Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions Site visit made on 7 October 2024 by C Carpenter BA MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 23 October 2024 Appeal A Ref: APP/L2250/W/23/3332546 Flat 1, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent CT19 5QX • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a failure to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision on an application for planning permission • The appeal is made by Mr Rytis Saparavicius (RS Purple Investments Ltd) against Folkestone and Hythe District Council. • The application Ref is 23/0186/FH. • The development proposed is ground floor rear infill extension. Appeal B Ref: APP/L2250/W/23/3332548 Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent CT19 5QX • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a failure to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision on an application for planning permission • The appeal is made by Mr Rytis Saparavicius (RS Purple Investments Ltd) against Folkestone and Hythe District Council. • The application Ref is 23/0187/FH.

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions • The development proposed is first floor rear infill extension and alterations to roof dormer with new dormer at the back addition. Decision 1. Appeal A is allowed and planning permission is granted for ground floor rear infill extension at Flat 1, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent CT19 5QX in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/0186/FH, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: 22028/PLN/01 Site Plan; 22028/PLN/02 Floor Plans Existing; 22028/PLN/03 Second Floor and Roof Plans; 22028/PLN/04 Sections Existing; 22028/PLN/05 Elevations Existing; 22028/PLN/06 Rev A Floor Plans Proposed; 22028/PLN/07 Rev A Second Floor and Roof Plans; 22028/PLN/08 Rev A Sections Proposed; 22028/PLN/09 Rev A Elevations Proposed. 3) The external materials of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 2. Appeal B is dismissed. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions APP/L2250/W/23/3332546, APP/L2250/W/23/3332548 Preliminary Matters 3. There are two appeals relating to this site as set out above. Although I have considered each on its individual merits, to avoid duplication I have dealt with the two schemes together except where otherwise indicated. 4. On 30 July 2024 the Government published a consultation on proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) and other changes to the planning system. The proposed revisions to the Framework are draft and therefore may be subject to change before the final Framework is published. Moreover, the draft revisions to the Framework and other proposed reforms are not directly relevant to this appeal. Therefore, I am satisfied no party would be disadvantaged by not having the opportunity to comment on them. Background and Main Issue 5. The appeals were made because of the Council’s failure to determine the planning applications within the statutory timescale. 6. The Council has not provided appeal statements or development plan policies. Folkestone Town Council raised no objection to either application, subject to neighbours’ comments. No neighbour comments are before me. 7.

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions The appellant has provided comments sent to him by the Council. These suggest the Council had no concern with the proposed ground floor extension, subject to provision of amended plans, but that it was not satisfied with the design and appearance of the proposed first floor extension. The appellant subsequently sent revised drawings for the proposed ground floor extension to the Council, and these are before me. 8. I consider the main issue in both appeals is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the existing building and surrounding area. Reasons 9. The appeal site comprises a modest three-storey terraced building of traditional appearance. There are buildings of similar design on either side of it, and terraced dwellings predominate in the surrounding area. To the rear, No 96 has a two-storey outrigger with a sloping roof that broadly mirrors the rear design of the adjoining property. Two-storey outriggers can be seen on other buildings from No 96’s short rear garden and, although designs vary, the majority have pitched roofs. Like the buildings to either side of it, the appeal premises also has a rear-facing gable dormer at roof level. Appeal A 10.

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions The proposed ground floor infill extension would be subordinate to the existing two-storey outrigger and its roof would have a similar pitch, with relatively discreet roof lights. The proposed French door would broadly align with the first-floor window above it. As such, the extension would respect the design of the existing building and would not look out of place in is surroundings. 11. I therefore conclude the proposed development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the existing building and surrounding area. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions The proposed ground floor infill extension would be subordinate to the existing two-storey outrigger and its roof would have a similar pitch, with relatively discreet roof lights. The proposed French door would broadly align with the first-floor window above it. As such, the extension would respect the design of the existing building and would not look out of place in is surroundings. 11. I therefore conclude the proposed development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the existing building and surrounding area. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions APP/L2250/W/23/3332546, APP/L2250/W/23/3332548 Appeal B 12. Notwithstanding the description of development, the proposal before me comprises a two-storey infill extension, an additional floor with flat roof above the existing two-storey outrigger, and a replacement roof dormer. 13. The design of the different elements would be incoherent, with a mix of flat and pitched roof forms at varying levels that would look incongruous and out of place. The combined size of the additions would also dominate the host building and undermine the symmetry of No 96’s two-storey outrigger with its adjoining neighbour. The replacement dormer on the main roof would be overbearing because of its width, which would span the building, despite being similar in height to the existing dormer. The change of roof dormer design would also jar with the gable dormers on either side, diminishing the coherence of this group in the terrace. 14. Overall, the proposal would detract from the appearance of the existing building, despite the existing high wall at the boundary with No 98. It would also erode local character, notwithstanding existing variety in building design.

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions These detrimental impacts would not be mitigated by matching materials and finishes. 15. A flat-roofed addition to an existing rear outrigger nearby has been brought to my attention. I am not aware of the circumstances of that development, so cannot be certain of the extent to which they are directly comparable to those before me. In any event, I have considered the appeal scheme on its individual merits. 16. For the above reasons, I conclude the proposed development would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the existing building and surrounding area. This is contrary to the Framework, which seeks good design that is visually attractive and sympathetic to local character. Other Matters Appeal B 17. On the evidence before me, the proposal would have little material effect on light for neighbouring occupiers. However, an absence of harm in this respect is a neutral factor. An improvement in living accommodation in Flat 2 is not sufficient to outweigh the harm I have found. 18. I appreciate the appellant was proactive in seeking clarification from the Council, and note his willingness to amend the drawings for the proposal.

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — Appeal Decisions Nevertheless, I am required to determine this appeal on the plans and evidence before me. Conclusion and Conditions Appeal A 19. For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed. In addition to the standard time limit condition, I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans. This is in the interest of certainty. The condition relating to materials is necessary to integrate the ground floor extension with the existing building. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3 Appeal Decisions APP/L2250/W/23/3332546, APP/L2250/W/23/3332548

Flat 2, 96 Black Bull Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 5QX — Folkestone and Hythe District Council — INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4