sensitive area.

And again, I'm just mindful that here we are,

no surface water drains,

it's a receptor site for the reptiles.

And the fact that no neighbours

have actually raised any objections in relation to this is interesting.

The one thing I would say, and I really do support what Councillor Goddard has said earlier

on with regard to the design.

In the report it talks about poor design, bulky square, incohesive materials not characteristic

with the area, hence it's an intrusive form of development.

And again as Councillor Goddard has pointed out, the more recent developments there both

on King Street and on Appledore Road are very much more in keeping

and why those developments were actually approved

by the local planning authority.

You can see that the effort has gone into those

to make those fit in with the rest of the environment.

So I do agree with the officer's report

in terms of it's an intrusive form of development.

Again, the detached properties, it talks about large footprint,

blank elevations and again when you look at the drawings the west and the east elevations

I think it looks atrocious to be honest with you I really do I don't I don't think this

is a good design at all so again I really do support what the officer says you know

the form the mass the bulk the design in the materiality it's not a good design and therefore

I'd like to propose that we accept the officers recommendation for refusal of this for the

her reasons stated in the officer's report. Thank you.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:32:37

Thank you, Councillor Thomas, and I've just had a seconder from Councillor Keane.

Councillor Cooper.

Thank you, Chair. As people have said, it does seem a shame that given it's got previous

Cllr Tony Cooper - 0:32:51

planning history, etc., that no further thought, etc., was given to this. I mean, it was obvious

that a lot of effort has been put into this, but I'm a little disappointed that further

the work wasn't to pull into this because as Councillor Thompson said

amongst other things it's a poor design like what Councillor Rheer Godard said.

So unfortunately I was going to say that we should approve this

but given the content of the reports and everything else

sadly I'm not going to be able to support this.

So I will go with what the office is saying. Thank you.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:33:24

Thank you. Councillor Mimsby.

Thank you Chairman.

Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:33:30

I was going to say, I mean, second reason for refusal is very difficult,

and especially as Rob explained in terms of the receptor, is that.

And I think that would be very difficult if that went to court.

So I do think from that point of view, I have to say,

I could be persuaded on the design,

But I think with that second reason, it's got to be refusal at this stage.

I'm sure that they will come back with the answers that we will require.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:34:07

Would any other councillor like to speak?

I'm...

Oh, Councillor Butcher.

I just want to pick up on Councillor Holland's point.

Cllr James Butcher - 0:34:16

Is there an opportunity for the applicant, if refused, for the applicant to come back with a different design?

That's the sticking point and to do more research.

OK, thanks.

Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:34:26

I'm just curious. Nobody seems to have objected to the design,

not even the parish council.

I would hope that maybe they would have another crack at this

and there is an opportunity to decide

that nobody seems to object to some sort of housing development going on

which we desperately need.

I would not want to discourage that

but I think this needs to go back for a bit.

Room for improvement, I think. Thank you very much.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:34:55

Thank you. I'm not seeing any other councillors to speak. So we have one proposal which was

seconded and that's to accept the officer's recommendation to refuse. All those in favour

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:35:11

of the officer's recommendation please show. And I can see that's unanimous. That application

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:35:19

has fallen. Thank you. So our third application this evening is 23 -1810 -FH which is Brick

Kildon Fields at Cockridge Lane New Romney. Do we have any updates please? Thank you chair

I have no updates.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:35:38

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:35:41

And we also have no speakers, so over to yourselves Councillor.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:35:52

Councillor Thomas.

Sorry, yeah I am the ward member of this.

Cllr Paul Thomas - 0:35:58

I did speak to the Chairman of the Planning Committee for New Romley Town Council about

their concerns with regard to this site because there is some planning history associated

with this site as well, going back a number of years for different things, some of which

have been accepted and some of which have been refused.

I have to say that in my opinion the reasons for refusal submitted by New Romney Town Council

are a little bit thin, to put it mildly.

And the fact that 23 neighbours consulted, there were two objections, but when you look

the detail of those objections, sorry, they are again just a little bit on the thin side.

It is outside of the settlement boundary, arguably, but only just because there are

some quite big developments on Cockery Bay and as we're probably well aware from developments

in New Romney, but I hasten to add most of those are actually in the parish of St Mary

in the Marsh, because they pinched that land from us about 100 years ago.

I'm not bearing any grudges there.

But I'd just like to say, in my opinion,

I'd like to support the officer's recommendation

for approval of the application, Chair.

Is that a proposal, Councillor Thomson?

Do we have a seconder?

Councillor Cooper's seconded.

I believe you wanted to speak, Councillor Cooper?

Oh, you didn't.

Councillor Goddard?

Thank you, Chair. Just quickly to back Councillor Thomas up,

basically, I thought they were very thin as well,

and move on the planning committee. Usually they're quite on the ball with their conditions

and that but I thought that was a bit weak. But no, again, tidy development, you know,

it's obviously overshadowed by all the major development in and around the area. But no,

good design, will fit in there nicely and I'm glad hopefully the committee was supporting

Thank you.

I'm not seeing any...

All of a sudden, a flurry of hands.

Councillor Butcher, then Councillor Lockwood.

Sorry, Councillor Thomas, can you turn your mic off, please?

Thank you.

Yeah, it was just about the flooding thing.

Cllr James Butcher - 0:38:07

It sounds quite complex, the way to test it.

I wanted you to just give a simple explanation,

because there's a bit where it says,

yeah, 7 .35, 40's silent in respect of the sequential test.

if you could just help me understand how all of that works.

Yes, quite a delicate one, this one, in terms of flooding.

It is in flood zone 3,

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:38:30

but the FRA confirms that it will remain safe in a flooding scenario.

We've had that confirmed from the Environment Agency.

So we've had a look at how you approach something being in flood zone 3,

but not resulting in any harm.

and we've come across the appeal decision

where the Inspector picks up on that issue,

where he comments on the fact

there's no real -world harm to the case.

Also, the fact that we don't have a carry card

demonstrating a five -year housing land supply,

and what the report tries to do in the tilted balance section

is put all those together,

and we think that once you look at everything,

it goes in favour of the application.

What is the sequential test?

So the sequential test is where you put housing in the least vulnerable areas essentially.

So the Romney Mart is its own character area for flooding.

So yes, the idea is that you look at flood zone 1, then flood zone 2, then flood zone

So that's the sequential approach which in the report why it takes you through alternative

sites but as the inspectors decision said we've been looking at real world harm in this

one and we haven't been able to identify anything that we could present to an inspector as appeal

hence the recommendation so hopefully that's helped.

Councillor Lockwood?

I don't know if that's working.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:40:06

Cllr Adrian Lockwood - 0:40:10

Thank you Councillor Cooper and thank you Chair.

Cllr Tony Cooper - 0:40:12

Yes, I appreciate this is called in by a parish council and we must work with our parishes

and town councils with respect to their opinions on planning.

But it's a shame there isn't an opportunity for our very highly trained officers to push

back a bit on that and just say it wouldn't hold up possibly.

and it's telling they're not here to defend their objection.

So I just wonder if that's maybe a change that's coming through with the planning reform.

Let's see. But this looks like a good development. It's outside the designated area, so it's a windfall site,

so it helps us with land supply. Looks like a decent design. Lots of other developments going on around it,

So I can't see any reason why we wouldn't just wave this through.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:41:14

Thank you. And I'm not seeing any other councillors wishing to speak.

So we have one proposal, and that is to accept the officer's recommendation,

which has been proposed and seconded.

So all those in favour of the officer's recommendation, please show.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:41:34

And I can see that is unanimous so that has passed. Thank you, Kamuti. And then we move

7 25/0232/FH - Middle Park, Green Lane, Lyminge, Folkestone

on to the last one of the evening, which is 25 -0232 -FH, which is Middle Park, Green Lane

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:41:51

in Liming. And do we have any updates, please? Thank you, Chair, no updates. Thank you. And

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:41:54

Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:41:59

we have no speakers so over to you councillors. Councillor Hiersby. Happy to move the recommendation

chair. I'm very pleased to see that Liming Parish Council have no objections and I think

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:42:12

it's a sensible development. Thank you and do I have a seconder please. Councillor Jones.

Would anyone else like to speak on this one? I'm not seeing anyone. So we have one proposal

and that is to accept the officer's recommendations which has been proposed and seconded.

All those in favour please show now.

Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:42:34

And that is unanimous so it has passed.

Committee thank you very very much on this very hot evening.

Please travel home safely and good night until the next meeting.

We welcome your comments

Required field

Name

Comments

Need an accessible hCaptcha?
Check available options.
Sign up to hCaptcha or Log in to hChaptcha.

By clicking Send feedback, you agree that Folkestone & Hythe District Council and Public-i can use the information above to review your feedback and contact you about it. See our Privacy Policy for more details.

Planning and Licensing Committee - Tuesday 15 July 2025, 7:00pm - Folkestone & Hythe webcasting