Planning application summary for Kingston Ancient Market And Market House Market Place

26/00056/FUL the application proposes to refurbish the Grade II* Market House so that the ground floor can operate as a restaurant or café and the first floor as a bar with some community, cultural and event use, while also carrying out the internal alterations needed to make that work, including new toilets, kitchen and serving areas, improved access, and a new lift and staircase. At the same time, it proposes to replace the existing market stalls in the square with new permanent kiosks, allow temporary pop-up and themed markets and events, reuse the basement beneath the square for storage, bins and market servicing, install a lift down to that basement, create outdoor seating areas, and make the square function as a more flexible and actively managed market and public space.

Overview

This planning application concerns Kingston Ancient Market, Market Place and the Grade II* Market House at the centre of Kingston’s Old Town. In broad terms, it proposes a combined package of works to the square, the market infrastructure and the listed building. The application seeks permission for replacement of the existing permanent market stalls, flexible use of the square for temporary and themed markets, refurbishment and change of use of Market House, refurbishment of the basement storage area, installation of a new scissor lift and associated railings, provision of new seating and public realm works, and relocation of the Shrubsole Monument within the square. The applicant presents the scheme as a heritage-led renewal intended to improve functionality, accessibility, public realm quality, commercial viability and civic use.

The application is not simply about replacing stalls. It is also about redefining how the square and Market House would function together. The submitted material presents the proposal as a new year-round destination combining market trading, food and drink, temporary events, community activity and cultural programming. The application is therefore both physical and operational. That is an important point, because several of the supporting documents make clear that the long-term success of the scheme depends not only on design but on management, event programming, servicing, security, licensing and day-to-day operation.

The site and its civic significance

The application documents repeatedly stress the special status of the site. Market Place is described as the historic heart of Kingston, the core of the Old Town Conservation Area, and one of the town’s principal civic spaces. Its triangular footprint is presented as unusually significant because it still preserves a medieval street pattern and long-established market function. The square contains the Grade II* Market House and the Grade II Shrubsole Monument, and sits within the setting of a number of listed and locally listed buildings, most prominently Grade I All Saints Church and the Guildhall.

The documents also argue that the current condition of the market arrangement detracts from that significance. The Planning Statement and Design and Access document describe the existing stalls as visually cluttered, poor in condition and restrictive of circulation and sightlines. They also identify poor seating, limited step-free access, inadequate trader back-of-house provision, lack of greenery and limited civic flexibility as existing weaknesses. In the applicant’s case, the scheme is therefore intended to address both physical deterioration and a wider mismatch between the present layout and the square’s heritage and civic role.

Main components of the proposal

At the level of land use and physical works, the proposal has several main parts.

First, the existing permanent stalls would be removed and replaced with a new arrangement of produce kiosks, food kiosks, a bar kiosk, toilet provision, seating areas and associated service spaces. The application material describes these kiosks as modular, prefabricated, timber-based structures intended to be more functional and better serviced than the current ones. The basement below the square would be refurbished and reused for storage, bins, recycling and market equipment, with access via a new scissor lift and ground-level safety railings. Temporary stalls and event tents would also be enabled in the square.

Second, Market House would be brought into regular use. The ground floor is proposed for restaurant and café use. The first floor is described across the documents as a mix of bar, community, creative, cultural and event space. The works include new WCs, kitchen and servery areas, new internal openings, a new staircase and lift within the south-west wing, and other alterations designed to make the building more usable and accessible. The applicant says the intention is to restore an active relationship between the building and the square while giving the listed building a viable long-term use.

Third, the square itself would become more flexible. The planning documents describe a central area in front of Market House for event, cultural and family use, while the southern part of the square would accommodate temporary markets and pop-up activities. The supporting material gives examples including artisan markets, music or cultural events, sports screenings, sports provision and even an ice rink. The Shrubsole Monument would be moved southwards in order to release more central open space.

Design evolution and the revised scheme

One notable aspect of the application is that the proposal changed through the pre-application process. The Design Review Panel, convened at pre-application stage, regarded the site as highly significant but criticised the then scheme as too architectural, insufficiently rooted in context and over-reliant on the stalls as objects rather than as market infrastructure. It called for a clearer sustainability strategy, a rethink of the masterplan and key views, simplification of the stall design, better evidence on heritage impact, and more thought about management and servicing.

The submitted Design and Access document explicitly shows a change in kiosk height after the design review process. It compares an October 2025 consultation proposal at 4.22 metres with a December 2025 proposed scheme at 3 metres. The revised material presents this as part of a reduction in visual bulk and massing. In that sense, the application documents themselves suggest that public and design review feedback led to a lower and lighter scheme than the earlier version.

Heritage case

The heritage case put forward by the applicant is relatively clear. The documents accept that the scheme would involve some harm to heritage significance, particularly through alterations to the listed Market House and the introduction of new market structures. However, that harm is described as low and “less than substantial”. It is said to be outweighed by public benefits, including securing a viable use for Market House, improving accessibility, reversing some later harmful alterations, decluttering the square, improving views of surrounding heritage assets, and enhancing public use and functionality.

The applicant’s heritage position can be summarised as follows. External works to Market House such as lowering cills to create new openings and replacing modern steps are presented as heritage benefits because they reverse less sympathetic modern changes. Internal works such as insertion of kitchens, bars, a lift and new openings between principal rooms are accepted as causing minor harm, but largely in areas said to have lower significance or as necessary consequences of securing a viable use. The new stalls are presented as an improvement on the current degraded structures, with reduced roof profile, timber construction and better sightlines. Relocation of the Shrubsole Monument is said to cause no harm to its significance or setting.

Market House and proposed uses

Market House is central to the application. The Planning Statement says the building has lacked a defined and regular use in recent years and that this underuse is itself harmful to the listed building and conservation area. The proposal therefore links conservation to activation. The ground floor would operate as restaurant and café space, while the first floor would become a combination of hospitality and public-facing uses. Across the submitted documents, that upper-floor offer is variously described as bar use, community space, event space, creative space and cultural space.

The Operational Management Plan is more specific about how the building would run. It states that bar operations at first-floor level would be overseen by a Bars Manager. It also sets out proposed operating hours. Market stalls are envisaged as running from 07:00 to 22:30 Sunday to Wednesday and to 23:30 Thursday to Saturday. Market House would operate from 07:00 to 23:30 on Sundays, to 00:30 Monday to Wednesday, and to 01:30 Thursday to Saturday, with provision for some pre-booked late-night events subject to licensing conditions and management controls.

Market infrastructure, public realm and temporary uses

The market element is presented as a shift from poorly performing fixed stalls to a more coordinated and serviced arrangement. The new kiosks are described as prefabricated, removable structures with integrated drainage, plant and back-of-house provision. The basement would support their operation through storage and waste management. The design and sustainability documents describe the structures as timber, semi-external, naturally ventilated and intended to reduce the ad hoc additions that currently contribute to clutter.

The square would also become more heavily programmed. The submitted documents envisage temporary and themed markets, performance events, external seating, family space and flexible public use. This is one of the reasons the Operational Management Plan is so important within the application pack. It sets out an operational model concerned with servicing, waste, cleaning, footfall, sound control, alcohol management, stewarding, lighting, access control and occupancy management. The applicant’s wider case is that the site should function as a managed civic-commercial environment rather than only as a traditional daytime market.

Consultation and recorded feedback

The Statement of Community Involvement describes a programme of pre-application consultation. According to that document, there was stallholder consultation on 10 July 2025, public consultation sessions on 12 and 14 July, a second round including a one-day in-person event on 27 September 2025, online consultation periods, leaflet distribution to around 1,000 homes, website material and stakeholder engagement with councillors, Kingston First, All Saints Church, Historic England, the Conservation Area Advisory Committee and the Design Review Panel. The application material says more than 300 responses were received in the first phase.

The consultation summary included in the SCI records mixed and shifting public sentiment. In the first consultation round, support for the principle of the works was recorded at 52.5 per cent, with 25.6 per cent against. By the second round, support had fallen to 33.3 per cent and opposition had risen to 45.8 per cent. On design specifically, support fell from 58.0 per cent in the earlier round to 18.8 per cent in the later round, while opposition rose to 45.8 per cent. The summary identifies the main concerns as heritage impact, the scale and visual dominance of the stalls, commercialisation and loss of traditional market character. It also records support for better public realm, active use of Market House, seating, lighting and planting.

Sustainability, biodiversity and transport

The sustainability case is modest rather than transformational, but it is more detailed than a simple design narrative. The Sustainability Statement describes the kiosks as semi-external, naturally ventilated and low-energy in operation. It proposes photovoltaics on suitable kiosk roofs, a heat pump or VRF system for Market House, energy-efficient lighting, rainwater collection and reuse, green roofs, planters, and design for disassembly and recycling. The statement also notes that no additional car parking is proposed and points to the site’s strong public transport accessibility.

In biodiversity terms, the site is described as having little existing ecological value. The proposed ecological response is therefore mainly through biodiverse roofs and limited planting rather than large-scale landscape change. The statement also notes that the design team has deliberately kept planting restrained in order to preserve openness within the square.

Noise and amenity

The Noise Impact Assessment concludes that the continued and expanded operation of the market and Market House can be managed within acceptable limits for a mixed-use town-centre setting. It says that predicted façade changes are negligible, internal break-in levels remain within guidance, no significant adverse noise effects are expected, and the operation would remain below the Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level in most cases. The assessment relies on management through a Sound Management Plan, plant specification, servicing protocols and routine monitoring rather than major physical acoustic mitigation.

Overall planning position in the submitted papers

Taken as a whole, the application papers present the scheme as a heritage-led but commercially managed renewal of Kingston’s ancient market. The central proposition is that the current arrangement is physically and functionally inadequate, that Market House needs a viable new use, and that the square should operate as a more flexible public space with stronger market infrastructure and a broader day-to-evening offer. The applicant’s planning case is that any limited heritage harm is outweighed by benefits in accessibility, public realm quality, viability, activation, trader infrastructure and long-term use.

From a civic perspective, the key themes running through the application are clear. They are heritage and reuse, public realm decluttering, market modernisation, operational management, and the balance between open square, active market and programmed destination. The documents show that this balance was the main subject of both consultation feedback and design review critique. The revised application responds to some of that criticism, most visibly in reduced kiosk height and a more developed sustainability narrative, but it remains, by its own terms, a proposal in which design, heritage and management are tightly intertwined.