Folkestone & Hythe District Council Portfolio Holder Reports: Otterpool Park, Budget Pressures, Parking Changes and Housing Costs Explained

Folkestone & Hythe District Council’s Full Council will receive its latest set of Portfolio Holder reports on Wednesday 28 January 2026 as Agenda Item 9 — a familiar “round-the-table” snapshot of what Cabinet members say has been happening across planning, finance, community work, transport, regeneration, climate, waste and housing. What stands out this month is a council that is plainly active on multiple fronts, but which often reports activity rather than outcomes, and occasionally leans on “commercial sensitivity” or simply provides no update at all where residents might reasonably expect one.

Planning: more work brought in-house — and a new local plan still waiting on Whitehall

The Leader’s planning policy update is heavy on process. We’re told the council has a number of Planning Performance Agreements (PPAs) — paid, timetabled arrangements intended to help major planning applications move through the system — and that, whereas these had previously been outsourced, they are now being handled in-house. That is potentially significant: PPAs can improve speed and coordination, but they also raise public questions about transparency and whether “customer service for applicants” sits comfortably alongside impartial decision-making. The report does not say how many PPAs exist, what income they generate, or what performance is being achieved. 

Alongside this, the planning policy team continues work on HELAA (the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment) — the longlist exercise which tests whether submitted sites might be suitable for homes or jobs. The report confirms there were two “calls for sites” earlier in the year and that those sites are being assessed, but gives no timetable for publication or for how the public will see the evidence. Meanwhile, the council says it is working on a new Local Plan under the post-2023 planning system, but adds that it has been waiting for government regulations and guidance while undertaking “background evidence work” — in other words: progress, but still partly at the mercy of Westminster’s rulebook. 

Otterpool Park: “critical stage”, but the public is asked to accept less detail

On Otterpool Park, the tone becomes cautious. The Leader calls the project “at a critical stage” but says they are “limited” in what can be said due to commercial sensitivity. There is a long list of stakeholders being met — MPs, Kent County Council, neighbouring council leaders, Homes England, developers, consultants, and parish representatives. That may reassure some residents that lines of communication are open; others will hear an implication that key decisions are approaching while the public narrative is, deliberately, thin. 

The report’s most concrete item is that the Waste Water Treatment Works planning application has been validated by KCC — yet “progress is painfully slow”. It also references discussions with Ashford and Canterbury about phosphates and nitrates affecting the River Stour, and asserts that the works “will clean the water in the Stour as it passes through Otterpool”. That is a striking claim in a short paragraph: councillors would be wise to pin down what “clean” means in measurable terms, what standards apply, and how impacts are being assessed. 

Finance: a less-bad settlement — but a tougher road ahead and big “unknowns”

The Finance and Governance portfolio is refreshingly candid in parts. Councillor Prater says the Provisional Local Government Settlement was “not as bad as our worst fears” for this year, but “progressively harder / worse” in the coming years, and flags Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) costs as a major pressure in the next two years. That is the sort of forward-looking warning residents rarely get in plain language — but it is still a warning without figures attached.

He outlines the committee trail before budget approval (Finance and Performance Sub-Committee, Overview & Scrutiny, Audit and Governance, plus Cabinet), and promises that feedback will genuinely be taken on board. The “broad parameters” are presented as political pledges: no frontline service cuts, a lower Council Tax rise than Kent County Council, “big commitments” to leisure, a deliverable plan for FOLCA including health provision, Levelling Up Fund works completing in summer, and continued support through the “unknowns”. The difficulty for Full Council is that these are headline ambitions while key evidence — notably the awaited Q3 outturn — is explicitly not yet available in the report, though expected to reach Overview & Scrutiny on 27 January, the day before Full Council. 

Community and collaboration: food networks, youth voices — and a library heading to auction

The Community and Collaboration update is wide-ranging and, at its best, grounded in real partnership work. The District Food Network (born in the pandemic) is being repositioned as more strategic, with a transformation workshop attended by nearly 40 people, and a new steering group. There is also a nod to prevention: convenience stores potentially helping tackle obesity, discussed at the Folkestone & Hythe Health Alliance.

Yet the most politically charged line is about Grace Hill library. After lobbying in support of reopening it, the portfolio holder reports Kent County Council has decided to auction the building, “possibly as early as next month”. For residents, that could be the point of no return — and it arrives here as almost a footnote. 

Transport and regulation: parking policy reboot, bus funding announced — details awaited

The Transport/Regulatory/Building Control report is one of the most operationally detailed. A revised Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) Framework is due to go to Overview & Scrutiny on 27 January before public consultation, acknowledging the decade-old policy no longer fits modern pressures — including displacement parking and impacts on care workers. Multiple consultations are live or recent (Cheriton; Bayle and the Parade; Radnor Cliff near the Coastal Park). The Radnor Cliff proposal is particularly significant: removing free limited parking in favour of permit-only to address summer congestion. 

On buses, the report says the Bus Services Bill became law and that £78.2 million has been allocated for bus services in Kent over three years, with the portfolio holder awaiting details of how it will be spent and planning to press KCC on 3 February. It is a useful marker — but again, residents will want to know what routes, what frequencies, and what guarantees. 

Digital services and accountability: faster calls, cyber resilience — and a “borderline” complaints target

Resident Engagement and Accountability is where the report becomes quietly data-rich. Elections staff are moving to a new system; the annual canvass exceeded a 90% response rate. On information rights, the council says it is meeting targets for FOI/EIR requests and Subject Access Requests — with a possible January dip due to Christmas closure. Complaints performance, however, is described as “borderline” against response-time targets. 

Customer Services reports a 97.57% call answer rate and average waits under two minutes, an improvement on 3½ minutes in 2024–25, and notes plans for more traditional telephony as a cyber-resilience fallback. There are also practical website changes (“my area” postcode lookup) and a commitment to produce more easy-read and summary versions of public documents — a small line that could have large democratic value if delivered consistently. 

Regeneration, tourism and the town centre: visible works, procurement milestones, and a deadline reprieve

On “Folkestone – A Brighter Future” (the government-funded programme), the council says around 40% is complete, with major works finished by end of summer. The report is specific about streetscape works, rain gardens, and an archaeological watching brief after a culvert was uncovered — a reminder that regeneration is never just paving stones and press releases. 

FOLCA redevelopment is broken into phases with procurement milestones: nine bids for Phase 1 (weatherproofing/strip-out) with contract award planned w/c 26 January and works February–July; design work for Phase 2 with an Employer’s Agent appointed and Cabinet recommendations due 11 February; and disposal of “FOLCA 1” with a preferred bidder selected from six bids, pending final commercial terms. These are tangible steps — though residents will still be asking: what exactly will be delivered, when will the health element be guaranteed, and what is the financial risk?

The UK Shared Prosperity Fund and Rural England Prosperity Fund both get a crucial administrative win: the spending deadline has been extended to 30 September 2026. There are early figures — seven REPF projects approved totalling £58,564 — but limited detail on outcomes beyond uptake and engagement. 

Housing and homelessness: a major service-charge change, more homes — and 120 in temporary accommodation

Housing is where policy meets pain. Cabinet has agreed to “de-pool” service charges from April 2026, moving from flat-rate charging to block-by-block actual costs. The portfolio holder argues the old system was unfair and increasingly subsidised by rents. The mitigating measure is a Tenant Support Fund offering help for up to three years, with administration by the benefits and welfare team. In March, all tenants will be told their 2026/27 rent and service charges in writing. The policy may be defensible — but the politics will hinge on how steep individual increases are, and whether the support fund is large and agile enough to prevent hardship. 

There is better news on supply: 44 homes at Risborough Barracks are expected by May, with the first nine Affordable Rented homes handed over and tenants moving in on 26 January. Yet the scale of need is stark: around 1,450 households on the housing register, 120 households in temporary accommodation, a winter shelter for 12, and six rough sleepers counted in the last outreach. 

One empty chair: assets and local government reorganisation provide “no update”

Finally, there is the report that isn’t there. The Cabinet Member for Assets and Local Government Reorganisation provides no update. Given that reorganisation is explicitly flagged elsewhere as a looming cost and uncertainty, and that assets underpin everything from town-centre strategy to service resilience, councillors should treat this absence not as a blank page but as a question in itself.

The Shepway Vox Team

The Velvet Voices of Voxatiousness