Folkestone Folca 1 Flats Approved as Council-Owned Building Sale Questions Remain
shepwayvox
Folkestone’s former Debenhams has taken another step out of limbo. On Tuesday evening, Folkestone & Hythe District Council’s Planning and Licensing Committee approved the conversion of Folca 1, the Edwardian part of the old department store, into 17 flats with commercial use retained at street level.
The vote was decisive: 11 for, one against, none abstaining. The meeting was short. The consequences won’t be.
This wasn’t a normal planning application. It was a Class MA prior approval application, the national permitted-development route that allows certain commercial buildings to become homes. That matters because councillors weren’t being asked to decide whether this was the best possible future for Folca, whether the council should have held out for something else, or whether the scheme should include affordable housing. Their legal task was narrower: does it fall within Class MA, and are the specified prior approval issues properly dealt with?
Cllr Jackie Meade made the essential public clarification at the start. This was Folca 1, the older Edwardian section. It wasn’t Folca 2, the later Sandgate Road part still tied to discussions over a possible GP centre. So this decision doesn’t approve, cancel or rescue the medical-centre plan. It approves the conversion of a different piece of the former Debenhams puzzle.
Arcvelop’s design director told councillors the Folca 1 scheme met Class MA rules: the building isn’t listed, isn’t in a conservation area, isn’t covered by an Article 4 direction, needs no external alterations for the conversion, sits in flood zone 1, and would keep an active ground-floor commercial frontage — though Arcvelop is still only “finalising the purchase” of a building the council continues to own.
That last point is important. Class MA may allow the change of use, but it doesn’t give the applicant a free pass to redesign the outside of the building. If wider architectural improvements, façade changes or external works follow, they must come through the proper planning route. That future debate should stay public.
The only real objection came from Cllr Nicola Keen, who focused on parking. Her concern was not fanciful. Folkestone’s public transport isn’t a magic carpet. Not everyone works on a mainline rail route, not everyone can cycle, and residents still need to live practical lives. She called the lack of parking “ridiculous” and voted against.
But law and common sense don’t always pull in the same direction. Under Class MA, the question is transport impact, not whether Folkestone’s buses are good enough. Officers said Folca 1 sits in a highly sustainable town-centre location, inside controlled parking zone A1, where residents could apply for permits. They said local policy supports reduced or nil parking in town centres with parking controls. They also pointed to 32 cycle spaces for 23 bedrooms and a residential travel plan.
That was probably enough. A refusal based simply on “no parking” would have been legally exposed unless councillors could identify a clear unacceptable highways or transport impact. They didn’t.
For several members, the cycle provision became the reassuring detail. Cllr Rebecca Shoob welcomed it. Cllr Polly Blakemore pointed to the travel plan and proposed travel-plan co-ordinator. Cllr Mike Blakemore said town-centre living should promote active travel rather than car ownership. Cllr Clive Goddard supplied the inevitable line about a “mini Tour de Folkestone”.
Behind the jokes sat the deeper mood of the room: relief. Cllr Adrian Lockwood said the council had spent years trying to find a future for the building and had hoped for exactly this sort of outcome — commercial use below, flats above. Cllr Gary Fuller said the council had perhaps “got off lightly” compared with demolition and a denser modern block.
That is the political truth of Folca 1. The building has been empty too long. A landmark without life becomes a civic reproach. Seventeen flats above an active frontage may not be everyone’s dream, but it is better than a dead department store slowly teaching the town to lower its expectations.
Still, approval is not the end of the story. It is the beginning of the difficult bit.
The real test now is not whether the committee could lawfully say yes. It probably could. The real test is whether the conditions are strong enough to make these good homes. Town-centre conversions depend on unglamorous detail: acoustic glazing, ventilation, overheating, bins, cycle access, servicing, fire safety and the small daily business of living above a busy street.
Noise needs particular care. Future residents should not be left relying on closed windows and crossed fingers. If acoustic standards depend on sealed glazing, ventilation must work properly. If mitigation needs external equipment or visible changes, it must have the right consent. And if the commercial frontage is to remain active, existing businesses shouldn’t be set up for future conflict with residents because the conversion was approved on paper but under-specified in practice.
So yes, the committee’s decision looks defensible. Officers treated it as a Class MA case. Members understood the parking objection but accepted the officer advice on location, controlled parking, cycle storage and travel planning. That is unlikely to be the weak point.
The weak point, if one emerges, will be delivery.
Folca 1 can now become 17 homes. Done well, that could bring people, light and money back into one of Folkestone’s most visible empty buildings. Done badly, it could become another case study in permitted development doing the legal minimum while the town lives with the consequences.
The council has ticked the Class MA box. Now it must prove the boxes people live in will be fit for real life.
