Plans submitted for conversion of former Westgate care home site to flats and 6 houses

The three properties on Sea Road are planned for conversion Image Clague Architects LLP

Plans have been lodged with Thanet council to convert former care home buildings in Westgate into 39 flats with six terraced houses at the rear of the site.

The bid is by Grifo Developments which was previously highly commended in the Margate Civic Society Town Pride Awards for the conversion of Westcliff House in Westgate.

Proposed conversion Image Clague Architects LLP

The Maidstone-based firm wants to create the flats at 39-43 Sea Road. The buildings include the former Norfolk House and Ashbury Court care homes which were shut by operator Orchard Care Homes for ‘financial reasons’ in 2017.

Number 43 Sea Road was later used as a nursery and then supported accommodation for young mothers but this venture was looking to relocate.

Grifo is now seeking permission for the conversion and extension of 39-43 Sea Road to provide 39 apartments following demolition of part of the buildings, construction of six houses to the rear of number 37, accessed off St Clement’s Road, and 22 parking spaces, access and landscaping.

Permission was previously granted in 2018 for change of use from care home to residential on 39 – 41 Sea Road and mixed use residential and crèche on 43 Sea Road.

CGI image Clague Architects LLP

The new application has a number of alterations to the previous scheme including to the front elevations.

The proposals for no. 39 – 43 Sea Road include a mixture of 1 bedroom apartments, and2 bed apartments. The 6 terrace houses to the rear are to be in two terraced buildings, each with 3 houses.

The site falls within the Westgate-on-Sea Conservation Area Boundary and is adjacent to Designated Heritage Asset Ellingham House,

The properties date between 1880– 1890 as private Edwardian villas, overlooking the bay. Between 1890 – 1920 they were converted to other uses. All three villas are non-designated -heritage assets, their surviving architecture of the Queen Anne fusion style is highly significant to the character of the setting of the Conservation Area and developers plan to retain this.

Planning documents say: “Overall great care has been taken to ensure the proposed design, scale and mass of the scheme is sensitive and sympathetic to the area.”

A decision on the application is yet to be made. Documents can be viewed on Thanet council’s planning portal, reference F/TH/22/1447

Traumatic time for family of resident in one of the two Westgate homes due to be shut down


    • Totally agree – this developer looks to be one of the more considerate and thoughtful.
      As for care home places, affordable starter homes and downsizers, TDC seems to have a blind spot with endless approvals for larger less affordable ‘family’ homes – the planning system here (officers and the planning committee) lacks vision for a balanced housing market and fails to demonstrate a proper understanding of need.

  1. Will this mean the loss of the beautiful abandoned mobile home on the grassland opposite this proposal and next to the Pavilion that also appears to have been forgotten.
    This along with all recent changes to the properties in this area will mean the addition of more on street parking. Thankfully the road is wide enough to cope with this. It is a pity that more underground parking could not be provided for these developments considering most new dwellings have 2 vehicles.

  2. Looking through the previous applications it would appear this site has been a pain in TDC’s side for ages (2019)

  3. Once again, a private developer (even one with good, sympathetic plans, like this) gets to make money out of a property while the rest of us have to use our taxpayers money to replace the lost Care Home places. Or, depending on the will of governments, not bother replacing them at all. So leaving thousands of us that actually NEED a care-home place, stuck at home being cared for by frazzled relatives and just-as-frazzled Care staff, rushing from property to property with no time to really help the individuals.
    There will be those who will argue that the country needs new homes, so this scheme provides them. But ,surely, many people who go into Care Homes will be leaving a house or flat to which they may not return. In fact, with our grossly unfair Care system, many people HAVE to sell their family home of many years to fund their stay in the Care Home.
    So a Care Home DOES provide houses for the population, by taking people who have been living alone in large ,family houses, placing them in more appropriate accommodation with necessary staff and support, thus releasing that large, family home for the next generation.
    But, once again, there is no “joined-up thinking” so valuable properties are disposed of to whoever has the cash. And the Local Authorities and Public Services that need the property have been so starved of money for years, they can’t even make an offer.
    The wrong people have the money,and do what they want. Our democratically-elected bodies have almost NO money but pretend to be doing their best as we “have to be practical in these difficult circumstances”. So nothing changes

  4. 39 apartments plus 6 houses but only 22 parking spaces. It should be refused purely on this basis. When is the government going to introduce legislation for sufficient parking for new builds, including spaces for visitors? And how many couples these days only have one car, let alone a house which may also have adult children with cars. 22 parking spaces for 45 properties – cannot be allowed.

    • Good point – there are guidelines to the number of parking space that should be provided (certainly more than 22 in this case). However, officers pick and choose which guidelines they wish to apply…how and why they pick and choose is anyone’s guess!

    • Agreed , nowhere near enough parking spaces. Likely to be another build to rent development, which is no problem , but parking pressures on street will be considerable,

Comments are closed.