Agenda item

Mr Brian Collins (Deputy leader of the Council) with Rebecca Spore (Director of Infrastructure), Stephanie Holt-Castle (Director of Growth and Communities), Hugh D’Alton (Strategic Programme Manager) and James Pearson (Head of Libraries, and Registration & Archives) were in attendance for this item.

 

 

1. Mr Collins presented the key item to the Members; the following was discussed:

 

a)    Outlined the ongoing holding costs for keeping Grace Hill and the sites current state of disrepair which had remained unchanged since December 2022. It was highlighted that this had placed significant financial pressure on the Council.

 

b)    Restoring Grace Hill to even a basic, habitable condition would likely require substantial expenditure. The Deputy Leader discussed that as a Council there was a responsibility to balance investment and spending across the entire County, not just at one locale.

 

c)    Following the closure of the Grace Hill Library in 2022, a temporary library facility was established opposite the original site to ensure continuity of service for residents.

 

d)    The temporary library had been in place opposite Grace Hill along with other measures since its closure in 2022. The library did not provide residents with the experience or resource levels expected of a fully operating library in the Town Centre. It had also lacked a proper adult section and a proper children’s section, and although staff on site were working extremely hard the limitations of the premises had remained very restricted in delivery of offer.

 

e)    If the option of returning the library to the Grace Hill building was to be pursued, there would be no immediate reinstatement of services. The Deputy Leader suggested that in reality and under favourable conditions, it would likely take around three years before the building could reopen and that was only if such an investment were financially viable for the Council to pursue.

 

f)      The Council had agreed to look for alternative location for a temporary service in the town centre where the full-service offer could be delivered. The best site found was the former Woolworths building, 14 Sandgate Road, as a potential site for delivering library services. This option had offered a significant opportunity. It would provide the people of Folkestone with a dedicated, fully equipped library and included a complete adult section and a complete children’s section. Adult Education Services would also move into the location and align with the administration’s commitment to creating spaces that offer more than a just traditional library provision and ensure that the Folkestone has a full town centre offering.

 

g)    The Deputy Leader acknowledged that passions were understandably running high among some residents of Folkestone and acknowledged and respected those feelings. While the intention was for the Grace Hill site to go to auction in February, that process had not yet taken place. The door was therefore not fully closed to any offers to purchase the building.

 

h)    The Deputy Leader elaborated that there were still time and opportunities for individuals or organisations to come forward with alternative proposals for the future of the former Grace Hill Library building. Any viable option that benefited the community could still be considered before the auction process was finalised.

 

2. In response to comments and questions from Members and guests, discussion covered the following:

 

a)    Members discussed how historically, the library service had always been delivered solely from the ground floor. There had never been a requirement for users to go upstairs or downstairs to access library services. This was the basis of the community proposal for the future use of Grace Hill: that the library would continue to operate exclusively on the ground floor, with the upper and lower floors would be repurposed for other community?led activities

 

b)    The Deputy Leader responded that the statement of the Grace Hill building being inherently superior to the alternative simply because the alternative is “all on one floor” did not hold. From a library?service perspective, both buildings were effectively equivalent. The service at Grace Hill had always been delivered entirely on a single level. Members also highlighted the move of Adult Education from their current property to a higher rent property in view of the Grace Hill library as a cost increase that lacked rationale. It was further noted that the Grace Hill Library had occupied two floors, with the local history collections accommodated on the upper level.

 

c)    Members further queried the £2.9 Million pound cost of repairs being an accurate and concise figure and raised concerns on the how the new lease at Sandgate Road for 15 years had not been brought via referral before a committee. The pedestrianisation of the new library location would also impact those with limited mobility to access the site as ‘drop-off and pick up options were limited in the area.

 

d)    Break clauses within the temporary library lease were raised as a mechanism that could enable and allow a Creative Folkestone?led, community?based bid to take over the Grace Hill site, generate income, and take responsibility for the building’s ongoing upkeep. Members added that the absence of any commercial bids in response to previous tender invitations for the Grace Hill site could indicate limited commercial value or interest in developing the property.

 

e)    Mr Prater suggested that a hybrid approach could be taken with partners if they would put forward a bid that aimed to protect the Council from any revenue costs associated with that building. The proposal would support a consultation process to identify and secure funding for a full refurbishment and redevelopment of the site, bringing it up to a modern, fit?for?purpose standard. Importantly, their timeline extended through to 2030, which would provide the necessary space for that work to be fully planned and delivered. Such an approach would not only enable the community to explore a long?term vision for the building but would also safeguard the Council’s asset in the meantime.

 

f)      The Deputy Leader acknowledged the proposal but elaborated on the current state of the Grace Hill site after his recent visit. The property was a listed (Grade II) building which also complicated matters. Issues on water ingress, roof repairs and hazardous mould were discussed. Ongoing security and holding costs also remained a notable outlay for the Council.

 

g)    Members noted the administration’s recent renewed investment in County Hall and suggested that a similar approach could be applied to Grace Hill. It was suggested that the Grace Hill Library building had originally been gifted to the people of Folkestone in 1888 as a beacon of learning and opportunity, and therefore some Members questioned whether it should be considered KCC’s asset to dispose of. The Member urged KCC to work collaboratively with Creative Folkestone and the Save Folkestone Library groups to facilitate a sustainable solution. Mr Brady confirmed his support for Option 2A, which proposed working with these groups to retain the Folkestone Library service at the Grace Hill site.

 

h)    Mr Brady proposed that a covenant be placed on the Grace Hill site; this proposal was seconded by Mrs Hudson. Mr Brady explained that, should Members decide not to support Option 2A which would seek to retain the building and continue working with Creative Folkestone and the Save Folkestone Library – Grace Hill campaign—then, in the event that the Council proceeds with a sale, a covenant should be applied. This covenant would ensure that the building remained in community use for the benefit of the residents of Folkestone.

 

i)      Members discussed the proposals set out in the amendment and suggested that it would be helpful to Members to provide some clarity on the Council’s disposal policy and the relevant processes that were applied.

 

j)      Officers highlighted that the amendment being proposed would not align with the Council’s Freehold Disposal Policy, and any decision would therefore need to be considered within the context of that policy. The Council had clear obligations regarding secure and prudent investment, and although there were circumstances in which wider social or community benefits could be considered, these must be carefully assessed as part of the decision?making process.

 

k)    Officers suggested that it was important to highlight the position regarding a potential auction. As referenced in the exempt paper’s financial figures. Any reserve would be informed by an up?to?date valuation and agreed in consultation with the auctioneers to ensure it was appropriate and compliant with KCC’s policy requirements.

 

l)      Members acknowledged the clarification but suggested that the Committees role should be to set and challenge policies. Officers addressed the point and reminded the committee that the Council had adopted the Freehold disposal policy.

 

m)  Additional caution was urged by officers on the implications associated with application a covenant to the property. While such a covenant could protect the facility—unless it were later varied or removed—it would also affect who may be able to come forward for the property at auction. It would likely influence the value of the building and could limit the range of potential bidders and the types of proposals they might bring forward

 

n)    Officers reminded Members that the Grace Hill building was a listed building. Any change of use to a purpose not already permitted under current planning regulations would require planning consent. Additionally, any works that affected the historic fabric of the building would require listed building consent. These matters would fall under the jurisdiction of Folkestone & Hythe District Council, as they are the local planning authority. Kent County Council did not hold planning authority in the discussed context.

 

o)    The vote for Mr Bradys proposal was taken. Members requested the voting be recorded in the minutes.

 

For (4)

 

Mr Brady, Mrs Hudson, Mr Prater and Mr Hood

 

Against (6)

 

Mr Defriend, Mr Waters, Mr Paul, Mrs Porter, Mr Sian and Mr Mole.

 

Abstain (3)

 

Mr Thomas, Mr Mallon and Mr Fryer

 

The Chair noted that the proposal was unsuccessful.

 

p)    The Deputy Leader reiterated that the property would likely proceed to auction. However, it was emphasised again that the opportunity for organisations such as Creative Folkestone remained open, adding that the option had not been closed. Extensive discussions had already taken place with the organisation, and if they were still able to bring forward proposals the Council would remain receptive to discussions.

 

q)    Mrs Hudson expressed her strong opposition to the sale of the Grace Hill site and suggested that KCC should explore opportunities to work with the wider Folkestone community in order to identify a sustainable future for Grace Hill.

 

r)     Mrs Hudson proposed a vote on option 2A, the proposal was that the Council would accept Creative Folkestone’s intention to work towards an alternative, grant?funded vision for the future of the Grace Hill building. During an undetermined period, the temporary library service would continue to operate from 14 Sandgate Road, on the basis that once the Grace Hill building had been brought back to life and made fully fit for purpose, the library service would return to the Grace Hill site.

 

3.In response to the Members concerns the Deputy Leader Discussed the following:

 

a)    Highlighted that the potential holding costs associated with the Grace Hill site for any interested party could amount to approximately £300,000–£500,000 over a three? to five?year period.

 

b)    It was important to bring Members back to the content of the paper, which sets out the extensive background to the Grace Hill and Folkestone Library matter—covering the original closure, the establishment of the temporary library, and the findings from the public consultation.

 

c)    The criteria by which KCC would assess proposals had been identified at a very early stage. These criteria were included within the public consultation materials and had remained consistent throughout the entire process. Documentation had been in the public domain for a significant period of time.

 

d)    The January 2025 key decision authorised work to identify and establish an alternative temporary library provision. This had led to the work on the temporary facility at 14 Sandgate Road and this was in direct response to views expressed as part of the public consultation as outlined in the January 2025 decision.

 

e)    Officers further explained how the January 2025 key decision had given all parties a clear road map for the commencement of the asset of community value process and the Councils future intentions. Officers confirmed that all community groups that had shown and interest had been contacted.

 

f)      The paper provided to Members had captured the appraised proposals as formally articulated to officers. Officers had engaged extensively with Creative Folkestone, and there was detailed dialogue regarding the condition of the Grace Hill building. KCC had provided information on the building itself and on the way in which KCC constructed and managed its property budgets. In addition, discussions were held regarding the service requirements that would need to be met.

 

g)    Officers discussed that engagement had taken place thoroughly, and it had taken place continuously since the January 2025 decision. The paper evaluated the proposal as it had been submitted. It was raised that Members may have heard speculation today that goes beyond what is included in the formal submission, but the Council could only appraise what had been written and what had been formally provided for County Council consideration.

 

h)    Notable concerns were raised regarding the ability of any community group to meet the ongoing holding costs associated with the Grace Hill site.

 

4. Members acknowledged the response from officers and in addition responded:

 

a)    Raised that no face-to-face meeting has taken place between Creative Folkestone and Cabinet Members.  The Cabinet Member responded to the concerns and confirmed that that they were not correct. The KCC Presentation delivered and shared with the press was perceived as poor timing. disparity in the administration’s approach to the Grace Hill building compared with its approach to this building here. Member urges support for option 2A, using a temporary library location and with a view of restoring Grace Hill.

 

b)    Returning to Mrs Hudson’s proposal, which had been seconded by Mr Prater, Members requested the voting be recorded in the minutes. The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (5)

 

Mr Brady, Mrs Hudson, Mr Hood, Mr Prater and Mr Thomas.

 

Against (6)

 

Mr Defriend, Mr Waters, Mr Paul, Mrs Porter, Mr Sian and Mr Mole.

 

Abstain (2)

 

Mr Fry and Mr Mallon

 

The Chair noted the second proposal was unsuccessful.

 

c)    Mr Thomas proposed that the decision be split and that the disposal of the Grace Hill site be deferred from auction for a period of two months to allow for further investigation. Mrs Hudson seconded the proposal. Members requested the voting be recorded in the minutes.. The vote was recorded as follows:

 

For (3)

 

Mr Thomas, Mr Hood, and Mrs Hudson.

 

Against (9)

 

Mr Brady, Mr Prater, Mr Defriend, Mr Fryer, Mr Waters, Mr Paul, Mrs Porter,

Mr Sian and Mr Mole.

 

Abstain (1)

 

Mr Mallon

 

The Chair noted the third proposal was unsuccessful.

 

d)    Mrs Lawes as a local representative of Folkestone’s, discussed the desire to keep the site but acknowledged the considerable costs involved. The Member further added that herself and Cllr Baker had met directly with representatives from the Creative Foundation in the creative quarter to discuss the situation.

 

e)    Members suggested modifying proposal 2A to allow Creative Folkestone enough space and time to come back to the council with a full proposal that would satisfy the Councils concerns.

 

f)      The Deputy Leader noted the proposal but suggested that the timeframes to auction were incredibly tight and that if an organisation could make a multi-million-pound commitment over a number of years it could be looked at. It was highlighted that the period for offers to come forward had been extensive, and those parties had not made themselves visible to the Council or at this time shown any interest in acquiring the Grace Hill site.

 

g)    A final vote was proposed by Mr Brady and seconded by Mr Prater, The Chair clarified that this was to vote for the endorsement of option 1A and would close out the discussion. Members requested the voting be recorded in the minutes.

 

For (8)

 

Mr Defriend, Mr Mallon, Mr Fryer, Mr Waters, Mr Paul, Mrs Porter, Mr Sian

and Mr Mole.

 

Against (4)

 

Mr Brady, Mr Hood, Mrs Hudson and Mr Prater.

 

Abstain (1)

 

Mr Thomas

 

The Chair noted the final position.

 

RESOLVED to endorse the proposed decision, namely:

 

That the Cabinet Member for Community and Regulatory Services agree to:

 

a)     Reaffirm the Council’s commitment to delivering a sustainable, comprehensive town-centre Library and Registration Service in Folkestone.

 

b)    Note the outcome of the 2 Grace Hill Asset of Community Value and marketing process, including the outcome of the KCC evaluation of Creative Folkestone’s proposal alongside other options for the library service.

 

c)    Confirm 14 Sandgate Road as the location of the Folkestone town centre Library and Registration service for the foreseeable future. 

 

d)    Confirm that the Council remains open to considering the location of the library service as part of its ongoing estates management best practice. With the next review now likely to take place in late 2028.

 

e)    Confirm that the Council will progress with open market disposal of the Grace Hill building.

 

f)      Delegate authority to the Director of Infrastructure, in liaison with the Deputy Leader, to finalise terms and enter contracts necessary to implement the decision regarding the Grace Hill building and the Sandgate Road building