76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW

76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 27 September 2023 by David Smith BA(Hons) DMS MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 4th October 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/L2250/W/23/3318810 76-78 St. Leonards Road, Hythe, CT21 6HW • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Gary Crook against the decision of Folkestone and Hythe District Council. • The application Ref 21/2372/FH, dated 19 November 2021, was refused by notice dated 23 December 2022. • The development proposed is erection of a two-storey detached dwelling with integral double garage. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issues 2. These are: • The effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of 60 Wakefield Way with reference to daylight, sunlight and outlook; and • The effect on highway safety arising from the proposed off-street parking arrangements. Reasons Living conditions 3. The appeal site comprises land at the end of two gardens. It contains vegetation and outbuildings. The proposed dwelling would lie directly to the south of 60 Wakefield Way near to the boundary fence.

76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decision The closest section would be single storey with a pitched roof but it would extend up to two- stories. The depth of the proposal would project well beyond the main rear wall and conservatory at No 60. 4. No technical analysis, such as the detailed tests contained in the BRE Guide, has been undertaken. The Council’s sun path diagrams do not assist in this regard. Therefore, an assessment of the impact of the proposal has to be made based on the current situation on the ground which includes the conservatory with its opaque roof. 5. Overshadowing of the conservatory’s side windows would be bound to occur due to the orientation of the proposed development in relation them. The proximity and scale of the side wall would also be liable to materially curtail daylight. As a result, internal living conditions at No 60 would be significantly https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L2250/W/23/3318810 eroded. Moreover, the bulk and position of the proposed dwelling would be unduly overbearing and would overwhelm the fairly narrow neighbouring garden. Compared to the cypress trees within the site the proposal would be much closer to the fenestration and outdoor area of No 60 and would be permanent rather than having a limited lifespan. These specimens therefore do not justify the proposal and the overall effect would be unacceptable. 6. The first-floor flank window that serves a room at No 60 would also be affected. However, neither daylight nor sunlight would be obstructed to a significant degree as the proposal would not be sited directly in front of it. 7. The proposal would nonetheless harm the living conditions of the occupiers of 60 Wakefield Way. Even though overlooking could be avoided it would lead to an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbours contrary to Policy HB1 of the Places and Policies Local Plan. Highway safety 8. To accord with its standards and Policy T2 of the Places and Policies Local Plan the Council expects one off-street parking space to be provided. The scheme includes a double length garage but these are often underutilised.

76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decision In any event, the appellant has demonstrated that a standard sized vehicle could be kept on the area in front of the garage. Local residents dispute the status of this land and maintain that it has unregistered title. This is not a matter for me to settle and, if the appeal were to be allowed, a condition could be imposed requiring provision of that space as it falls within the appeal site. 9. There is also concern that vehicles using the concrete track at the end of Wakefield Way would endanger pedestrians walking through to Range Road. However, the number of daily traffic movements could reasonably be expected to be few and drivers would be able to see anyone approaching on foot. 10. There would therefore be no unacceptable impact on highway safety and the proposal would comply with Policy T2. Other Considerations 11. The appeal site is within the settlement boundary of Hythe and the Council accepts that new housing development here is acceptable in principle. Indeed, the National Planning Policy Framework indicates that the development of windfall sites should be supported and the proposal would make use of disused land.

76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decision Great weight should be given to the benefits of using suitable sites within existing settlements for homes. However, the Framework also provides that developments should create places with a high standard of amenity for existing users which would not be the case. 12. The new house would have a linear footprint with a double pitch roof. It would be different to the simpler form of 59/60 Wakefield Way and the half hip roof of The Garden House but would fit neatly between those buildings. There are concerns that the proposal would harm the natural environment but the preliminary ecological appraisal raised no objections and recommended biodiversity enhancements. The delivery and storage of materials during construction could be disruptive but would be short-lived and could be managed by condition. None of these matters count against the proposal. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L2250/W/23/3318810 13. The appellant is critical of various aspects of the handling of the application by the Council including the time taken to determine it, the failure to upload material to the portal and the change of case officer. However, none of this alters my assessment of the proposal. 14. Representations have also referred to various other matters including an officer report in connection with an application in 1991, the permission given to the rear of 88 St Leonards Road, the scope for a different form of development and the claimed public footpath between Wakefield Way and Range Road. However, these are all of limited relevance to the main issues in the appeal and therefore of little weight. Conclusion 15. Although there would be no unacceptable impact on highway safety, the proposed development would harm the living conditions of adjoining occupiers. This is a significant objection. None of the material considerations outweigh this finding and therefore they do not warrant reaching a decision other than one in accordance with the development plan. So, for the reasons given, the appeal should not succeed.

76 St. Leonards Road, HYTHE, CT21 6HW — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — David Smith INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3