8. Tourism

8.1.

Introduction

Thanet has been a traditional tourist destination for over 200 years. Whilst the popularity of seaside tourism may have declined since the heyday at the turn of last century, it still remains the single largest component of the domestic holiday market. Tourism expenditure directly supports 4860 jobs, whilst a further 1078 are supported through indirect expenditure.

8.2.

A good tourist industry can also provide additional benefits to the District. Facilities providing a service for tourists can also provide further recreational opportunities for residents. A well-received tourist ‘experience’ can improve the image of Thanet, which may encourage business to locate or families to move into the area.

8.3.

The Council’s vision is that facilities and attractions would have adapted to the tourist market by 2020 and these would provide new leisure experiences compared to those that were provided twenty years earlier. Projects such as Margate Old Town, including the Turner Centre, and Ramsgate Renaissance would add to existing facilities and events, such as Folk Week at Broadstairs.

8.4.

The coast is also seen as a major asset, catering for all recreational requirements from bird watching to jet skiing. It is hoped that the integration of these diverse activities will be achieved through the promotion of the Coastal Park initiative. Many of these attractions should also help to lengthen the holiday period in Thanet and give the area an image boost.

OBJECTIVES

  1. TO PROMOTE AND PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEW TOURISM FACILITIES
  2. TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE LOCAL ECONOMY IN THANET
8.5.

Tourism will continue to be significant in the local area so it is appropriate that planning policies encourage tourism-related development and seek to improve the seaside architecture and overall environment to assist the revitalisation of the industry and improve Thanet's image and appearance. There is potential for tourism to form part of agricultural diversification schemes to the benefit of both industries. Proposals which will expand the length of the holiday season will be supported, for example, promotion of the area as a centre in East Kent for education-related tourism (language schools and school and college field trips relating to geology and archaeology, etc).

8.6.

Figures from the South-East England Tourist Board indicate that in 2000, in the region of 518,000 staying trips (10% of the county) were undertaken by tourists in Thanet and that these visitors generated in the region of £85.56 million of direct tourist expenditure into the District economy. In addition to staying visitors, it is estimated that the District received 2.60 million day visitors who contributed a further £43.1 million to the local economy.

8.7.

Thanet, Canterbury and Shepway are working together on an East Kent Tourism Strategy. It is expected that the local authorities in the East Kent area will continue to work together to achieve a mutual benefit on a number of issues and make the best use of resources. Thanet also supported Canterbury’s bid for the European Capital of Culture 2008.

POLICY T1 - TOURIST FACILITIES

PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED FOR DEVELOPMENT WHICH WOULD EXTEND OR UPGRADE THE RANGE OF TOURIST FACILITIES, INCREASE THE ATTRACTION OF TOURISTS TO THE AREA OR EXTEND THE SEASON.

8.8.

Serviced Accommodation

There is scope for further quality hotels in the area to improve the product base. The Council will encourage new provision, or additional provision of such facilities. Policy EC11 considers another aspect of the accommodation market, Business Hotels, in the Economic Development Chapter.

(POLICY NOT SAVED) T2 - SERVICED ACCOMMODATION

IN THE THANET TOWNS AND VILLAGES, PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICED TOURIST ACCOMMODATION, INCLUDING EXTENSIONS TO AND CONVERSIONS OF EXISTING BUILDINGS, WILL BE APPROVED. SUCH PROPOSALS WILL BE JUDGED ON THEIR INDIVIDUAL MERITS IN RELATION TO SCALE, DESIGN, IMPACT ON THE LOCALITY AND NORMAL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL CRITERIA.

8.9.

Self-Catering Accommodation

The range of self-catering tourist accommodation is wide, including holiday homes and flats, touring and static caravan sites and chalets. Such facilities provide choice for the tourist and are to be supported.

8.10.

The Council also recognises that tourist facilities need to adapt to an everchanging market. The upgrading of self-catering accommodation facilities to provide an improved product for the tourist market will therefore be supported by the Council.

8.11.

However, in recent years, many facilities have come under pressure for change of use to higher value uses, such as housing. The Council would therefore seek to retain facilities where such a change of use would reduce the choice of tourist accommodation in Thanet.

POLICY T3 - SELF-CATERING ACCOMMODATION

  1. EXCEPT AT OR NEAR THE COAST AND TAKING ACCOUNT OF THE CRITERIA PROVIDED IN POLICY CC2, IN RELATION TO LANDSCAPE, PROPOSALS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TOURING AND STATIC CARAVAN SITES, AND SUITABLE EXTENSIONS TO EXISTING SITES, WILL BE PERMITTED, SUBJECT TO SITING, DESIGN AND ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS, AND PROVIDING THERE IS NO OVERRIDING CONFLICT WITH OTHER PLANNING POLICIES. ALL NEW SITES AND SUITABLE EXTENSIONS MUST BE WELL RELATED TO THE PRIMARY OR SECONDARY ROAD NETWORK. IN ALL NEW CASES, THE CARAVAN SITE MUST BE CAPABLE OF BEING EXTENSIVELY LANDSCAPED SUCH THAT ITS IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA IS MINIMISED.
  2. PROPOSALS TO DIVERSIFY, UPGRADE OR IMPROVE FACILITIES RELATING TO SELF-CATERING ACCOMMODATION WILL BE PERMITTED SUBJECT TO SCALE, SITING, DESIGN, ACCESS AND LANDSCAPING CONSIDERATIONS.
  3. PROPOSALS TO REDEVELOP SELF-CATERING FACILITIES FOR OTHER USES, WILL NOT BE PERMITTED WHERE IT IS CONSIDERED THAT SUCH PROPOSALS WOULD SERIOUSLY AFFECT THE MAINTENANCE OF A REASONABLE CHOICE OF TOURIST ACCOMMODATION IN THANET. 
8.12.

Coastal Park

The idea for a Coastal Park developed out of the preparation of the Management Scheme for the Thanet Coast Marine Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Many issues were discussed in that process which did not fall solely within the scope of the Management Scheme, which is a statutory document. These issues included regeneration projects, tourism and leisure (such as ‘green tourism’) new development, nature conservation and related issues.

8.13.

The Coastal Park will also encompass green tourism issues such as the development of walking and cycling routes, particularly the Viking Coastal Trail. TDC are also working up a Coastal Information and Interpretation Strategy alongside the Coastal Park proposal, which will inform and direct future provision of information boards and interpretation panels along the coast.

8.14.

The concept of the ‘Coastal Park’ is to draw together all these policies, proposals and projects at the coast under a single, integrated action plan, to give these initiatives a common identity and to set a framework to carry them forward and develop new ideas. As there are many issues covered by this initiative, various policies covering the coastal area will apply. However, the primary policy relating to the Coastal Park is CC13.

8.15.

Former Hoverport, Pegwell Bay

The former Hoverport site at Pegwell Bay is located at Cliffs End, adjacent to the coast, and consists of an extensive area of hardstanding (over 8 hectares).

8.16.

Any proposed development will, however, have to have due regard to the surrounding environmental concerns. Pegwell Bay is not only part of the Sandwich Bay/Hacklinge Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest but is also of major international environmental importance under the European Community Wild Birds Directive (as a Special Protection Area) and Ramsar Convention. Part of Pegwell Bay has also been designated within the Sandwich Bay Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and the Thanet Coast Marine SAC. The importance of the surrounding Pegwell Bay area has also been reflected in its designation as a National Nature Reserve under Section 35 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

8.17.

The cliffs at and near the Hoverport site are also of Special Scientific Interest because of their geology and are a landscape feature of great importance particularly when viewed along the A256.

8.18.

The Council as owner of the site has been advised that removal of the hardstanding to return the site back to nature is not a practical or an economic proposition. The Council is therefore seeking a development that will utilise the site to its best economic advantage, without damage to the short and long term future of the SSSI and other aspects of nature conservation interest.

8.19.

The Council therefore commits itself to finding a practical and economic form of development, subject to the Habitats Regulations, which will provide employment opportunities on the site without damage to the SSSI, SPA, Ramsar Site or the two SACs.

8.20.

The Hoverport site is suitable to form part of the Regional Conservation Park located around the Stour and Wantsum Channel. The Area Investment Framework Action Plan (involving Thanet, Canterbury and Dover Councils) includes the Regional Park Initiative and, as part of the development of a green heart for East Kent, identifies the Hoverport site as a visitor centre for green tourism. The Regional Conservation Park will work in conjunction with Thanet's Coastal Park Initiative which draws together policies, proposals and projects at the coast, developed from the preparation of the Management Scheme for the Thanet Coast Marine Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

POLICY T4 - HOVERPORT SITE PEGWELL BAY

PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED TO PROPOSALS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE HOVERPORT WITHIN ITS EXISTING BOUNDARIES, PROVIDED:

  1. THERE IS NO MATERIAL HARM TO THE SSSI-SPA-RAMSAR SITE AND THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE NATURE CONSERVATION INTERESTS OF THE SSSI, SPA, RAMSAR SITE OR SACS.
  2. ANY PROPOSED BUILT DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT RESULT IN UNACCEPTABLE HARM TO THE SPECIAL LANDSCAPE AREA;
  3. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF BUILT DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE CLIFF FACE
  4. PUBLIC VIEWS FROM THE A256 OF THE CHALK CLIFF LINE TO THE EAST OF THE HOVERPORT ARE RETAINED; AND
  5. PUBLIC ACCESS IS RETAINED TO THE REAR OF THE SITE TO FACILITATE INSPECTION OF THE IMPORTANT CLIFF GEOLOGY AND TO THE HUGIN BEACH TO THE EAST
8.21.

The Lido, Cliftonville

The outdated and rundown Lido leisure complex lies on the seaward side of Ethelbert Terrace, on the cliff face close to the Winter Gardens and proposed Turner Centre. This location provides an ideal opportunity for a mixed-use development with uninterrupted sea views. However, any development must be sympathetic to the character of the area and retain a high proportion of sea views from Ethelbert Terrace. The latter requirement should be reflected in the design of any proposed buildings, which should consider varying heights, above the cliff top, to obtain the most advantageous views from Ethelbert Terrace, Ethelbert Crescent and Cliff Terrace. The following policy will therefore apply.

POLICY T5 - THE LIDO SITE

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LIDO COMPLEX FOR AN APPROPRIATE MIX OF TOURISM, LEISURE AND HOUSING USES, WILL BE PERMITTED SUBJECT TO CONSIDERATION BEING GIVEN TO THE POTENTIAL LOSS OF SEA VIEWS FROM ETHELBERT TERRACE AND BEING SYMPATHETIC TO THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA.

8.22.

Language Schools

The Thanet towns have a considerable number of language schools. Attendance tends to peak during the Easter period and the summer holiday. A high percentage of students using these services stay with Thanet families or as paying guests. The South-East England Tourist Board’s document ‘The Economic Impact of Tourism – Thanet 1998’ estimated that the total visitor expenditure, by such visitors, was £27.15 million in 1998.

8.23.

English language schools in Thanet are therefore a major contributor to the local economy, and offer potential for encouraging the next generation of visitors to this part of Kent. The Council wishes to encourage this sector of the local economy to grow.

POLICY T6 - LANGUAGE SCHOOLS

LANGUAGE SCHOOLS WILL NORMALLY BE PERMITTED SUBJECT TO:

  1. THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS TO BE ACCOMMODATED, THE HOURS OF OPERATION, THE RANGE OF FACILITIES PROVIDED AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH ADJOINING PROPERTIES NOT RESULTING IN AN UNACCEPTABLE IMPACT ON THE AMENITIES OF ADJACENT OCCUPIERS OR ON THE CHARACTER OF AN AREA AS A WHOLE THROUGH NOISE OR GENERAL DISTURBANCE;
  2. THE USE OF THE PROPERTY AS A LANGUAGE SCHOOL NOT RESULTING IN AN OVER-CONCENTRATION OF SUCH USES IN A PARTICULAR LOCALITY TO A LEVEL WHERE THE CHARACTER OF THAT AREA IS MATERIALLY ALTERED.
8.24.

Amusement Uses

Due to its long history as a major holiday centre, Thanet is well served by a great variety of amusement uses. In deciding whether a particular location is suitable for a new amusement use, a relevant factor will always be the kind of amusement intended. There are two distinct types of amusement uses, ‘amusement arcades’ and ‘amusement centres’.

8.25.

‘Amusement arcades’ offer a mix of amusements with prizes as well as entertainment-only machines (ranging from traditional pin-tables to video games and ‘virtual reality’). Arcades are usually open to all ages and offer a bright, noisy, holiday atmosphere. Other more traditional amusements, such as shooting galleries and fairground rides, are also found in Thanet in locations very close to the sea.

8.26.

An ‘amusement centre’ is usually limited to amusements with prizes, although ancillary retail or refreshment facilities may also be provided, subject to planning conditions. The concept was developed from that of ‘arcades’ but they exclusively use modern electronic machinery. Prize bingo, normally played on console machines, is sometimes included. Centres tend to be far more discreet in appearance than ‘arcades’ and are ‘closed’, suppressing noise within the property often via automatic doors. Operators tend to seek to locate ‘centres’ in traditional street locations to attract a particular clientele and many, therefore, maintain a ‘shopfront’ appearance with priced goods for sale. Access is usually denied to people under the age of sixteen or eighteen.

8.27.

The main issues in determining appropriate locations for such uses will be the character of the area, noise and disturbance, the kind of amusements involved, appearance, traffic and road safety. To some extent noise and general disturbance are likely to depend on the kind of amusement intended and the expected clientele. Therefore, arcades would not be permitted in a town centre, whereas an amusement centre may be. Amusement centres will, however, be required to have a high quality shopfront design that displays prizes or priced goods for sale, thus maintaining a traditional town environment.

8.28.

Where proposals for amusement uses are to be located in Listed Buildings the relevant consent will be required. In Conservation Areas, careful design of shop fronts will be also be a requirement.

8.29.

Annex D to PPG6 suggests that the Local Plan should give guidance with regard to preferred locations in resort towns. In view of the high level of provision that currently exists in the Thanet towns and the ease of access to existing arcades and centres, it is considered appropriate to operate a policy of restraint in respect of the further expansion of these amusement facilities. In addition to this general approach, the reasons for the application of such a policy are substantiated by the characteristics of the different parts of the District.

8.30.

Margate

The major area for amusement arcades is Marine Terrace along Margate seafront and within Dreamland. This area has developed a bright holiday atmosphere, where numerous individual arcades and associated uses compete for business and where a wide range of choice is given to the customer. This area has been defined on the Proposals Map for such uses. An extension to this allocated area will be resisted for two reasons. The first is the unacceptable impact upon the residential apartments, Arlington House, to the west. The second is the importance of Marine Gardens, to the east, as a buffer zone between the main retail area of Margate and the amusements along Marine Terrace. Amusement centres are, however, considered to be acceptable in the designated town centre area, subject to Policy T7 below.

8.31.

Ramsgate

Although there are amusement arcades along Harbour Parade, the previous Local Plan had designated an area based on a large amusement centre along Marina Esplanade, close to the main beach. This, however, has since been demolished after a fire and an alternative development has since been approved. The approved development forms part of the Ramsgate Renaissance Initiative that seeks to rejuvenate the waterfront of the town. It is considered that the aims of this initiative would be compromised by any further development of amusement arcades in this area. Therefore, future proposals for amusement arcades will be limited to the defined area in Harbour Parade (as shown on the Proposals Map). Amusement centres are considered to be acceptable in the designated town centre area, subject to Policy T7 below.

8.32.

Broadstairs

Broadstairs has a single but significant amusement arcade that lies between the town centre, the harbour and the beach. As a resort, Broadstairs is complementary to Margate and Ramsgate. The visitors that are attracted to Broadstairs are drawn there by its charm and the quiet "Victorian" elegance of the town. The existing amusement arcade is in a central location and it is considered that this meets the needs of visitors and residents. Given the special character and small scale of Broadstairs, there is no need or justification for further expansion of arcades or centres that would be likely to detract from the character of the town. Amusement centres are considered to be acceptable in the designated town centre area of Broadstairs, subject to Policy T7 below.

8.33.

Westwood

Amusement arcades will not be permitted within the proposed town centre of Westwood, as defined in Policy TC2. Such an activity would be at odds, and therefore detrimental to, the proposed uses of this new town centre. However, amusement centres are considered to be acceptable in this proposed town centre area, subject to the criteria set out in Policy T7 below.

8.34.

Other Centres

Cliftonville was traditionally the "dormitory" area of Margate with a major concentration of hotels and guesthouses. As such, it was entirely appropriate that a certain scale of amusement provision was made in the area. However, the long-stay holiday market has declined and with it the number of hotels. These have generally been replaced with more permanent residential uses and there is therefore a greater potential for conflict if further amusement arcades were to be permitted.

8.35.

Two amusement arcades exist and these are relatively divorced from private residential accommodation. It is therefore considered that adequate provision exists, particularly bearing in mind the proximity to Margate. Introducing further arcades would detract from the character of the area and result in conflict with other uses.

8.36.

Outside the centres referred to above, there are a number of District local centres and village centres in Thanet, which serve the needs of immediate residents. Given the small scale of these local centres, it is considered that the introduction of amusement arcades into these areas would be detrimental to the character and residential amenities of these areas and should not therefore be permitted. Access to the main town centres is relatively easy and adequate provision is made there.

8.37.

Outside the town centres, the acceptability of amusement centres will be judged against the scale of the centre in which they are to be located, the compatibility with adjacent uses and the criteria set out in Policy T7 below.

POLICY T7 - AMUSEMENT USES

  1. AMUSEMENT ‘CENTRES’, WILL BE PERMITTED IN THE TOWN CENTRES AND AT WESTWOOD, AS DEFINED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP, SUBJECT TO; 
    • THE LIMITATION OF USE TO AMUSEMENTS WITH PRIZES;
    • THE PROVISION OF EFFECTIVE SOUNDPROOFING INCLUDING DOOR DESIGN,
    • A HIGH STANDARD OF SHOPFRONT DESIGN, WITH WINDOW DISPLAY, ESPECIALLY IN CONSERVATION AREAS.
  2. AMUSEMENT ARCADES WILL BE PERMITTED IN MARGATE AND RAMSGATE ONLY, WITHIN THE AREA SHOWN ON THE PROPOSALS MAP. PROPOSALS FOR AMUSEMENT USES WILL BE EXPECTED TO RETAIN EXISTING SIGNIFICANT ELEMENTS OF SEASIDE ARCHITECTURE.
  3. OUTSIDE THE DEFINED AREAS PROPOSALS FOR NEW AMUSEMENT ARCADES OR THE EXTENSION OF SUCH USES WILL BE REFUSED.
  4. OUTSIDE TOWN CENTRES THE ACCEPTABILITY OF AMUSEMENT CENTRES WILL BE JUDGED AGAINST THE SCALE OF THE CENTRE IN WHICH THEY ARE LOCATED AND COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT USES.
8.38.

Dreamland

The long-established amusement park known as Dreamland has been synonymous with Margate’s function and image as a traditional seaside resort. However, in recent years there has been no substantial investment in the park to add to or maintain its attractiveness, with the result that the park has taken on an increasingly rundown and depressing appearance, with a dwindling number of rides occupying the site. Policy supports investment in the site as an amusement park and continuation of such use if viable and sustainable.

8.39.

The Council is promoting the rejuvenation and diversification of Margate for local people and visitors alike through an evolving programme capitalising on its seaside location and character, the historic old town and harbour, and cultural associations including the legacy of the artist JMW Turner. An emerging Master Plan will set out principles and comprehensive opportunities for a number of key seafront sites.

8.40.

The Dreamland site, as a result of its size (6.5 hectares) and location, is a key opportunity within the big picture for Margate’s future. The Council wishes to realise a comprehensive scheme for the site, maximising its potential to contribute to the economic well-being and attractiveness of Margate as a visitor destination and area in which to live and invest.

8.41.

Any development of the Dreamland site will be expected to reflect the context and vision of the wider regeneration programme for Margate, and to integrate with proposals for adjoining key sites. Proposals should not therefore be limited in concept to the immediate Dreamland site, and schemes will be expected to anticipate and integrate with opportunities for redevelopment/refurbishment of adjacent sites (for example potential improvements to Arlington Square/House/car park). In particular, the site is key to securing the diversion of Marine Terrace around the back of the Dreamland site in order to enable much improved pedestrian movement between the site and the beach and enable significant environmental improvements along Marine Terrace. Proposals should therefore demonstrate how this could be achieved and phased in as appropriate.

8.42.

The main Dreamland building and scenic railway are listed buildings. Proposals would need to retain these features in situ and to provide an appropriate setting for them in line with other relevant policies in this plan and guidance in PPG15.

8.43.

The predominant use of the Dreamland site should be for leisure purposes providing a year-round destination, attractive to visitors and locals alike. This leisure use could take the form of an amusement park on the whole or part of the site. However, if an amusement park is found not to be viable and sustainable then alternative leisure uses will be explored. Any leisure use will be expected to integrate with properties and land fronting Marine Terrace and adjacent at Arlington Square. A residential element may also be appropriate on the site, but only at a scale necessary to enable the leisure proposals to proceed, contribute to the new access road and enable other aspects of the site’s development and supporting infrastructure to take place including providing an appropriate parkland setting to the scenic railway. A green park around the scenic railway as a central feature would be required in order to provide an appropriate setting and high quality amenity space with pedestrian links within and beyond the site. A limited amount of retail use, restricted to the sale of goods in connection with the leisure and tourism elements on the site may be appropriate. A small (below 500sq m) convenience store to serve the immediate residential area and visitors would be acceptable.

POLICY T8 - DREAMLAND

  1. PROPOSALS THAT SEEK TO EXTEND, UPGRADE OR IMPROVE THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF DREAMLAND AS AN AMUSEMENT PARK WILL BE PERMITTED. DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN THE ATTRACTIVENESS, LEISURE OR TOURIST POTENTIAL WILL BE RESISTED.

    EXCEPTIONALLY, DEVELOPMENT OF A LIMITED PART OF THE SITE MAY BE ACCEPTED AS A PART OF A COMPREHENSIVE SCHEME FOR THE UPGRADING AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE AMUSEMENT PARK. THE SCHEME WILL BE REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE FUTUREVIABILITY OF THE AMUSEMENT PARK CAN BE ASSURED AND THE COUNCIL WILL NEGOTIATE A LEGAL AGREEMENT TO ENSURE THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND THE AGREED INVESTMENT IN THE AMUSEMENT PARK ARE CARRIED OUT IN PARALLEL. 

  2. IN THE EVENT THAT EVIDENCE, IN THE FORM OF AN INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONAL ASSESSMENT, IS SUBMITTED (AND ACCEPTED BY THE COUNCIL) AS DEMONSTRATING THAT IT IS NOT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE TO OPERATE AN AMUSEMENT PARK ON THE WHOLE OR MAJORITY OF THE SITE IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, THEN PROPOSALS FOR REDEVELOPMENT MAY BE ACCEPTED SUBJECT TO:
    1. PROPOSALS DEMONSTRATING THAT SUCH REDEVELOPMENT WOULD SUSTAINABLY CONTRIBUTE TO THE ECONOMIC WELLBEING AND REJUVENATION OF MARGATE, AND BEING SUPPORTED BY A BUSINESS PLAN DEMONSTRATING THAT SUCH PROPOSALS ARE ECONOMICALLY VIABLE;
    2. THE PREDOMINANT USE OF THE SITE BEING FOR LEISURE PURPOSES. (AN ELEMENT OF MIXED RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE APPROPRIATE BUT ONLY OF SUCH A SCALE NEEDED TO SUPPORT DELIVERY OF THE COMPREHENSIVE VISION FOR THE SITE);
    3. COMPATIBILITY WITH THE CONTEXT AND PROPOSALS OF THE STRATEGIC URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK, AND INTEGRATION WITH APPROPRIATE PROPOSALS FOR REDEVELOPMENT /REFURBISHMENT OF NEIGHBOURING SITES;
    4. PROPOSALS DELIVERING A NEW ROAD ALONG THE SOUTHERN SITE BOUNDARY TO ENABLE THE DIVERSION OF VEHICULAR TRAFFIC FROM MARINE TERRACE. (A LEGAL AGREEMENT WILL BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT A PROPORTIONATE CONTRIBUTION WILL BE MADE TOWARDS THE COST OF PROVIDING THE NEW ROAD AND TO APPROPRIATE IMPROVEMENTS TO CREATE A PEDESTRIAN PRIORITY ENVIRONMENT ALONG MARINE TERRACE);
    5. RETENTION OF THE SCENIC RAILWAY IN SITU AS AN OPERATING FEATURE WITHIN A GREEN PARK SETTING APPROPRIATE TO ITS CHARACTER AS A LISTED BUILDING; AND
    6. PROPOSALS BEING ACCOMPANIED BY A TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT.
8.44.

Rural Tourism

It is considered essential, in the interests of the wider tourism strategy of the District and the county, that appropriate rural tourist facilities should be provided in rural settlements as well as in the urban areas. Minster Abbey and the Rural Life Museum, Sarre Mill, the Norman Church at St. Nicholas, and Foxhunter Park at Monkton are existing examples.

8.45.

In planning terms, new facilities could include the reuse of rural buildings, particularly those that are listed, or possibly the conversion or part use of large existing residential properties. The following Policy will apply to such proposals.

(POLICY NOT SAVED) T9 - RURAL TOURISM

PROPOSALS FOR THE CONVERSION OF BUILDINGS IN RURAL SETTLEMENTS TO TOURISM-RELATED USES WILL BE PERMITTED, SUBJECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND TRAFFIC CONSIDERATIONS. THE CONVERSION OF FARM BUILDINGS WILL ALSO BE SUBJECT TO POLICIES R5 AND HE3.

PICNIC AREAS, NATURE WALKS AND OTHER MODEST FACILITIES PROMOTING GREEN TOURISM IN THESE AREAS ARE CONSIDERED DESIRABLE AND WILL BE ENCOURAGED.

TARGETS
LP Implementation Target
Policy Area
Amusement Uses
Relevant Policies
T7
Indicator
Number of amusement arcades permitted outside designated areas.
Target
Nil.
Monitoring
Monitoring of planning applications

References:

‘The Economic Impact of Tourism’. Thanet 1998. South-East England Tourist Board. April 2000

‘Margate Old Town Action Plan, ‘A Vision for the Future of Margate’’ Public Consultation Document. TDC & Kent Architecture Centre. 2000.

‘Ramsgate Renaissance’. A Vision for Ramsgate Waterfront. TDC. ARUP October 1998.

‘Amusement Centres’. Development Control Practice Notes. Issue 23-02/94. G Holt.

‘Sir Moses Montefiore and Ramsgate’, by Gill Wyatt. Kent County Council. 1984.

« Back to contents page | Back to top