More on KentOnline
More on KentOnline
Home Folkestone News Article
Bosses have warned access to one of Kent’s most popular attractions could be cut off if hundreds of new homes are not built there.
Controversial plans from multimillionaire Sir Roger De Haan for tower blocks on Folkestone’s harbour arm car park were snubbed by councillors last week - despite being recommended for approval.
But his Folkestone Harbour & Seafront Development Company (FHSDC) has already submitted revised proposals.
A cover letter for the application, written by estate agents Savills, says access to the harbour arm “as an amenity for the enjoyment of the public” is predicated on it getting the green light.
The area, a former ferry port, has been regenerated by Sir Roger through millions of pounds of investment. It now attracts hundreds of thousands of people every year, enjoying its bars, restaurants and markets.
The letter says: “The site is located on private land and was mostly inaccessible prior to the applicant's restoration of existing infrastructure and provision of newly installed pedestrian and vehicle access.
“The proposals included in this reserved matter application (RMA) include enhanced publicly accessible areas, parks, amenity spaces and gardens.
“The long-term provision of all these features relies on the revenues generated from the sale of new homes and the leases for commercial spaces in Plot G.”
This plot includes the harbour arm car park and The Goods Yard, home to independent street food businesses and bars.
The letter adds: “The site's ongoing accessibility as an amenity for the enjoyment of the public is predicated on this application receiving permission.”
But critics of the proposals say this “seems like an ultimatum” and are urging Sir Roger not to push ahead with the development.
The letter also says Savills has been instructed to appeal against the council's refusal.
But it adds: “However, the applicant hopes that the need for such an appeal could be averted by this resubmission, which includes amendments to the development that respond to the discussions and concerns raised by planning committee members.”
The revised application reduces the number of new homes by five to 405 and proposes an increase in visitor and commercial parking spaces from 328 to 500.
The original proposals were narrowly defeated, with five councillors voting in favour, four against and one abstention.
The committee members raised concerns that the housing provision did not meet local needs, the design was out of character and harmful to heritage assets, and that it would negatively impact the town's setting and nearby views.
The cover letter says the designs have already been “finessed” to better fit the harbour location and its heritage features.
It adds: “Many of the public realm improvements, building restoration, and place-making works comprised in the masterplan for the harbour and seafront have already been carried out by the applicant.
“The restoration of the station, customs house, and signal box were all completed by the applicant and will be paid for from the development, of which Plots F, G, and H are a critical part.
“Approval of this RMA will therefore secure the long-term retention and maintenance of these publicly accessible assets.”
The overall masterplan, first granted outline approval in 2015, allows for up to 1,000 homes to be built along Folkestone’s coastline.
However, while the overarching vision has been approved, detailed designs for each phase must still go before the council.
Although outline permission included approval for demolishing the harbour station and related buildings, FHSDC instead restored it.
The company has also dismissed claims that the development would damage the station, asserting that the project has “directly enabled the asset's retention”.
Mark Hourahane, vice chair of the New Folkestone Society, pointed out that the site was only fully closed to the public after being bought by FHSDC in 2004.
“It is a shame that the applicant is now suggesting that access to the station, harbour arm, and other existing facilities might hinge on the development going ahead,” he added.
Georgina Baker, who has campaigned against the plans, said: “It seems like an ultimatum, that if this development is not accepted the site will not be accessible for the public to enjoy as it is his private land.
“Roger De Haan would gain more respect by leaving this area alone. He will reverse all the good he has done by pushing through this development.
“Why can’t he see that this development is not wanted?”
The cover letter, submitted to the council this week, explains the financial impact the refusal could have on the rest of the town.
The application for Plots F, G & H includes more than £5 million of related Section 106 contributions.
FHSDC now warns that none of these will be paid if the new homes and 54 commercial units are not built.
The contributions include £1.7 million towards play space and primary education, £1.8 million towards improvements to the public realm, walking and cycling routes, and parking improvements and £318,000 towards the refurbishment of the Leas Lift.
The company states that the restoration of the Grade II*-listed funicular lift will be put into “jeopardy” if the plans are not approved.
Contractors have started clearing vegetation from the site, which has long been earmarked for restoration.
Floortje Hoette, chief executive officer of Folkestone Leas Lift Company Charity, said: “It would be very disappointing to have a shortfall in funding and it would put us in a challenging position.
“However, we have overcome many challenges over the last few years and have raised almost £7 million to restore the historically significant Leas Lift for the Folkestone community.
“We do not envisage any interruption to the planned restoration works.”
FHSDC was approached for a comment by KentOnline.
