The post you are reporting:
Alex #1544,
Long term core strategies are subject to review, change, modification on a fairly regular basis and a corporate plan is a perfectly acceptable tool to use to make such a modification. In Port Masterplanning I would expect to conduct a significant review every 5 to 7 years with such significant reviews involving a rework/rewrite of major portions of a 30 year masterplan. Whether such a rewrite/rework was introduced directly into the plan, which would then become the Masterplan v2.0, or was implemented by way of a new 5 year corporate plan would not make a material difference. I should imagine that the relationship between core strategy and corporate plan is similar in local government.
In the simple then, DDC core strategy is erm well a long term strategy, a guiding document, subject to change/modification because it is so long term that it cannot take account of changes in physical and economic circumstance which occur between the date of publication and present date. A corporate plan is erm well a medium term plan developed for implementation as a modification to the strategy that takes account of more recent physical/economic changes.
If EH had done their job properly and if they had kept to the commitments that they made with regard to the heights, then CGI proposals would not have gained any traction whatsoever.
EH deserve to be defied and held to account for what they have not done over the last 20 years up on the heights. As a member of EH yourself Alex you have a level of responsibility to keep them to their word, it is past time that the membership of EH held their organisation to account and agitated for EH to live up to its obligations instead of condeming the heights to death by a thousand cuts.
There is no contradiction between WHPS' dedication to preserving the heights and their feeling of abandonment by EH. EH have left the heights largely abandoned and allowed them to decay with ONLY WHPS doing anything significant to arrest the decline. I think I'd feel abandoned by the landlord as well.
Instead of having a go at Paul or the WHPS, who do not deserve it, have a go at the organisations which have failed the heights for 20 years. Demand that they present costed plans and a timetable for restoring all the damage that they have allowed to happen and commit to open the Drop Redoubt as a permanent visitor attraction and re-open all of the moats to the public within 24 months.
At least the CGI plans offer something. EH and the CPRE offer nothing but decay and ruin for the area and EH, of whom much is made as heroes of the piece riding to the rescue, are the body directly responsible for the decay and the fact that this SAM is on the 'at risk' register.
In my book, EH are the villains of this piece, not CGI and certainly not the WHPS.