The first day of an appeal against Thanet council’s rejection for a 68-bed house of multiple occupation in Broadstairs resulted in a brutal shredding of evidence presented by Kent County Council’s Senior Transport and Development Planner.
Advocate for HMO applicant RW Margate Ltd Rebecca Clutten picked apart the evidence given by planner Laura McDonald saying much of it was based on assumption and not evidence
RW Margate Ltd had applied for an 84-bed HMO at the former student accommodation at Northwood Court but this was rejected in 2024. A downsized application for a 68-bed HMO with onsite gym and workspace was then made in April 2025 but again rejected by Thanet council in September that year based on it undermining the viability of remaining businesses nearby because the application would be introducing an incompatible residential use to an employment site and due to there being insufficient off-street parking, in an area already suffering from significant parking demand.
An appeal was lodged and the enquiry opened yesterday (March 24) at Thanet council’s offices.
Cllr Mike Garner spoke to relay the concerns of residents, primarily around highways and parking.
He said: “This proposal would introduce at least 68 residents into a single building yet provides only 18 parking spaces. The appellant relies on comparison with another site, but there is no binding mechanism to restrict car ownership here.
“Even a modest level of car ownership would result in a substantial shortfall.
“This is further compounded by staff parking. The development requires on-site management and support staff, yet no clear provision has been made for them, nor for visitors, contractors, or healthcare workers. This demand has not been robustly assessed.
“The surrounding estate already experiences significant parking stress. Residents routinely struggle to park safely and legally. Additional demand will inevitably lead to overspill into surrounding roads, resulting in pavement parking, obstruction of visibility at junctions, and restricted access for emergency vehicles.”
He added that there was further highways stress from school traffic with St George’s school in the direct area and the additional impact of parking shortfall at the new Thanet Health Hub.
He also raised a lack of public transport options for patients attending the hub from Broadstairs.
Mrs McDonald was then grilled over her evidence ranging across the quality of transport links to estimated car ownership for occupants.
Points raised about Mrs McDonald’s statements lodged to support the council’s view that the scheme should not be approved ranged from car ownership figures, to the frequency and quality of bus services, whether there were day to day facilities within reach of residents, parking demand and availability, car club use and even the nature of residents at the HMO.
Mrs McDonald was forced to admit on several occasions that statements she had made had not been backed by evidence, with some even contradicting documents put forward by both Kent and Thanet councils.
Issue was raised that in regard to HMOs adequate parking should be available either on site or on street but Mrs McDonald said this was with smaller HMOs in mind.
Ms Clutten said nowhere did the policy indicate it was based on smaller HMOs and that this was just Mrs McDonald’s view and not backed by evidence, causing the inquiry inspector to query whether he was to rely on the council’s policy or Mrs McDonald’s personal view.
An assertion that parking was mandated in the Kent Parking Standards as one space per unit and 0.2 visitor spaces was also shot down when Ms Clutten said the parking standards quoted no such figure and in fact said it should be decided on an individual basis.
Public transport
Another assertion that public transport links were limited was also interrogated with Ms Clutten raising the Loop service – a 700m walk to the stop- was every eight to ten minutes from early morning to late evening plus services 34 and 35 with stops in a 150m walk. Ms Clutten said Mrs McDonald’s evidence stated the Loop ran every 15 to 30 minutes with Mrs McDonald saying the frequency had since changed. It was noted that service connectivity had scored 71 out of 100 according to a tool from the Department for Transport and so accessibility was reasonably high rather than limited.
‘Transient’
Another issue of contention was Mrs McDonald’s description of people likely to live at the HMO as being shift workers or contract workers and taking frequent short notice trips. When questioned on where the evidence was to support this, Mrs McDonald said there was “no evidence to say this was not the case” and the assessment was based on experience with ‘flatted developments and smaller HMOs.’ She added that smaller HMOs were more of a “home stay (with) people staying there a longer time” with larger scale HMOs meaning residents would be “more transient.”
When tackled on what evidence there was to support that claim, Mrs McDonald said it was a “personal view” and eventually conceded there was no available evidence.
Following a lunch break, questioning resumed with issues of car ownership numbers and surveys for on-street parking with 2011 census data used as a base.
Mrs McDonald said the 2011 census data is out of date and 2021 census data was skewed but Mc Clutten says this statement appeared nowhere in her written responses and she did not inform the applicant of this view and did not request the use of other data.
Car ownership figures
A disparity in the assumed car ownership numbers for the HMO was also raised. When the first application was submitted requesting an 84-bed HMO, Mrs McDonald said 30% car ownership was ‘a realistic assumption’ but in responses for the new reduced 68-bed application she said it would be 50% – equating to 34 cars. If it had been estimated at 30% it would result in 22 cars, leaving four to find on-street parking.
Ms Clutten asked whether this was based on evidence, policy or guidance or whether she had “plucked a figure out of the air.”
Mrs McDonald said the figure was a ‘place holder’ and she had made a ‘reasonable assumption’ but admitted there was no evidence produced to back up the claim.
Mrs McDonald said the change of car ownership figures was due to the subsequent approval of the neighbouring Thanet Health Hub although Ms Clutten said this had no relevance on car ownership by HMO residents.
Mrs McDonald admitted her interpretation of data from the census and car ownership in the ward did not give a representative figure.
Her tables showed 21% of people living in bedsits did not own a car based on ward data whereas Ms Clutten said the correct interpretation of data would show it was in fact 60%.
Mrs McDonald was forced to admit her data and tables were not reliable.
It was also established that Thanet council’s refusal of the application had partly been based on Mrs McDonald’s written advice that the dismissal of appeal against a 21-bed HMO at Kent House was partly due to parking overspill. This claim was shown to be incorrect with parking not forming any of the reasons for dismissal.
Mrs McDonald’s initial assessment said 16 cars could not be accommodated in the HMO scheme’s parking whereas Ms Clutten says the data shows it would be four to six vehicles.
There was further dispute over whether any overspill of parking would be acceptable and what the levels of parking stress were, with Ms Clutten saying a parking survey showed there was acceptable on-street provision for parking at least 30 vehicles.
Mrs McDonald said there was already unsafe parking in the area which further cars would exacerbate. Ms Clutten questioned why, in that case, KCC was taking no action such as implementing double yellow lines.
Pedestrians
Concerns were raised by Mrs McDonald that 68 extra residents would increase pedestrian activity and risk of injury through road crossing.
The applicant has agreed to install a crossing at Northwood Road but Ms Clutten raised that the current lawful use of the building is for 85 people, meaning the HMO would be a reduction in pedestrian numbers.
Mrs McDonald disagreed and pointed out Northwood Court has not actually been used for any residents for at least eight years.
Car clubs, travel plans and services demand
The scheme also proposes to introduce a car club and a travel plan.
Mrs McDonald had said car clubs are most effective when established, Ms Clutten responded that car clubs could not be launched in any new area if being established was a requirement.
Mrs McDonald suggested the car club would not work because a HMO would generate too much demand for a single shared vehicle but in another point suggested that location meant there would not be enough demand. At the enquiry she admitted this was contradictory.
Mrs McDonald’s comments about travel plans not working for large HMOs was shown to contradict Kent County Council’s published policy which requires those plans for HMOs with more than 100 rooms.
Delivery and service requirements were raised with Ms Clutten questioning how Mrs McDonald concluded that the application for 85 Thanet Earth workers to use the building would result in less service demand – such as online shopping deliveries- than 68 people living in the same building.
Mrs McDonald said this was based on the way people lived, with Thanet Earth residents all working at the same place as opposed to 68 HMO residents. Ms Clutten said this would not make a difference to shopping habits for online/takeaway deliveries.
The enquiry will resume tomorrow (March 26). It is being headed by M Boniface MSc, MRTPI and is scheduled for 4 sitting days.
The decision is expected to be issued on or before 8 May.
I believe currently the building is being used to accommodate migrants from what I saw last week…
Well if I ever need legal representation I’ll be looking up Ms Clutton. Sounds like she had done her homework… Unlike the planner who sounds like she needs to go back to college to learn about evidence-based practice.
Looks like much subjectivity led to the refusal.
And isn’t this on the same site as the new health hub? Parking and transport was a serious concern during those proposals but was waived thru by Polly, TDC et al.
At least this HMO will be managed. Unlike the HMO near my house, in a totally unsuitable building, unlike this one. Small units for dwellings are in serious demand. This site looks ideal.
No, it’s a separate site although obviously was part of the university campus.It’s on the other side of Millennium Way to the Innovation Centre and the medical centre where there are plenty of parking spaces for those attending for medical appointments.
I do appreciate the importance of this debate but my eye was immediately drawn to the phrase “Mrs McDonald was grilled.” I had a little snigger anyway 😊
No, Ms McDonald did a slap happy job.My focus would be “intended” and “might” , the car club and ridecsharing does noy exist and may never exist.There is no compulsion on the HMO residents to use public transport, but there is ample evidence to show where there are limited spaces for residents in flats or HMOs there will.be lots of illegal, on pavement parking,and what is known as fly parking.Has Ms McDonald done her job, the lawyer’s guns would have been spiked.
It’s what I have been saying about KCC for some time.They work from home, do not visit the sites properly and this is the result.
Working from home and not visiting a site are not correlated.
That kind of archaic presenteeism belongs in the past George. Alongside resolute M to F full time in the office nonsense.
The competence of this, and local government competence in general, has nothing to do with hybrid work. Perhaps if local government could enter the century they’d benefit from the part time remote talent keen to work in public service. There isnt a shred of evidence to suggest that being glued to some crappy desk, in a crumbling building with poor parking facilities makes you any better at your job.
You ate in cloud cuckoo land, assumably defending a cosy wfh arrangement and having no need try and get such employees out to make a visit.
Wfh at council and county council level is a disaster, tdc stopped telephone contact with such officers because of the endlees occasions where dogs wee on walks, washing up being done telly/radio on in background.
Firmly esconsed on the sofa officers see site visits as an inconvenience to avoided rather than the excuse to get out of the office they once were. Before covid tdc had some departments that had work from home days, christened by the staff as laundry and duvet days.
I agree
Ms Clutton has not used the loop,because 8 to 10 minutes is a target not an actuality.If something happens on the loop,and it does, the buses bunch and you may not get a bus for half an hour, then 3 turn up.The loop is great but Thanet is a dysfunctional traffic system, especially with Westwood cross nearby, another “expert traffic planner’s” scheme. I don’t know about the other bus routes, but they will be hub and spoke operations and probably hourly.What about furniture deliveries and removals? These are not forever homes, people come and go,on a transient basis.What about visitors, friends,family,etc. Or is the HMO some kind of closed order? Will they all come by bus? Deliveries.If it was apartments the building would generate much less traffic.Ms Clutton is using the old lawyers trick of semantics by making the inreasonable seem reasonable.I doubt if Ms Clutton will be living in an HMO.
Setting aside the dickensian aspect of cramming 28 people into a space fit for less than 14, with all that says about privacy, and well being. If the appeal is successful, it’s going to be a gift that keeps on giving for years, in terms of social discord, don’t you think Thanet has suffered enough.All because a KCC officer can’t be rrrsed to do her job properly. What was TDC doing? They know this was on the horizon, this is what develooers do, did no one go through the evidence in some detail?
As for managed do me a favour.They will manage to extract maximum rent out of people needing a home.HMO’s don’t solve housing problems, they make them worse, and you wonder why populists get elected!
This was the opening day so I assume TDCs evidence was later and hence not included in this report.
Not a good start though is it Jenny.I assume that both TDC and KCC put their heads together on this, or did both parties orbit around the issue, without discussing it in some detail. Normally the legal team would test the evidence, and where it was lacking, look fir the misding corroboration.
I do hooe TDC make a better fist of it.
Plus what sort of hmo is it going to be if as per mr garners comments it needs on site management and support staff along with vists from healthcare staff.
Blimey the planning department really is looking incompetent. Can’t say i’m surprised. I’ve only had to deal with them once and they were frankly appalling. I avoid doing anything that requires planing permission or listed building consent just so I don’t have to deal with them again.
As some flats are nearly £1000.00 a month and just not affordable for people, moving forward this is a great idea.
People need to be housed. This is going to be the norm moving forward. People need cheaper accommodation.
I myself am looking forward to applying to live here.