Nine new council flats to be built at Clements Road in Ramsgate

Impression of how the flats block will look Image HazleMcCormackYoung LLP

Planning permission has been granted for a scheme to provide nine new council flats in Ramsgate.

The flats -4 one-bed and 5 two-bed will be built at the rear of 161 to 213 Clements Road.

The site is currently a car park, a hard surfaced clothes drying area and grassed area. It will be used for the flats block after demolition of storage buildings.

The building will be three storeys with three flats on each level. It will have solar panels on the flat roof.

HazleMcCormackYoung LLP

The existing access to the site will be used for the new development and the parking on the site will be rearranged. A new community garden will be created in the centre of the site in front of the new building and the existing footpaths around the site will be altered to provide access.

Additional parking spaces will be provided to the north and south of the site to serve both new and existing residents. Nine electric vehicle charging points will be provided on the site aa well as a new bin and bike store.

The flats form part of Thanet council’s Phase 4 building programme to create social housing. The council  aims to provide 400 new affordable homes by 2027.

Three letters of objection have been received for the Clements Road scheme raising concerns including the lack of clothes drying facilities, loss of parking spaces and a possible increase in anti-social behaviour.

The site at Clements Road began development in the late 1940s and was first occupied by post war pre fabs along the extent of the road stacked in pairs.

The site area was formerly farmland, and the development formed the boundary of development to this green wedge.

In the late 1970s the site was redeveloped with 12 three-storey apartment blocks arranged in perpendicular pairs along the road, enclosing green space (generally grass and planted trees), drying courts, small masonry stores and car parking.

Image HazleMcCormackYoung LLP

The new proposal is intended for 50+ aged tenants in a bid to free up family homes. The flats will be 100% affordable/ social rent. Ten new parking spaces are proposed.

Thanet council’s housing programme has included agreement to buy homes at Tothill Street in Minster and at sites including Reading Street, Westwood and Spitfire Green.

New build council homes are earmarked for Tomlin Drive, Dane Valley Road and the former Dane Valley Arms site in Margate, and Staner Court and the Clements Road site in Ramsgate.

All of these are brownfield sites, which means the land has been previously developed. They are all owned by the council, and currently have either disused garages or laundry drying areas on them.

Thanet council has been allocated £685,275 of government funding  to support the council homes building project.

22 Comments

    • Yay, more free housing for the workshy. The rest of us work 50+hours a week to pay for our homes while the workshy get theirs for free. It really does pay to sign on and do nothing

      • Concerned, they will pay rent which goes back to Thanet council to provide revenue to pay for services that YOU use.

        • They pay a peppercorn rent and We, the working tax payer has to pay for the upkeep of the properties as well as the original purchase costs.
          Personally I find it offensive that the work shy get given so much while the rest of us work hard and contribute to society only for the wasters in our society to benefit from free houses. No wonder the unemployed don’t actively search for employment, people such as yourself empower them to sit at home collecting their benefits and have created an environment where it pays not to work more than 16 hours a week.

          • Alternatively, the working taxpayer has to pay for the
            Housing Benefit that subsidises higher rents that are charged by private landlords.

            Which of the two schemes would you prefer ?

          • Seeing as the private landlord, pays tax ( income and eventually capital gains) , provides the initial deposit, doesn’t have their employment costs subsidised by the council tax payer, is more efficient, provides safer homes, provides more in the way of white goods and floor coverings, it only really leaves dogmatic politically based opinion / bias to not rewlise that private landlords offer better value for money to tax payers than council providers of social housing. Yes there are most certainly some very poor private landlords, for which there is plenty of legislation to deal with them , unlike the social providers that have killed tenants but no council employees went to jail.

          • Concerned – very well put and sums up situation perfectly. The likes of Mr Lewis viewing life via their red glasses and fail to understand clowns like me worked all my life, saved some money for old age and then idle get subsidised for everything from my efforts. A joke.

          • These flats are to free up rented properties that are not suitable for existing tenants! I managed to move my parents into a flat, once all their children had left home, and they were left rattling around a large 3 bed, council house, and my father could no longer manage the front and rear gardens! In fact Bromley council built dozens of studio flats with smaller gardens, for older tenants to move into, freeing up their 3 or more bed houses for younger people! This meant the older tenants could still stay in the local neighbourhood, where they had friends ansd relatives!

          • Dumpton what a charming and skilled wordsmith you are, with luck your comment will deleted by the moderator, you can then perhaps make your point again but remain civil

        • Barry , are the rents not ringfenced inside the housing revenue account for further provision of additional housing and maintenance/management of the councils social housing?
          Nationally around 2/3rds of social housing is occupied by workless households , the insistence by TDC that new social housing is rented at LHA rates or less along with lifetime tenancies means that there is very little incentive for those benefiting from social housing to improve their lot in life, which in turn has helped perpetuate some of the issues that afflict social housing developments and which makes them so unattractive as neighbours.
          The taxpayer, not only subsidises social housing via grants from central government, but via housing benefit and council tax payers subsidise the employment costs of the council staff within the social housing sections of TDC.
          Do you have a figure for the number/ percentage of the councils housing that is home to workless households? Just for a bit of balance

          • Yes Grey Area, over generations housing needs have changed, when my Dad came back from the war, our home had been bombed, and my mum and me had become refugees (evacuees?) The new labour government went on a spending spree with billion pound loans, and built millions of new houses/flats, even new towns.

            I remember when we first went to view our new 3 bed council house, and the smell! It was the smell of paint, and that the windows had no glass in them that, and no roads! But we did move in eventually, despite the roads coming at a later date, and we had an indoor toilet, and bathroom! That was in 1949, and as far as I remember every man worked, and some women!

            Scroll forward a few years and most children left home, leaving many houses with only 2 at most tenants, and although we had grown our food, and had a few chickens, and rabbits, many older people could no longer keep up with the work needed. In my fathers case he had lost an eye due to a botched cataract operation, and he lost his job with Express Dairy, and my parents relied on various benefits.

            So, now we have people like “Concerned” above calling people like my parents “Workshy” “Benefit scroungers” “wasters”, even though both my parents grew up in the 20’s and 30’s, and who would work at anything to put food on the table, during the depression. They also had a bad war, my older sister Beryl was killed in the bombing, and me and my mum become homeless. So as I said generations change, and governments should change with them!

          • Dumpton, i don’t believe ( but i could well be wrong) that the accusations were aimed at the older generations of social housing tenants. My grandparents were forever grateful for the good quality post war council housing they were allocated, both worked hard and raised their families and downsized to a much smaller property when their children had moved out. They took great pride in their homes and communities.
            However the change in the 1970’s to needs based social housing allocation meant that the tenants were then largely out of work and often problematic, this led to the decline of “council estates” from being vibrant communities of working families towards the sink estates that are seen too often today.
            Just look at the state of some soical housing once its been vacated, talk to trades that work in such properties, societal attitudes have changed and for too many a lifestyle based on benefits and not working is too attractive to pass by. There are low rise blocks of flats innthanet in which no one works, generations where work is just not seen as something you would ever consider.
            That as a society substance abuse and petty crime is seen as perfectly acceptable has only compounded the problems.
            Have a play with one of the online benefit calculators and see what sort of incomes are possible ( though in the absence of a disabled person in the household, the overall benefit cap usually comes into play, but which also lies behind the surge in those seeking a disability award) and then look at how many full time jobs match those figures. Chuck in the poor levels of educational attainment that blights the nation and its soon apparent we’ve painted ourselves into a corner with no real idea how to escape.

  1. Only real solution to the misery of homelessness and sky high rents. A good start that can be expanded a lot more as the years go by.

  2. It’s a start but a long way to go, shouldn’t be building one bedroom anything, 2 bedroom should be a minimum. Let’s hope it is quality housing.

  3. but, surely a major problem regarding ‘social housing’ is the ‘right to buy’ which removes homes from the available pool? This needs addressing IMO.

  4. Ben, I would love to see the full structural report on Stratford House, you don’t just knock down a new build like that, there are many ways to rectify a bad build underpinning being just one.
    Something smells very fishy to me.
    Well done TDC keep it up guys.

  5. Workshy lol, does that include disabled, retired, those in society like poor families who were happy to private rent but in 6 years rents have doubled and so called benefits remain stuck in austerity, causing a massive glut of poverty, everything’s gone up and those who were private rentals can no longer afford to stay, some also work. The disabled require carers are they also workshy. I think as we all know. New and more houses are needed. People get older and get a pension. #workshy? There should be rent guidelines and management a maximum, limiting money grabbing landlords from putting people into debt, the mortages havent risen like private rent costs causing a very bad seesaw effect on the less financially stable. So greedy landlords don’t force out families on the streets because what was affordable is never going to be again. The shortfall in income is too vast nowadays. When you can’t physically work through pain. Lemme call you workshy what a throwaway comment. Wake up! Poverty in thanet is real. All comes down from main government. You think folks on benefits have it easy, that tells me you know very little about hardship. Bigotted vision of a dying society. America have had rent reform for years. Town halls have procedures to stop overcharging rent of private properties like banding for affordability. Can’t do much about class divide. But, fact remains our community does not have enough affordable properties.

    • Quite comical that you make broad generalisations regarding landlords and rents but object to similar generalisations in respect of those on benefits. A proper bit of Boris Cakeism. There are many facets to the arguments on both sides , as you say there are those who are genuinely disabled and their carers, on the other private rents have been forced up by a piece of legislation called section 24, which effectively taxes parts of some private landlords turnover rather than profits. In my case that means rents have gone up £50 a month for each pf my tenants, this being the amount required once tax has been pid on that amount to cover the tax i pay on money i’ve paid out in mortgage interest.
      An absurd piece of legislation but which is seen as popular with those that don’t like landlords, but as ever the only people that suffer are the tenants and rising rents, the £50 being pure tax.
      But of course the shouty anti landlord types aren’t interested in facts.
      So we end up with endless generalisations that ignore the realities and as a result nothing really gets solved at either extreme.

  6. In haste: I know of someone who had rented a small garden flat for 15 years, until her landlord died. The property was left to her 3 children who evicted the tenants because they wanted to sell the property! This caused much anguish as finding another flat at a reasonable rent is just not possible. In another case I know of a single man aged 89 who rented a bungalow for years, and looked after it, but his landlord evicted him a few days before Christmas! He was offered a flat in Eastbourne by the council! There is a solution, and thats to build more council homes, and for councils to manage them professionally!

    • Undoubtedly greater provision of social housing is desirable, but determining the extent of that provision is more difficult, you could build endlessly and never satisfy demand as very few would turn down subsidised housing. Then there’s the cost to society of that subsidy. Then as you say the council needs to manage thehousing properly, currently they are incredibly inefficeint and wasteful , rarely reading the reports and assessments they commission and gold plating measures ,that if they read the reports properly or actually had someone who understood the subject ,don’t need doing. Large swathes of the hpusing team working from home has been and will continue to be a disaster, but of course the inefficiencies will instead be seen as a lack of resources.
      There is arguably better use of resources in getting people better educated/trained , healthier and so more self reliant , than endlessly just throwing more money at people in order to support poor lifestyles / outcomes.
      Do theses homes the council are building pay infrastructure levies for additional services for the new residents ? If not then these homes are effectively getting further hidden subsidy’s

Comments are closed.