‘Ongoing public access’ to Folkestone harbour arm threatened if 410 new homes not built

Updated 12/02/25 @ 12:52

Sir Roger De Haan, a man who is “uncompromising when he sets his mind to something“,  has via his company and agent, resubmitted revised plans for Folkestone Harbour Arm under a new reserved matters planning application – 25/0158/FH

Planning permission for the first application 24/0505/FH was refused by Folkestone & Hythe District Council planning committee by five votes to four on the 21/01/25. The planning committee’s decision notice is dated the 30 Jan 2025.  However, two days earlier 28/01/25, Folkestone Harbour (GP) Ltd, owned by Sir Roger De Haan, according to Companies House, made an new application with revised plans for Folkestone Harbour Plots F,G & H. The revised reserved matters application was submitted one day before the planning permission – for the whole site – was due to lapse on the 29/01/25.

Within the application documents is a Covering Letter written by Savills, for and on behalf of their client, Sir Roger De Haan (pictured). The letter states:

“We have instructions to appeal against the Council’s refusal.”

It goes onto say

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 during the planning committee meeting.

The covering letter also says:

“The site’s ongoing accessibility as an amenity for the enjoyment of the public is predicated on this application receiving permission”

and furthers says:

This application includes the provision of enhanced publicly accessible public realm instead of development on Plot G2. This offer to provide public access to the Plot G2 site is only possible if permission is granted.

In response  to the revised planning application, 25/0158/FH, Mark Hourahane, Vice Chair of the New Folkestone Society (pictured) has said:

“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,”.

The covering letter goes onto say:

Discussions between members of the Planning Committee relating to the history and character of the station were misguided and poorly informed by local pressure groups.

One of these “local pressure groups”  who were supposedly “misguided“, especially about the Heritage of the site, was the New Folkestone Society, mentioned by Cllr Mike Blakemore (Green) at the planning committee hearing on the 21 Jan 2025.

 

It is not the first time housing has been proposed on the Harbour arm. Back in 1989, Sea Containers Property Services Ltd – ultimately owned in the offshore tax haven of Bermuda at the time, made a planning application for housing on the site, under SH/89/1352. The application was quaintly called, The Folkestone Harbour Village. It was for 409 – 1,2 & 3 bedroom apartments, and 97 – 3 & 4 bedroom apartments with moorings, total of 506  apartments. It also proposed a leisure centre of 22,000 sq ft and a festival centre of the same size.

Now for those of you who like your history regarding Sir Roger De Haan, back in 1993, he made it clear, SAGA, of which he was the Group Chairman at the time, implied SAGA “may quit” Folkestone, if planing permission for the Saga Enbrook building was not given. 

In an article published by the Folkestone Herald (1993), Sir Roger is quoted as saying:

“We may have to move out of Shepway altogether which is the last thing we want to do” he added “We would be very reluctant to move to another district, but we may have to if we don’t get [Planning] permission at Enbrook. That’s not a threat, just sheer reality.“

After nearly two years worth of discussions with the Council, the planning notice for 95/0181/SH was published on the 14/03/95. Planning Permission for was granted on 12 Jan 1996, for the new SAGA headquarters (pictured) at Enbrook park in Sandgate.

Back to application 25/0158/FH, the revised plans increases the proportion of visitor/ commercial parking from 328 spaces to 500 parking spaces. However, the covering letter also makes clear

“410 homes are proposed in this application, of which 53 homes are proposed to be Shared Ownership. This equates to 13% shared ownership and meets the outline planning permission requirement for 8% across all phases. This phase has a substantially higher ratio of affordable homes compared to all previous phases, which have already received RMA approval.2

Attached to the outline planning application is £5,159m of related section 106 contributions. Perchance the application for F, G & H at the second bite of the cherry does not get approval, none of this has to be paid. 

That’s not a threat, just sheer reality. And let’s not forget, Sir Roger can appeal if his application is denied at the second time of asking. Given what has happened previously, we suspect, he will.

So, whether you are for or against the second application – 25/0158/FH – Plots F1, F2, G1, G2 and H on the Harbour Arm, do feel free to comment on the reserved matters application.

In the interest of transparency, we publish the land/property owned Folkestone Harbour Nominee (1) Ltd, whose person of significant control is Sir Roger, according to Companies House. The data was published by the land registry on 3 Jan 2025.

Land owned by Folkestone Harbour Nominee (1) Ltd

Finally, Sir Roger is a man who doesn’t understand the words “No”, or “Can’t”, according to Trevor Minter – AKA – Ming the Merciless, who previously worked for Sir Roger before retirement. 

The Shepway Vox Team

Journalism for the People NOT the Powerful