Kentish Express Ashford & District
More criticism of ‘Ashford Shard’ plan
Controversial plans for the ‘Ashford Shard’ have been sent back to the drawing board for a second time by a council committee.
Last week, Ashford borough councillors overwhelmingly voted to defer the apartment block scheme featuring a 16-storey tower.
The ambitious project is earmarked for the corner of Beaver Road and Victoria Road – a site which once housed HomePlus Furniture.
Groundwork has already started on the prominent location, work which unexpectedly uncovered an unexploded Second World War bomb.
Being led by Ashford Borough Council’s property investment arm, A Better Choice for Property Ltd, the 207-apartment complex would consist of two blocks connected by a central courtyard with nine townhouses attached.
There would also be three retail units and a rooftop restaurant.
The proposal that was in front of the planning committee last Wednesday has been
tweaked since its last council appearance in June, when it was deferred over design, environmental concerns and a lack of affordable housing.
Gold fins were added to the top of the tallest block and the number of apartments was lowered by seven.
While design did prove to be an obstacle in the applicant’s second attempt for approval, the main issue was the community funding – or section 106 contributions – the developer would make.
The fact the contributions would only be paid once “the actual sales price of each dwelling exceeds the predicted sales price as identified by the viability assessment” proved unpopular.
Central Ashford Community Forum trustee Michelle Krawczyk particularly focused on this point, and was lauded by many of the committee members.
Calling it “a very high bar”, she listed 16 community services that would lose funding if this wasn’t met. She added: “Without the S106 contributions, the additional requirements on those services generated by this development don’t go away.
“The cost just gets passed onto Ashford residents at a time when residents in this borough are struggling to make ends meet and the council is asking to increase council tax, while eliminating services.
“Is it really acceptable to ask residents to cover these costs to increase the developer’s profit margins?”
Concerns over this deferred funding were raised by many members, including Cllrs Charles Suddards and Dara Farrell (Lab) who represent the ward the site is in.
C l lr Su d d a r d s said: “Although they are an improvement, we don’t believe the new plans do address the issue of massing and size. We believe the building doesn’t meet with the nature of Ashford as a whole.”
The negative view of the appearance was echoed by
Ashford Labour leader Cllr Brendan Chilton, who cited it and the S106 contributions as reasons for proposing deferral.
He noted: “The moment you have buildings of multiple colours like this, with our climate and our weather, they look like an eyesore in no time at all.”
These views were shared by Conservative Cllr Paul Clokie, who quickly seconded the motion to defer.
Meanwhile, Conservative Cllrs William Howard and Neil Shorter proposed and seconded an approval motion, saying the amendments made to the initial scheme had addressed the original reasons for deferral with added environmental focus and design.
Despite this, the motion to approve was defeated three votes to 11 while the motion to defer succeeded with 12 votes to three.
One of the people voting for deferral was Cllr Howard, who had proposed the motion to approve.
Although not officially called the ‘Ashford Shard’, On Architecture director David Weir described the scheme last year as “not quite The Shard, but Ashford’s version of it”.