®Planning appeal decision
San Clu Hotel, Victoria Parade, Ramsgate, CT11 8DT
Planning appeal 3370118 at San Clu Hotel, Victoria Parade, Ramsgate, CT11 8DT (Thanet District Council) was dismissed on 16 April 2026 by Inspector Bristow T, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effects of the proposal in respect of historic integrity.
described on the application form as the ‘ Erection of a five storey extension, opening up of existing basement, to provide 19 self-contained residential units, spa, coffee shop, function room and conference facilities, following the creation of a new entrance and demolition of an existing extension and out building’.1
- Authority
- Thanet District Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Other Major Developments
- Inspector
- Bristow T
- Postcode
- CT11 8DT
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effects of the proposal in respect of historic integrity
- the effects of the proposal in respect of the living conditions of the occupants of nearby properties
What decided it
The heritage harm arising from the design of the extension, particularly the clumsy glazed link and failure to respect the historic building's hierarchy and symmetry, combined with the adverse effects on neighbouring living conditions, could not be justified by the social, economic and environmental benefits proposed.
The less than substantial heritage harm to the listed building and conservation area, together with the meaningful adverse effects on neighbouring living conditions, outweighed the social, economic and environmental benefits of housing delivery, tourism facilities and biodiversity net gain, particularly as the benefits were not demonstrated to be intrinsically reliant on this specific scheme.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- SP36HE02HE03QD02QD03SP04E07E08H01
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 73Paragraph 78Paragraph 85Paragraph 124Paragraph 125Paragraph 129Paragraph 130Paragraph 135Paragraph 202Paragraph 212Paragraph 213Paragraph 215Paragraph 219
- Judgments
- Daejan Properties Ltd v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the London Borough of Camden (ref. AC-2025-LON-000526)
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 2026
- Allowed28 August 20253365495Land to the North East of Preston Road Adjoining Preston Caravan Park, Preston Road, Ramsgate, Kent, CT12 5AR
- Dismissed9 April 2025335682425 Wellington Crescent, Ramsgate, Kent, CT11 8JD
- Dismissed9 April 2025335682125 Wellington Crescent, Ramsgate, Kent, CT11 8JD
- Dismissed12 March 20253349417Land Rear of Honeysuckle Inn, 31 Honeysuckle Road, Ramsgate, Kent, CT11 8AA
- Dismissed17 January 20253342693162 Botany Road , Broadstairs , Kent , CT10 3SE
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.