Addington Place developer told to go back to the drawing board

Addington Place

An application to demolish a commercial building in Ramsgate and replace it with terraced  houses has been sent back to the drawing board by Thanet councillors on the planning committee.

A bid for planning permission to knock down an offices/laundry site in Addington Place and build five 3 bed and one 4 bed terraced dwellings was discussed by the committee last night (May 19).

The application proposes the demolition of the L shaped building adjacent to Hertford Place.

The scheme has been amended from three storey properties to two storeys to the eaves with the second floor of accommodation provided in the roof having a central dormer window and rooflight.

But concerns were raised about over-development and a lack of parking with just two spaces for the entire development.

Resident Mr Scott told the meeting: “This is over-development of the area. It does not work for the community.” He said he and approximately 20 other residents were concerned about lack of parking, the demolition of a flint wall and the use of aliminum windows in a conservation area.

Ward councillor Raushan Ara spoke to say the project was over-development with inadequate parking and would be ‘over-crowding.’

She added: “Reduce the housing by one and use that (area) for parking and open space.”

Her view was backed by fellow Ramsgate councillor Becky Wing who said the project was a “considerable increase on what’s there.”

She highlighted the conservation area and said of the parking: “Two parking spaces for six dwellings is simply not enough.”

Further issues around the lack of pathway, already narrow roads coping with traffic, issues with waste trucks entering the site and the demolition of the flint wall were also voiced.

Cllr Wing added: “The development represents a massive negative impact on an area currently undergoing rejuvenation. A great deal more could and should have been done with this site.”

The committee were in agreement about the over-development and lack of parking problems and voted against the application.

An amended vote, which was agreed, requires the developer to remove one house and create additional parking spaces.

The application will go back before councillors when amendments are made or, if it is not amended, it will be brought back and rejected outright.