Kentish Gazette Canterbury & District
We were kept in the dark over new student housing
Neighbours living near a site approved for new student housing claim they only found out “by chance” weeks after the plans were rubber-stamped by councillors.
Residents in Havelock Street say they have been kept in the dark and accuse the city council of failing to consult properly.
They also claim the new 28-bedroom development, on land between Old Ruttington Lane and Havelock Street, will push the council well above its 10% quota for student housing in a residential area.
The homes, nodded through by the planning committee on February 7, are six three-bedroom properties, two four-bedroom and one two-bedroom. Six will face onto Havelock Street.
The city council insists it publicised the planning application, but not in Havelock Street as “no addresses in the road abut the site.”,
Sean Sayers, who has lived in Havelock Street for 45 years, says he lives almost directly opposite the land,
“There was nothing posted on lampposts, no notifications – nobody knew about it,” he said.
“People living on the other side of the development in Old Ruttington Lane seem to have been notified as they made objections.
“Both streets are going to be affected, there will be houses facing both sides, more on ours.”
City council planning policy stipulates the number of student homes – or houses of multiple occupation (HMOS) – must make up only 10% within a 100metre radius to stop the community becoming “imbalanced”.
But this only relates to change of use and extensions of existing HMOS, not new builds.
Harry Blows, of the Havelock Street Community Group, says there is already a high proportion of students in the vicinity.
“The percentage of HMOS in Havelock Street is already in excess of 25%, and this development will push this to more than 34%,” he said.
“The adjoining residents were not personally notified of the planning application under the normal public consultation process.
“It was only by chance that in the last few weeks one of the residents happened to notice the record of the decision made by the planning committee.”
He said a complaint has been issued.
But city council spokesman Robert Davies says the authority has no duty to write to any residents, instead choosing to do so.
“This planning application was advertised in the Kentish Gazette, on our website, through a notice on-street and in writing to a number of addresses that abut the development site,” he said.
“These included Broad Street, Monastery Street and Old Ruttington Lane, but not Havelock Street because no addresses in this road abut the site.”