®Planning appeal decision
1 Fort Mount, Margate, Kent, CT9 1HQ
Planning appeal 3345356 at 1 Fort Mount, Margate, Kent, CT9 1HQ (Thanet District Council) was allowed in part (a split decision) on 16 June 2025 by Inspector Shields T, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Ground (d): whether the works to the building were urgently necessary in the interests of safety or health or for the preservation of the building, that it was not practicable to secure safety, health or preservation by works of repair or temporary support/shelter, and that the works carried out were limited to the minimum measures immediately necessary.
internal partition alterations, structural works to rear basement wall, removal of chimney breast to all floors together with installation of 1 No. rooflight to rear roof slope, installation of casement window to first floor rear elevation and installation of casement window to lower ground floor rear extension together with repointing of rear flint elevation and paint to front elevation
- Authority
- Thanet District Council
- Appeal type
- other · Listed Building Consent & Conservation Area Consent Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- residential · Householder developments
- Inspector
- Shields T
- Postcode
- CT9 1HQ
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Ground (d): whether the works to the building were urgently necessary in the interests of safety or health or for the preservation of the building, that it was not practicable to secure safety, health or preservation by works of repair or temporary support/shelter, and that the works carried out were limited to the minimum measures immediately necessary
- Ground (e): the effect of the works on the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building
- Ground (g): whether the notice requirements exceed what is necessary for restoring the building to its condition before the works were carried out
- Ground (h): whether the period specified in the notice falls short of what should reasonably be allowed
- Appeal B: the effect of the proposed works on the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building
What decided it
The unjustified loss of historic chimney breasts and disruption of the building's historic single-cell plan form and staircase caused significant harm to the listed building's special interest that was not outweighed by the minor public benefits advanced.
the minor public benefits advanced (heritage benefit of restoring long-term viability) did not outweigh the significant, less-than-substantial harm to the listed building's special interest, and the wider public interest in preservation outweighed the occupiers' personal/HRA circumstances
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy HE03
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 213Paragraph 215
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Thanet
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025
- Notice varied and upheld28 May 20263327546Little Upton, Vale Road, Broadstairs, Kent, CT10 2JJ
- Planning permission granted22 May 20263344673The Dolphin Public House, 53-55 Albion Street, Broadstairs, Kent, CT10 1NE
- Notice varied and upheld22 May 2026334467153 Albion Street, Broadstairs, Kent, CT10 1NE
- Notice varied and upheld17 March 2026332898543 - 45 High Street, Broadstairs, Kent, CT10 1JR
- Notice varied and upheld2 February 202633289895 Beach Mews, Broadstairs, Thanet, Kent, CT10 1JQ
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.