The Judicial Review brought by the Save Princes Parade over the planning permission for the development of Princes Parade (Hythe) has been lost.
The judicial review was brought against Folkestone & Hythe District Council and was heard in late March 2020.
We understand the Save Princes Parade Group will have to pay £5,000 in costs to the Council, money they do not have a spokesperson has stated.
The SPP are now weighing up the judgement as they believe there are a “myriad of other irregularities” which may allow them to appeal the JR decision.
The Treasurer of the Save Princes Parade Group released the following statement earlier today.
“Justice Dove has dismissed our Judicial Review claim to declare the Council’s planning permission for the development on Princes Parade illegal, naturally we are very disappointed.
We are very grateful for all your support, donations, signing the petition and lodging your objections and we are upset that it hasn’t produced a positive result.
The full judgment will be put on the Save Princes Parade website later today for you to see.
We feel the Judge has got it wrong. Our solicitors and barrister feel that Justice Dove’s explanation for his dismissal was superficial and lacked detail. We have requested leave to appeal.
We argued two principal grounds: the Council should have carried out the required sequential test for flooding (which they did not) and the members of the Planning Committee should have been advised of the significant harm the development would cause to the Scheduled Ancient Monument (which they were not).
There are a myriad of other irregularities, inconsistencies and errors in the Council’s planning application and we feel it is worth pursuing them. We will now review the judgement in detail and consider our next steps to Save Prince’s Parade – the Fight Continues.”
The proposed development of Princes Parade is the most ridiculous idea ever. FHDC just ride roughshod over everyone in the Council’s area! They ignore what they don’t want to acknowledge as being legitimate reasons for NOT proceeding with a development!
The proposed site is an anomaly in flood planning terms. It conveniently sits on land in the lowest flood risk category but is surrounded on all sides by the highest risk category. It is effectively an island. The only reason its (might) pass the sequential test is due to the sea wall. Therefore someone (F&HDC, EA, Gov ???) would need to indemnify all property owners based on the sea wall being fully maintained, never being breached, and viable under all climate change scenarios long in to future (100 years).
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
The proposed development of Princes Parade is the most ridiculous idea ever. FHDC just ride roughshod over everyone in the Council’s area! They ignore what they don’t want to acknowledge as being legitimate reasons for NOT proceeding with a development!
The proposed site is an anomaly in flood planning terms. It conveniently sits on land in the lowest flood risk category but is surrounded on all sides by the highest risk category. It is effectively an island. The only reason its (might) pass the sequential test is due to the sea wall. Therefore someone (F&HDC, EA, Gov ???) would need to indemnify all property owners based on the sea wall being fully maintained, never being breached, and viable under all climate change scenarios long in to future (100 years).
Is it possible to demand a referendum to consider it future?
The legal process has been done and whatever you think and say the new pool is going to happen so get over it and move on!