{"id":771598,"date":"2025-01-23T09:45:50","date_gmt":"2025-01-23T09:45:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?p=771598"},"modified":"2025-01-23T12:13:50","modified_gmt":"2025-01-23T12:13:50","slug":"surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans","title":{"rendered":"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans"},"content":{"rendered":"

Councillors on Folkestone & Hythe\u2019s planning committee<\/a> narrowly turned down the London-based practice\u2019s scheme by five to four votes at meeting on Tuesday night (21 January). There was one abstention.<\/p>\n

The decision followed a heated debate on plans to develop a 23ha seafront site<\/a> in the Kent town, backed by local businessman Roger De Haan\u2019s Folkestone Harbour & Seafront Development Company<\/a> (FHSDC).<\/p>\n

Planning officers had recommend approval of the revised 410-home scheme on the southernmost tip of Folkestone, including the inner and outer harbour arm.<\/p>\n

A IS FOR_<\/a>, set up by former ACME employees in 2021, submitted plans last spring for the seafront development \u2013 a \u2018simplified and unified\u2019 design of an earlier proposal which had prompted a local backlash<\/a>.<\/p>\n

However, speaking at the committee meeting, Folkestone\u2019s councillors raised concerns over the scale of the proposed plans and their impact on nearby heritage assets \u2013 a harbour station, lighthouse and swing bridge.<\/p>\n

There was also criticism of the amount of affordable housing on offer \u2013 just 8 per cent versus a 22 per cent target set by Folkestone & Hythe \u2013 as well as concerns over changes between a 2015 outline planning application and this reserved matters proposal.<\/p>\n

Councillor Mike Blakemore told the committee: \u2018Folkestone has much to be grateful for with the restoration of the harbour arm and the historic buildings. But the prospect of those very assets being degenerated by a massive development does seem very troubling.\u2019<\/p>\n

Other councillors said A IS FOR_\u2019s scheme was \u2018not yet good enough\u2019, while another argued that \u2018little [had] changed as a result of community engagement\u2019.<\/p>\n

A IS FOR_\u2019s refused scheme was a rejig of a visually more complex, earlier proposal for 600 homes, unveiled in 2023. The changes introduced a seafront park and a lighter colour palette.<\/p>\n

A petition against the \u2018bolder\u2019 original vision, the final part of a 2012 masterplan by Farrells<\/a>, generated 5,000 signatures.<\/p>\n

A IS FOR_ director <\/span>Duarte Lobo Antunes defended the practice\u2019s original designs as \u2018characterful and bold\u2019 in comments<\/a> to the AJ in 2023. He argued that the proposal was designed to be a \u2018<\/span><\/span>huge benefit to the town of Folkestone and for those that live and work here\u2019<\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

FHSDC, which first won outline planning for the development over a decade ago, has raised half a mile of beach by 2.2m to accommodate the harbour development, while restoring the harbour arm station, a swing bridge and a lighthouse on the harbour.<\/p>\n

De Haan, whose father set up Saga Holidays, told the committee: \u2018Over the past 20 years, we\u2019ve commissioned great architects, produced the Fosters masterplan, the Sir Terry Farrell plan, and the ACME plan.<\/p>\n

\u2018These and nine subsequent planning applications have involved extensive public and stakeholder consultations and we\u2019ve responded to many of the constructive recommendations by modifying our plans.\u2019<\/p>\n

A spokesperson for Folkestone Harbour & Seafront Development Company told the AJl: \u2018<\/span>We are considering our position following decisions made at Folkestone & Hythe\u2019s recent Planning Committee meeting and will provide an update in due course.\u2019<\/p>\n

Homes designed by ACME<\/a> on the western edge of the harbour site, delivered under outline plans for 1,000 homes, have already come to market.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Councillors on Folkestone & Hythe\u2019s planning committee narrowly turned down the London-based practice\u2019s scheme by five to four votes at meeting on Tuesday night (21 January). There was one abstention. The decision followed a heated debate on plans to develop a 23ha seafront site in the Kent town, backed by local businessman Roger De Haan\u2019s …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":131789,"featured_media":736349,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_oasis_is_in_workflow":0,"_oasis_original":0,"ep_exclude_from_search":false},"categories":[681],"tags":[100380,2246,3580,1489],"yoast_head":"\nSurprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"London-based practice A IS FOR_ has unveiled \u2018simpler\u2019 proposals for Folkestone harbour, having gone back to the drawing board with controversial designs unveiled last year\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"London-based practice A IS FOR_ has unveiled \u2018simpler\u2019 proposals for Folkestone harbour, having gone back to the drawing board with controversial designs unveiled last year\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Architects\u2019 Journal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-01-23T09:45:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-01-23T12:13:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/cdn.rt.emap.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2024\/04\/02105256\/folkestone-1024x691.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"691\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Gino Spocchia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Gino Spocchia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans\",\"name\":\"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-01-23T09:45:50+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-01-23T12:13:50+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/779aa0e54c8c20bf4509b8cce80c65b0\"},\"description\":\"London-based practice A IS FOR_ has unveiled \u2018simpler\u2019 proposals for Folkestone harbour, having gone back to the drawing board with controversial designs unveiled last year\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/\",\"name\":\"The Architects\u2019 Journal\",\"description\":\"Architecture News & Buildings\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/779aa0e54c8c20bf4509b8cce80c65b0\",\"name\":\"Gino Spocchia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/ff22f86c19263bf2f9ca73b4d596096f\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ace0cb1667a73da3fb8f9f2e77f8b97?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ace0cb1667a73da3fb8f9f2e77f8b97?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Gino Spocchia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/author\/gino-spocchia\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans","description":"London-based practice A IS FOR_ has unveiled \u2018simpler\u2019 proposals for Folkestone harbour, having gone back to the drawing board with controversial designs unveiled last year","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans","og_description":"London-based practice A IS FOR_ has unveiled \u2018simpler\u2019 proposals for Folkestone harbour, having gone back to the drawing board with controversial designs unveiled last year","og_url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans","og_site_name":"The Architects\u2019 Journal","article_published_time":"2025-01-23T09:45:50+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-01-23T12:13:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":691,"url":"https:\/\/cdn.rt.emap.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2024\/04\/02105256\/folkestone-1024x691.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Gino Spocchia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Gino Spocchia","Estimated reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans","url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans","name":"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-01-23T09:45:50+00:00","dateModified":"2025-01-23T12:13:50+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/779aa0e54c8c20bf4509b8cce80c65b0"},"description":"London-based practice A IS FOR_ has unveiled \u2018simpler\u2019 proposals for Folkestone harbour, having gone back to the drawing board with controversial designs unveiled last year","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/news\/surprise-rejection-for-a-is-for_s-folkestone-harbour-plans#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Surprise rejection for A IS FOR_\u2019s Folkestone harbour plans"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/","name":"The Architects\u2019 Journal","description":"Architecture News & Buildings","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/779aa0e54c8c20bf4509b8cce80c65b0","name":"Gino Spocchia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/ff22f86c19263bf2f9ca73b4d596096f","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ace0cb1667a73da3fb8f9f2e77f8b97?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9ace0cb1667a73da3fb8f9f2e77f8b97?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Gino Spocchia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/author\/gino-spocchia"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/771598"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/131789"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=771598"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/771598\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":771757,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/771598\/revisions\/771757"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/736349"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=771598"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=771598"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.architectsjournal.co.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=771598"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}