A new planning application has been submitted for the redevelopment of the Ashford International Social Club site.
The proposal for thirty-four 1 and 2 bedroom apartments follows the refusal of an application in 2021 for a replacement social club facility with thirty-one apartments in two blocks of five and three storeys. The primary reason for refusal being:
“The proposed development, by reason of its inappropriate height, scale and massing would comprise over-development of the site that would fail to promote high quality design or complement or respond to the prevailing character of the area.”
Norman Road elevation of 2021 proposal
The latest proposal comprises two four storey buildings. Block A facing Beaver Road comprises 19 apartments, Block B facing Norman Road 15 apartments.
Image of latest proposal from the corner of Beaver Road
The documents reveal that a advice was given by planning officers early this year that a proposal for forty-three apartments was unlikely to be approved for reasons including:
The height and scale of both buildings would fail to appropriately respond to the prevailing heights of surrounding buildings and be harmful to the local townscape, and
Concern about the ability for the site to sustainably accommodate the quantum of development proposed and potential over-development of the site. This would not represent efficient or optimal use of land and would be in conflict with a number of national and local planning policies
View of latest proposal from Norman Road
The current proposal includes 38 parking spaces, 11 of which are accessible.
Site plan of latest proposal
Full details can be examined on the Ashford Borough Council planning website, Case Ref: PA/2024/2033
Ashford Borough Council is preparing a new Local Plan for the borough and is inviting local communities to get involved in the process.
The council is holding a series of events throughout the summer to provide residents with the opportunity to find out more about how the new Ashford Local Plan will be prepared, what it will cover, what stage are we at, and when we will go out to formal public consultation.
Attendees will be able to share their aspirations for the borough, as well as frustrations, on matters such as the environment, future needs for local housing, jobs, green spaces, and both existing and new infrastructure as well as a whole range of other topics that fall with the remit of planning.
A Local Plan provides the opportunity to shape the places that we live, work and socialise. It addresses the needs for housing and employment, and provides a series of planning policies covering many other topics such as community facilities and infrastructure, the natural and historic environment, adapting to climate change and achieving well designed places.
Although the general principle of the plan is to encourage growth within the economy of Ashford, our Local Plan will also seek to protect Ashford’s valued assets including our landscapes, heritage, and open spaces for leisure and nature.
Once adopted, the policies within a Local Plan are used as the starting point to decide planning applications for future development.
Simon Cole, Assistant Director for Planning and Development said: “Everyone is affected by planning so it’s important to get involved and have your say. These events are intended to explain the process and provide an opportunity to meet the planning team.
“You can find out where sites have been put forward by land owners, ask questions and leave feedback. By working together with residents and other stakeholders at this early stage, as well as throughout the later formal consultations, we can ensure that appropriate development delivers the affordable homes and infrastructure that our borough needs.”
The council is holding a total of eight ‘in person’ community events across the borough throughout July and August. These events will be followed by two virtual events in late August/early September for those who are unable or prefer not to attend in person.
The events are intended to be ‘drop in’ sessions open to all members of the community and residents may attend any of the events in any of the locations.
The council will review and collate all the feedback received during the community events, which will be used to gain a better understanding of key local issues and, where appropriate, inform the content of the draft version of the new Local Plan.
New proposals have emerged for the Coneybeare Site
Ashford Borough Council are consulting on revised proposals for the site between Torrington Road and Eastmead Avenue. The west of the site was previously used as allotments and the east for the light industrial premises of Coneybeare & Company.
The Council consulted on a proposal for the site in 2022 but have now produced revised proposals including 16 apartments and 12 houses plus a community hub for a ‘men-in-sheds’ organisation. The commercial element of the previous scheme has been omitted and open space element extended.
A concern that has long restricted the development of the site is poor access. This previously being limited to the Coneybeare access from Torrington Road and a narrow passage at the east end of Eastmead Avenue. The new proposal shows the main access across the site of Eastmead House, previously the premises of Alpha Blinds.
The next meeting of South Ashford Community Forum will be
at 7:30pm
on 24 April 2024
at Christchurch Community Hall
Christchurch Road, Ashford, TN23 7XB
Please note the change of venue and time
this is due to St. Francis Hall being out of use
There is restricted parking at Christchurch. A Brownie group have a meeting ending at 7:00 pm. Please do not enter the building until the children have left and leaders have cleared away.
The meeting will be held as a Committee Meeting to which all residents of the Community Forum area are invited. The format will be a round table discussion to which all attendees have the opportunity to contribute.
We are aware that an event is happening at the Civic Centre and our Councillors may not be able to attend.
Agenda
Welcome Sign in Apologies
Minutes of meeting of 24 January 2024 Matters arising
Although consultation has not opened on the proposed sites for inclusion in the Local Plan to 2041, we will start to draw opinions on those in South Ashford.
The table below lists all in Beaver, Norman And Victoria Wards.
HELAA Site reference
Call for Sites Consultation Portal Response ID
Address
Ward
CF Area
HELAA/LP41/198
1178822
Land at St Stephen’s Walk and Stanhope Road, Ashford, TN23 5BD
Beaver
South
HELAA/LP41/103
1178424
Land south of Asda, A2042, Ashford, TN24 0SD
Norman
South
HELAA/LP41/146
1178675
Land off Norman Road and Romney Marsh Road, Ashford, Kent, TN24 0SD
Norman
South
HELAA/LP41/163
1178745
Land south of Norman Rd, Ashford TN23 7DG
Norman
South
HELAA/LP41/188
1178800
Coneybeare, Eastmead Avenue, Ashford, TN23 7SB
Norman; Victoria
South
HELAA/LP41/210
1178916
Old Stanhay Works, Ashford, TN23 7HE
Victoria
South
HELAA/LP41/211
1178920
1 Victoria Road, Ashford, TN23 7HE
Victoria
South
HELAA/LP41/217
1178959
Beaver Road, Ashford, TN23 7RR
Victoria
South
HELAA/LP41/221
1178984
26 Bank Street, Ashford, Kent, TN23 1BE
Victoria
South
HELAA/LP41/061
1178083
Kent House, Station Road, Ashford, TN23 1PJ
Victoria
Central
HELAA/LP41/169
1178756
County Square Shopping Centre, Elwick Road, Ashford, TN23 1YB
A planning application for the 90 dwelling East Stour Park development and an associated application for the site opposite the Ashford Designer Outlet have been withdrawn.
The developer initially proposed a development of 240 apartments for the site at the junction of Romney Marsh Road and Norman Road at a Public Consultation Event in March 2019. An application was submitted in May 2019, reducing the development to 212 apartments. On 19 February 2019, Ashford Borough Council’s Planning Committee rejected the application by a 15:1 majority vote (against the officer’s recommendation), ABC Case ref :19/00709/AS. The developer appealed against the decision in July 2020. The appeal hearing took place virtually in April 2021 and the inspector dismissed the appeal on 2 December 2021.
In October 2022 the developer submitted a new application, reducing the number of units to 80 in three blocks of five storeys, later increased to 90 units, ABC Case Ref: PA/2022/2669.
An outline application was submitted in January 2023 for a Community Centre, supplementary to the residential development, ABC Case Ref: PA/2023/0065.
Both the 90 unit residential development and the community centre applications have been marked as withdrawn on the ABC planning website this month.
A planning application has been submitted to Ashford Borough Council for the construction of seven flats within the grounds of the Fish Inn (previously The Crusader) in Brookfield Road.
It is proposed that part of the existing building, the garages and storage container are demolished and a new building, named Crusader House, of single storey to the front rising to three storeys at the rear, would be wrapped round the south end and rear of the existing building.
The Ashford Borough Council planning case reference is PA/2023/2038
Comments can be made via the ABC planning website by tapping the link above.
Public consultation launched on plans to develop derelict land at the rear of Eastmead Avenue
Ashford Borough Council’s housing services team is proposing to develop unused land at the rear of Eastmead Avenue which often attracts flytipping and anti-social behaviour. The council is proposing to create a multi-purpose site which will include a community project aimed at combating isolation in older people; a brand new parkland area; additional parking, a small number of commercial units for startup businesses; and 35 affordable homes comprising of a mixture of houses, flats and town houses, which will be the enabler for the other proposed improvements.
The site at the rear of Eastmead Avenue is a derelict patch of land that is currently overgrown and drab and has become an area unfortunately used for fly-tipping and antisocial behaviour. It is no longer allotment land, having been declassified by the Government for the purpose of potential development some time ago. It is currently divided in two. There is land that was previously used for allotment gardens to the west of the site, and to the east there is hard standing which was previously used by the Coneybeare Engineering Company.
The site has the potential to provide better green space, much-needed affordable homes and community facilities. It is also well placed to make use of the cycle lanes into town and those which also encourage further exploration of Ashford and the surrounding areas.
As the image shows, the Council are hoping to develop the site into distinct but linked areas:
A park and enhanced green space as shown towards the bottom of the image.
A community area for the Community Sheds Project, also referred to as ‘Shedders’ and ‘Men in Sheds’. This project aims to tackle isolation and loneliness in older people, providing them a space to connect, converse and create. We are committed to delivering this project as part of our site< and have been liaising with the local ward member about this.
A commercial area, with sensitively clad shipping containers offering a place for small business start-ups to trade. We are keen to understand your views on this and there is a specific question in the consultation document relating to this part of the proposal.
Affordable housing, as shown at the top of the image. This is proposed to be a mixture of both houses and flats (note that the drawing above shows the requisite number of storeys on the apartment block to deliver 29 homes in total). We are committed to delivering much-needed homes but are keen to understand your views on the proposals.
Site access
There are a number of access routes onto the site, but vehicular access is potentially limited. As the image below shows, routes onto the site are currently as follows:
Two footpaths from Torrington Road. One is under a public space protection order (PSPO) and is gated. The other is there so that residents can access their rear gardens. PSPOs are designed to deal with issues in a particular area, which is affecting the local community’s quality of life.
One footpath from Eastmead Avenue, which forms the current public access under the PSPO. This is passable and currently gives access to rear gardens.
There is potentially vehicular access from Eastmead Avenue, although overgrown shrubbery would need to be cleared to assess this.
The housing services team have taken this vision through the pre application process with the planning department.
This stage provides detailed feedback on the application to help progress it and develop it into something that is worthwhile that will benefit the community.
The feedback received suggested that housing try to link the housing, parking and the community aspects together more, rather than them being individual elements within the one site. Planners felt that they could make more of the cycle paths in the area and encourage their use more. Therefore, they also questioned whether our initial ideas to create additional parking to help with the congestion on the surrounding roads of terraced properties was actually required. If they did proceed with the parking they were asked to consider if it would be allocated and managed. What are your views?
Finally, they were asked to consider if there would be enough footfall for the viability of the proposed commercial section of the site. Management of the commercial element is not straightforward for the council and this would require some thought from us. However, are there any alternative uses for this section of the site that would lend itself to this location that we have not yet thought of?
Would you like to see some small-scale business use in this area? Alternatively, what would you like to see there?
Your feedback
Your views will help the Council to determine how they proceed.
What do you think of the number of homes?
What do you think about the parking?
What do you think about the proposed commercial use?
They would really welcome your feedback on the initial vision for the site.
You can respond to the consultation questionnaire on the hard-copy provided and post it back to the council or you can visit our consultation portal and respond online. If you leave your details any questions you raise can be answered.
The Council have given responses to some of the feedback received to date.
Thank you so much to those who have taken the time to respond to the first stage of our consultation on possible proposals for the site between Eastmead Avenue and Torrington Road. We genuinely appreciate you taking the time to respond as it is only by understanding the thoughts and concerns of the community that we can adapt the plans and deliver something meaningful on the site. At the end of the consultation we will take away the responses submitted so far and look at the plans again. We will then consult the community for a second time in the coming months. This will be done ahead of any planning application being submitted. There will then be a third opportunity for residents to comment more formally through the planning application process.
There have been lots of points raised during the consultation and we wanted to address them all and let everyone who responded see the points that had been made and our initial reaction to them, ahead of us revisiting the proposals ahead of the second stage of consultation. Please note that we will not be able to change everything but when we put forward the proposals a second time we will be able to say why we have changed things or why we are unable to change them.
We are really pleased that so many of you who responded said that it would be good to see the patch of land put to good use. We are also pleased to see the support expressed for the Shedders project, which is something that we will be delivering on the site. We also are pleased that the parkland area received much praise from those who have responded as we seek to create a really lovely place for those who already live nearby as well as those whom we are hoping could also be housed in the area.
Parking – inadequate on surrounding roads and site
We knew that parking would be a contentious matter and as we stated in the original documentation, we had originally looked to over-provide parking spaces to alleviate congestion on surrounding roads but had been encouraged by planners to look at potentially not doing this and instead looking at making better use of the cycle lanes that exist in the area, offering access into the town. We note that many of you have raised parking concerns and will look at this aspect of the proposals again and see what balance can be struck.
Access – one road in
Access is another important aspect. We note comments made about the fact that only one road leads onto the site under our proposals and also that the access itself onto the site is reasonably tight towards the end of Eastmead Avenue. It is worth pointing out that this would meet planning demands but will again reconsider this aspect of the design. There may be alternative options which we need to pursue and we will feed back on these, but we appreciate the concern and the points raised on this matter, particularly from those who live towards the end of Eastmead Avenue where the proposed access currently is.
The thinking behind the access shown relates to the traffic control bollard in place on Beaver Road and not wanting to create a way to bypass this resulting in a busy through route.
Flats not in keeping with area, concerned about height, overlooking established gardens
We will look at this aspect of the design again. The length of the gardens had indicated in planning terms that the height of the flatted development could be higher than would ordinarily be expected. It would not be dictated by the existing street scene. We note the comments about flats not being in-keeping but of course given the limitations as to which parts of the site can accommodate housing due to the flood zones that exist on the site, this means that to make the affordable housing element viable we might need to introduce some flatted development to increase the number of homes that can be built as it is the rental income from the affordable housing that will ultimately determine the viability of the scheme. And of course with around 1,500 households on the waiting list we need to deliver as many homes as we can and build what we can to try and alleviate the demand.
There also central government drives to make efficient use of land, but this aspect must be design-led.
No vehicular access to units/men in sheds
We appreciate that at the moment there is limited access, but will look to enhance this as part of the wider plans for the site.
Poor cycling infrastructure
We believe that there is a good cycle lane route into the town centre from close to the site and we have been asked to explore this as a means of perhaps having fewer parking spaces on the site itself.
Privacy issues
We understand that people may be concerned about being overlooked when they have not been previously. We will look again at the storey heights of particularly the flatted development within the constraints we have as set out above. Overlooking is a material planning consideration that our architects will fully consider.
Noise
There will be additional noise during the construction phase. If plans are approved and contractors are appointed, then we will ensure that any contractor we work with will sign up to the considerate contractor scheme – as part of their work they seek to minimise disruption to the local community and, for example, keep noise and dust to a minimum. They cannot eliminate all disruption but will make sure this is kept to a minimum.
Light
We know that our architects carefully consider the tracking of the sun when designing any scheme to make sure that there is no major impact of light deprivation as a result of anything that we build.
Flooding
The flood zones that cut across the site are of course a determining factor in what we have proposed to build and where. The housing can only be delivered on the left-hand end of the site which means that we cannot address some of the points that have been made by residents in this first consultation. We are constrained by the flood zones and so that is why we need to look at some flatted development.& In the assessing of flood risk, commercial development is not as sensitive as residential development, which is why this has been included in the location shown. The design would provide natural active surveillance across as much of the site as possible to help address ASB. We will take another look at the options in light of some ideas that have been shared.
Vandalism in area
Some respondents raised concerns about potential vandalism in the area. Of course, it is our intention here to create a space that people will have great civic pride in, will look after, much more so than the existing space which attracts flytipping etc, and will be much enjoyed by everyone. Indeed, the existing piece of land has attracted antisocial behaviour and flytipping so this is very much intended to bring back some community pride in the space.
Long term viability of commercial units
We are interested in the comments on the commercial units – this requires greater thought from us. The spread of responses reflects the fact that it is an innovative idea but needs careful thought around footfall, viability and what happens if the scheme does not take off as intended. We will consider this further ahead of our second stage proposal.
Public footpath off Lower Denmark Road between 2 Rose Villas and Denmark Terrace should be reinstated
We will look into this suggestion further.
Wildlife
We will undertake all necessary ecological assessments to ensure that we are not displacing wildlife. Many of you have noted that the proposed parkland area to the right end of the site will be a beautiful place to visit and we would hope this will attract wildlife in a more sustainable way. Be assured the final proposals will protect existing ecology and increase net biodiversity.
Lack of GPs, hospital being overburdened
Of course, with any new housing comes with the concerns over stretching existing medical services. The council does liaise with healthcare partners and they have a say in responding to planning about proposals.
Why not building bungalows when there is a lack in Ashford.
We understand that bungalows are in high demand and indeed the Council is one of the only developers in the borough who is actually delivering them. The issue with bungalows is that they do require a lot of land, whereas houses take up a smaller space of course being on two or three levels. Flats are advantageous as they can work for older people too as they are level access. We have delivered a number of high quality spacious apartments with balconies or private outdoor space recently that have been well received.
We must stress that these are the initial proposals and that this is the first part of the community consultation and we will go away and consider all the views that have been expressed by residents who have been kind enough to engage with this part of the process. We will then consider these points before our second stage of consultation.
A public consultation on the proposed development of a new headquarters in Ashford for bicycle manufacturer Brompton
Quinn Estates have organised a public exhibition to give local residents and stakeholders an opportunity to see and discuss ther proposals. The aim is to understand the views and ideas of the stakeholders so that the scheme can reflect them.
The event will be held on:
at 4pm – 7pm
on Tuesday 29th March
at United Church Ashford Cade Road Ashford TN23 6JE
The proposed site of the development is the South Willesborough Dykes to the east of the A2042, Romney Marsh Road.
We have been informed by Ashford Borough Council that early removal of items from the Watercress Lane flats began yesterday. This is simply removal all of the fixtures and fittings inside the shell, including windows and doors on all but the ground floor. The demolition of the ‘superstructure’ of the building is not being started at this time. The building will still be secured at ground floor level until the final demolition is done.
The decision on the planning application for the proposed redevelopment is yet to be made. The planning application case number is 21/01250/AS
The developer’s Appeal against Ashford Borough Council’s decision to refuse permission for the “East Stour Park” development has been dismissed by the planning inspector.
Council Decision
Ashford Borough Council’s Planning Committee resolved to refuse the application to build on the Land at junction of Romney Marsh Road and north of, Norman Road, a site on Ashford’s Green Corridor, contrary to the planning officer’s recommendation, in February 2020.
The reason given or refusal was:
“The proposal would be contrary to Policies SP1 and ENV2 of the Ashford Local Plan (ALP) 2030, the Green Corridor Action Plan 2017 supporting the ALP and policies in the NPPF and would be harmful to interests of acknowledged planning importance for the following reasons;
the application site is located within the designated Ashford Green Corridor and the proposed residential development is not compatible with, or ancillary to, the principal role and current use of the application site and would be harmful to the existing visual function of this part of the Green Corridor through the loss of an important undeveloped open space ‘buffer’ located between the existing built-up area to the west and the A2042 located to the east,
as a consequence of (a) above, the proposal would result in a detrimental change to the landscape character and visual amenity of this part of the Green Corridor,
the proposal would give rise to a detrimental change in the ability of the site to continue to function as a wide undeveloped corridor supporting varied wildlife habitat, wildlife connectivity and biodiversity,
the proposal would result in unjustified residential development on land which is flood zone 3, and
the site is not a brownfield site and the proposal would not provide overriding planning benefits sufficient to outweigh the significant harms identified above.”
Appeal
The developer, Quinn Estates Ltd, appealed the decision in July 2020, requesting that the appeal was considered at a hearing (rather than by Written Representation).
After many delays due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the hearing was held virtually on 20 and 21st April of this year.
Appeal Decision
The Appeal Decision was received by South Ashford Community Forum, today, because we had submitted a representation and attended the hearing.
We reproduce some extracts of the decision below which we believe are relevant to future development proposals on this site and elsewhere on the Green Corridor:
Main issues
4. “There are three main issues in this case:
The effect of the proposal on the Ashford Green Corridor in policy terms.
The effect of the proposal on the Ashford Green Corridor in visual terms.
The effect of the proposal on the Ashford Green Corridor in wildlife terms.
All in relation to policies SP1 and ENV2 of the Ashford Local Plan (LP) 2030 and the Ashford Green Corridor Action Plan 2017 (AGCAP).”
The effect on the GC in policy terms
24. “Overall the existing site, as acknowledged by the appellant, is an important undeveloped gap. However, as I discuss below, I do not agree with the appellant’s conclusion that its contribution is at most low to medium. The proposed high density major residential development would neither be compatible with or ancillary to the main open space use. It therefore conflicts with the LP and the AGCAP.”
The effect on the GC in visual terms
31. “I appreciate the landscape proposals would introduce significant planting into the remaining area, and this is obviously a benefit. However I do not consider that this comes close to compensating for the loss of the openness of the site and its buffer function. I cannot accept the appellant’s conclusion that the introduction of a substantial residential development and managed parkland would lead to a heightened degree of tranquillity. Nor do I agree that the effect of the proposal would be highly localised, as the buffer function extends well beyond the site boundary.”
The effect on the GC in wildlife terms
39. “Overall the proposal would not harm the GC in wildlife terms, and would not conflict with LP policies SP1 and ENV2. But overall, due to my concern with potential disturbance, this matter is neutral in the planning balance.”
Other matter – the implications of the location in Flood Zone 3
42. “The Council accepts that the development would be safe and would diminish flood risk elsewhere and that it meets the exception test.”
43. “However, as noted by the Council, this does not mean that the grant of planning permission is automatic. The authority states that the proposal is unnecessary and unjustified.”
Other matter – housing land supply
46. “The position regarding the supply of land for housing changed in the period leading up to the Hearing. But at the Hearing it was confirmed by the Council that, for the purposes of the appeal, there was a 4.8 year supply – a small shortfall beneath the 5 year supply at which point the ‘tilted balance’ in the Framework would normally come into play.
47. However, the Framework provides that the tilted balance would only apply if and when an appropriate assessment had concluded that the proposal would not adversely affect the integrity of the protected sites.”
Planning documents
Ashford Borough Council’s Planning Case Reference is 19/00709/AS (tap to view all planning and appeal documents)
