Our town, Our say

If you care about Margate for the next five years and beyond, now is the time to speak up!

Why we’re worried

1. Accountability. The ownership and company setup make long-term responsibility unclear. We want firm safeguards in writing.

2. Nature. The developer’s own report shows many trees, hedgerow and an exceptional slow-worm population at risk, with bat activity on site. Thanet’s tree canopy is about 4 percent - very low!

3. Affordability. Only 10 percent “affordable” is offered where 30 percent is expected, with no social rent.

4. GP capacity. The NHS asks for money but names no project to expand local GP services before people move in.

5. Public access. We want green routes and open space to be genuinely public and welcoming.
   
   

What we want the council to secure

• Clear ownership and responsibilities published in plain English, with duties that bind future owners.

• Independent ecology check, keep the best trees and hedgerows, protect bats with dark corridors, and a funded 30-year habitat plan.

• At least 30 percent affordable housing with a portion at social rent, and limits on short-term lets.

• A binding plan to deliver local GP capacity before occupation.

• Permanent public access to green routes and open spaces on the site.
  
  

Scroll further down to read the longer statement from Margate residents (approx. 7 minute read)

Full Statement from Margate residents  -   Long read, approx. 7 minutes

Re: Application OL/TH/25/0996 (Former Royal School for Deaf Children site)

Margate residents have things to say.

We are not going to be quiet while this is happening in the middle of our town.

Margate residents are united 

At 6.30pm on Wednesday 15th October, Margate residents met outside the council offices to protest the private development of the former Royal School for Deaf Children, one of the largest central sites in Margate, used for learning and care since 1792. KCC bought the site in 2020 specifically for a new secondary school, then declared it surplus and sold it in 2024. Now there is an outline plan for 150 private properties on about 12.8 acres (≈5.18 hectares) in the middle of Margate. Residents are concerned that a site bought by the county council for a school in 2020 has become a private scheme in 2025.

This substantial area of land has served the community for generations, and many of us feel strongly that the current proposal for development by Geronimo Estates LLP explicitly does not meet Margate’s needs, as well as presenting a threat to local wildlife and ecology. Residents want any new schemes to meet Thanet’s policies on affordable housing, real community space, GP capacity, trees and biodiversity. Public access to green areas is unclear within the plans, and we want guarantees that green routes and open space will be open for public benefit, and welcoming. Residents want the facts, and for any new permissions to deliver real local benefit, in accordance with local planning rules and statutory obligations.

Who we are dealing with and the accountability needed

The planning application is in the name of Geronimo Estates LLP. The applicant’s own Statement of Community Involvement says the site was acquired on 20 December 2024 by a company linked to the Square Bay group. Public filings show several related, project-specific companies in that group; these can be sold on or closed after a scheme. That is common in development, but it makes long-term accountability harder. Residents want simple, practical transparency and firm safeguards so there is always someone clearly responsible for public access, trees and habitats, affordable homes, and basic upkeep.

The accountability package we are asking for:

1. Name the freeholder exactly as shown on the Land Registry and publish a plain-English ownership chart so people can see who controls the site now and who will manage it later.

2. Fix responsibilities in writing. Through Section 106 and/or covenants, identify the body that will look after public open space, trees and habitats for 30 years, with a funded management plan and contact details.

3. Secure money up front. Use a bond or escrow to pay for habitat management, Biodiversity Net Gain delivery, tree replacement and public space maintenance so commitments survive any company changes.

4. Tie obligations to the land and sequence delivery. Make all key duties bind successors; require annual public reporting on affordable housing, BNG, tree canopy and bat-friendly lighting; and allow no occupation until ownership, management and funding arrangements are confirmed and published.

5. Lock in community protections. Guarantee permanent public access to green routes and open space; deliver affordable housing that includes social rent; and provide local GP capacity that is open before residents move in.

6. Add step-in powers and fair charges. Give the council step-in powers if the responsible company fails, recover costs from the bond, and cap and publish any estate charges linked to public areas with an independent dispute route.

Protecting our wildlife and local ecology

The developer’s own ecology report confirms heavy habitat loss on the former school site: removal of 51 scattered trees plus five trees within woodland, removal of sections of Habitat of Principal Importance hedgerow, an exceptional slow-worm population that needs major mitigation, and bat activity across the site with strict lighting limits recommended.

In England, biodiversity net gain is now mandatory. The law says developments must leave habitats “in a measurably better state than they were before”. That means publishing a clear baseline, showing the score after development, and then managing habitats for the long term so nature genuinely gains, not shrinks.

Margate residents want independent checking of the Biodiversity Net Gain calculations, full protection of what remains, and strict application of Thanet’s policies on biodiversity and trees before any decision is made.

Quote from a local ecological consultant (name withheld):

“There are bats utilising the site, and when I looked more closely at the biodiversity net gain they are hugely in a deficit because there are lots of habitats on site. About half of the good-condition trees and more than half of the moderate-condition trees are actually being removed. Thanet’s tree cover is disastrously low — we should not be chopping down any trees.”

What wildlife do we have at the site on Victoria Road?

The former school site is largely green, and is roughly the size of seven full-size football pitches, or 51,100 m² (about 41 Olympic pools). It has neutral grassland, blocks of broadleaved and mixed woodland (sycamore, holm oak, yew, ash, lime, beech, cherry, birch, horse chestnut), mixed scrub and native hedgerows, a small shaded pond, and many scattered, mixed-age trees. 

Thanet’s tree canopy is only about 4 percent, when UK towns and cities average about 16–17 percent tree canopy, and the South-East’s urban average is 22 percent. With Thanet comparing to only roughly a quarter of the UK urban average and about a fifth of the South-East average, this means every mature tree here in Margate is doing extra work for shade on hot days, cleaner air, flood soak-up and a calmer, greener feel to our town. 

The government puts it simply: “The value of trees in urban areas cannot be underestimated. They provide homes for birds and other wildlife, offer shade and natural cooling effects, help to reduce flood risk, and provide huge benefits for our health and wellbeing.” When you start from 4 percent, losing dozens of trees bites into the health of the whole place, with nest sites, shade, and insect food lost in one go. Fewer trees and hedges means fewer insects, fewer birds, fewer bats at dusk, and fewer small animals higher up the food chain. Remove the canopy and hedgerows here and it unpicks a local web of life that keeps Margate cooler, softer and more alive.

Bats, that protect us, need our protection now

Residents see and hear bats regularly along the tree lines, with detectors picking up common pipistrelles most evenings. Bats are our built-in pest control; a tiny common pipistrelle can eat more than 3,000 midges and other small flies in a night. All British bats and their roosts are legally protected, and Natural England’s planning advice says councils must treat bat protection as a material consideration. 

A local bat ecologist has warned that removing woodland and mature trees before a full bat survey and report is published risks harming protected species and the routes they use to fly and feed. Bats rely on connected, dark corridors of trees and hedges. Bright new lighting and gaps in hedgerows can push them out. Even the applicant’s own report recommends strict lighting limits here, which shows how sensitive this site already is.

On that basis, the application should not be decided until a full seasonal bat survey is published and independently reviewed, with a clear dark-corridor lighting plan, habitat connectivity retained and improved, and any works timed to avoid harm to roosts.

Slow-worms live here too, and some of them could be 30 years old!

An “exceptional” number of slow-worms live on this site too. They are gentle, shiny, legless lizards with eyelids, and they can drop their tail to escape harm. Females give birth to live young in late summer and they can live for decades. They reach maturity at about 3–5 years, many adults live 10–20 years, and well-protected wild individuals can exceed 20–30 years. In gardens and allotments they are our allies, quietly eating slugs and other pests. 

Slow-worms are protected by law and government guidance is clear that it is an offence to intentionally kill or injure our native reptiles. If their warm grass and scrub is scraped away or chopped into fragments, we lose precious native reptiles, as well as an important link that helps the whole chain of wildlife above them. Having a slow-worm population on a single urban site is uncommon and ecologically important.

Planning-wise, an “exceptional” population is the top survey category used in UK ecology reports. It usually triggers strong constraints: avoid and retain as much habitat as possible, phased vegetation clearance under an ecologist, a proven receptor site with long-term management and monitoring, and timing to avoid harm. Because slow-worms live a long time, move only short distances, and are faithful to their patch. Any token translocation or loss of their core habitat can crash the local population, and is hard to fix later.

Margate residents believe they will not be able to afford these homes

TDC’s Strategic Housing department says the scheme offers 10 percent affordable housing, against their 30 percent policy expectation, and they recommend an independent viability review. There is no commitment to socially rented homes, which means people on the housing list are unlikely to be offered any of the proposed new builds. 

Many residents know from experience that “affordable housing” often is not affordable at all. In other places, shared ownership schemes have demanded incomes that ordinary working people do not have. If people on local wages cannot afford the rent, it is not affordable. The current local housing allowance states that for a Margate resident aged 35 years old or more, the maximum local rent they should be paying is £570 per month. Margate already has a serious holiday home and short-term-let issue. People fear a chunk of these private properties could end up as holiday lets unless the council puts firm conditions in place.

We want the council to conduct an independent viability review, and to ensure that the 30 percent quota for affordable housing is fulfilled, with a portion of this being for social renting.

Quote from a local resident:
“How can a development of this size in the centre of our town be plausible if it does not tangibly support us, the local people? Margate residents contribute to and lift up this town. We set up and run soup kitchens because there is deprivation. We are the social workers, nurses, gardeners, and lots of us are renters. We are hospitality staff for tourists, and run businesses on a shoestring. I know people who change Airbnb beds for second homes. We barely make our rents each month. Most residents here are not rich, and yet we give our spare pennies to charities because of the need here. Thousands of people in Margate are on the housing register, waiting for a home. More are struggling as the rents keep rising, and yet we still keep this town alive. So how can we be so overlooked? It is an insult. Who do the councils expect will serve the community and tourists if residents can’t actually afford to live here anymore?”

Health, services and who carries the load

The NHS letter on the planning file says around 321 extra residents would register with The Limes and Bethesda and requests £185,523, but there is no concrete, named project to create GP capacity for this catchment before people move in. A new GP facility at Westwood Cross is being built, and this is welcome, however it may not expand the two surgeries actually named for this site. Many residents already struggle to access timely medical support, GP appointments seem more scarce than ever and the GP surgeries often tell us they are overstretched. We are asking for TDC to ensure that any application for new dwellings on this site is only approved with a binding plan for local GP capacity tied to phased occupation, not a vague promise or a cheque with no plan.

Civic engagement is needed more than ever

People here have struggled to find clear, accessible documents about the purchase and sale of this land. This matters deeply to our town and we want a real say in what happens next. We feel the process has eluded us until the last moment and that public consultation has been thin. We ask for open, simple ways to take part, like focus groups, roundtables, surveys, street teams with questions, and flyering homes. There are residents and local groups ready to deliver this work. 

It is vital to collect, record and analyse local voices, and to make the process transparent and easy to follow. We ask for more chances to be involved in planning, especially on sites of this size and importance, with better advertising of major applications so people know in time. If these checks and balances are not yet in place, they should be. Many of us have spent our spare time trying to piece together the paper trail. We want the council to do more to support residents to contribute ideas and views in line with planning rules and statutory duties. Residents are willing to be part of an integrative steering or learning group with plain English updates so local people can follow the proposed plans for this site, and feed in.

This is our town and we want a say. Small careful choices now will decide whether future Margate children still see bats flicker at dusk, or whether those little joys quietly disappear.

What residents are asking the council to do

• We want to see the forecasting that said a secondary school was no longer required. 

• We want the documentation that shows how and why the site was deemed “surplus to requirement” and disposed of.

• We want to know why that stage did not involve wider public consultation. 

• We want the green routes and open space on this site to be open to the public.

• We want safeguards in place that acknowledge and account for development risk.

• We want an independent ecological check, not just a client-funded report. 

• We want to keep the highest-value trees and hedgerows.

• We want to design lighting so bats can move safely.

• We want to protect and connect the slow-worm areas.

• We want to protect the tree canopies and replace any lost canopy on site so there is at least no net loss, and preferably a gain. 

• We want to ensure there is a binding plan for local GP capacity.

• We want the council to ensure 30 percent affordable housing.

• We want this to include social rent housing.

• We want the council to support more civic engagement around planning rules.

• We want to be part of a residents steering group for this site.

If you are passionate about this cause and would like to get involved, please email wearemargateresidents@gmail.com

About us

We are local residents volunteering our time. We are not a company, charity or formal entity, and are independent of Thanet District Council, Kent County Council, political parties and the developer. This page is for information only and does not constitute legal or planning advice. We aim to be accurate but cannot guarantee completeness. If you spot an error, please email us.

Privacy: If you sign the resident's statement, the Google form collects your name and street/postcode to verify local support. If you choose to share your email we may contact you with updates. Your data is stored in a password-protected Google account, not shared outside the organising team, and deleted after the planning decision and any appeal (or sooner if you ask). No personal details are published unless you choose to appear on the public supporters list. To withdraw or correct your data, email wearemargateresidents@gmail.com.

References

Kent County Council. “Tree Canopy Cover Report” (PDF). Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/111360/Canopy-cover-report.pdf

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra). “Second Round of Urban Tree Challenge Fund Opens Today.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/second-round-of-urban-tree-challenge-fund-opens-today

Natural England. “Bats: Advice for Making Planning Decisions.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/bats-advice-for-making-planning-decisions

UK Government. “Bats: Protection, Surveys and Licences.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/bats-protection-surveys-and-licences

Bat Conservation Trust. “Flight, Food and Echolocation.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.bats.org.uk/about-bats/flight-food-and-echolocation-2

UK Government. “Reptiles: Advice for Making Planning Decisions.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/reptiles-advice-for-making-planning-decisions

Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Trust. “Slow-worm.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.arc-trust.org/slow-worm

Froglife. “Slow-worm.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.froglife.org/info-advice/amphibians-and-reptiles/slow-worm/

UK Government. “Understanding Biodiversity Net Gain.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/understanding-biodiversity-net-gain

Thanet District Council. “Application OL/TH/25/0996 – Documents.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://planning.thanet.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=T2HDY0QEIXL00

— “Planning Statement, September 2025 (OL/TH/25/0996).” Accessed October 16, 2025. (Via Documents tab.)

— “Statement of Community Involvement, September 2025 (OL/TH/25/0996).” Accessed October 16, 2025. (Via Documents tab.)

— “Ecological Assessment, September 2025 (OL/TH/25/0996).” Accessed October 16, 2025. (Via Documents tab.)

— “Strategic Housing Comment, October 3, 2025 (OL/TH/25/0996).” Accessed October 16, 2025. (Via Documents tab.)

— “NHS Kent and Medway ICB Letter, September 25, 2025 (OL/TH/25/0996).” Accessed October 16, 2025. (Via Documents tab.)

Square Bay. “What We Do.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.squarebay.com/what-we-do/

Square Bay. “The Team.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://www.squarebay.com/the-team/

UK Companies House. “Geronimo Estates LLP: Overview.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/OC429658

UK Companies House. “Geronimo Estates LLP: Officers.” Accessed October 16, 2025. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/OC429658/officers

Kent County Council. “Decision Report 22/00115: Disposal of Land and Buildings at Victoria Road/Park Crescent Road, Margate CT9 1NB.” February 2023. Accessed October 16, 2025. https://democracy.kent.gov.uk:9071/documents/s116579/Decision%20Report.pdf