Guest 764- Registered: 27 Jul 2012
- Posts: 82
Hi Alexander.
I'm sorry if that's how my view has come across - this is not my intention. And I'm not absolutely sure how you've managed to interpret my words as if they're the view of EH !
As I said in #1545, that it is my understanding (because of my experience of them as stated in #1555) that they have rejected the proposals made by CGI because they lack detail.
I would encourage you to come to the public meeting next week, where I'm sure everyone will have a free voice and we will all learn a bit more of the status quo.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
For some reason I have the Magic Roundabout theme tune whirling around in my head
It may surprise you Alexander that there are people in EH that think the Heights are brilliant and should be saved, and others (very senior) that would rather the Heights vanished into a pile of dust... opinions eh?
But.....
What's the answer to my simple question in #1554 then Alexander? A simple option 1 or option 2 will suffice....
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 764- Registered: 27 Jul 2012
- Posts: 82
Paul-aka-Whatever, #1562.
Which one of us is Dougall ?
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, the problem is, the dispute between WHPS and English Heritage, who you say want the Heights to vanish into a pile of dust.
Facts demonstarte the opposite:
1) English Heritage have invested a large sum: £250,000, to save from decay an important component of the Napoleonic defences.
2) They have conducted a study on ivy and ascertained that it protects brick walls from decay. Consequently they gave WHPS instructions to carry out their requirements.
On both these issues WHPS is in dispute with English Heritage.
My gardening experience informs me that ivy does in fact protect walls, but it strangles trees. E.H. quite rightly instructed WHPS on how to preserve the walls.
As for the roots of bushes and trees encroaching onto brickwork, which I posted on yesterday, and also previously on this or another thread, and how to deal with it, it has not been taken up by you or Jeff, nor my point made on securing lose bricks, graffiti removal, repainting metal doors and railings, and the need to have some wardens on the Heights.
Quite clearly we are not seeing eye to eye.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
Just for Paul [URL][/URL].
I can't comment any more, PaulB wants us to play nice.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 764- Registered: 27 Jul 2012
- Posts: 82
Paul-aka-Whatever, #1564.
Sorry, I know this is addressed to you, but do you know which dispute Alexander is talking about ? I don't know of one. What a strange suggestion indeed.
What a peculiar thing to write.
Alexander, I think I did say how removing graffiti and securing brickwork etc involves tons of 'red tape' and money. Recheck my comments, I think you'll find I'm right
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,577
whilst alexanders has some passionate views, but not how to fund them,
i'm now convinced alexander doesn't read/digest other posters comments
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
#1564 - Sadly Alexander I am not going to feed your desire to defame the name of WHPS with your making of false statements and inventing disputes. WHPS will continue to work in partnership with EH to secure the long term future of the Heights, and work within their guidelines and to the laws of a Scheduled Ancient Monument.
Your common sense comments on weeds and bushes and graffit and loose brickwork are already things that are on WHPS radar so there really is no response. None of these things can be completed without Scheduled Monument Consent which would required from EH and are long term projects. Ivy as I have already pointed out (and posted images) causes immense damage to ancient walls with lime mortar which it eats away and eventually blows out whole sections of walls, it certainly isn't protecting it, but EH set the guidelines and WHPS will work within them. Differing opinion yes, dispute no !!
So back to the question:
A - Are you in this for your 15 minutes of fame and picture in the paper
OR
B - Are you in it for the long term, put hours of your free time into it every week, get your hands dirty helping out and still be there in another 10/20 years trying to do the right thing ??
No response I will assume (A) applies.....
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, you wrote:
"there are people in EH that think the Heights are brilliant and should be saved, and others (very senior) that would rather the Heights vanished into a pile of dust... "
Clearly there is a dispute between WHPS and English Heritage.
By writing that the senior members of E.H. would rather the Heights collapsed into dust, you are accusing them of the same things that have been brought against me and those who ran the petition to oppose the CGI planing application.
As for your question about whether I am only interested in a photo in the front page of the press for 15 minutes fame, I already have had this photo together with other petition members, plus the 25 minutes fame.
So if that was what I wanted, having already achieved it, I wouldn't be continuing trying to save the Heights from speculation by people whose sole interests are based on their landownership and profiteering, and not the Western Heights and certainly not Farthingloe.
Don't think for one instant I can't tell the difference between speculative profiteering and preserving Western Heights!
Guest 764- Registered: 27 Jul 2012
- Posts: 82
Well I don't think there's much point in contributing to this thread any more.
It seems to be more about the nonsensicle and quite simply bizarre interpretations of everything that gets written, than about the important issue which is the future of Western Heights and the developments.
So unless a valid point is made (and there hasn't been one of those for too long now), or a genuine discussion point raised which has some validity I shall refrain from posting and just watch and chuckle !
If I can advise with anything to do with the Heights (pretty well know them inside out), please do ask !
Ha ha ha !
Guest 685- Registered: 5 May 2009
- Posts: 85
I note, with pleasure that at least some of the postings agree with me, that legend is of importance to Dover's history and tourism, as is fact.
Fact, from an historic perspective, rests of course, on the interpretation of those who write the history. As it has been said countless times, it is usually the victors. However, as a successful researcher/historian, I am known for my being pedantic, in checking 'stated facts'.
For instance, Jeff Howe, who incidentally wrote a book together with Paul aka Scotchie states in his deliberately derogatory statement of the present Braddon housing, 27 July 2012 - 9:20am #1423, that, ' I became interested in the Western Heights in about 1991.'
I was heavily involved in the fight for Western Heights at that time but do not remember Jeff taking an active part in the proceedings. I do however, remember the stance that English Heritage took.
Their agreement, following my win, was to use profits from the Castle to pay for the work on WH. Now, if memory serves me correct - and I may be wrong - it was about this time that Jeff joined the Friends of Dover Castle and subsequently became the Chairman.
During the period from 1993-1998, as I have recounted many times on this Forum, a lot of promising work was started on the Heights. Besides clearing and disposing of wanton rubbish such as abandoned cars, washing machines etc; a lot of money was spent on repairing and rebuilding the Grand Shaft and some £¼m on re-pointing of the exterior wall of the Redoubt by English Heritage. They also paid for the wooden steps installed by the WCCP.
However, in 1998, as Jeff points out, he started his web site 'Western Heights Today', at that time I did not have access to the internet neither did many others. Albeit, a meeting was set up and much of what had been done since 1957 was 'conveniently forgotten about.' Indeed, in posting #1456 Jeff reiterated the same point he made at that meeting.
At the meeting, I pointed out all that had been done in the intervening seven years but was told, in a very surly manner that I did not know what I was talking about. When I mentioned my 1993 Planning Inquiry win, I was told that it no longer held. I received a letter from DDC confirming this, but in the 2002 LDP showed otherwise. Suffice to say, the officer who wrote that letter backed off.
Now we come to the nitty gritty of this particular set of postings, the proposed CGI development of WH and Farthingloe.
i. This contravenes both local and national local planning schedules and therefore, if given permission, DDC leave themselves wide open to Judicial Review.
ii. The future of WH - as I have suggested several times, that pressure should be put on EH to put money where their mouth is - but this has been met with outright derision particularly form those connected with the WHPS.
iii. Farthingloe - besides being an AONB protected valley also features in recognised in the anthology of Arthurian legends and therefore is a tourist asset.
So it is not case, as Paul # 1554 and Jeff back in 2000, '15 minutes of fame and picture in the paper, and a bit of anti-establishment shouting alongside Lorraine'.
It is trying to get the Establishment, who have shown scant regard for Dover and even less for the Western Heights or Farthingloe, to wake up.
Lorraine
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
#1569 - Alexander, so if/when CGI plans are dropped, you will be up there every weekend trying to better the Heights, etc, etc. etc for the next 10/20 years to save them from further deterioration? As I havs said if you really wanted that you would be helping now and in the past.
Been nice knowing you :)
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,658
I am going to get personal so I apologise in advance.
Lorraine what you did and what happened in the past is really not pertinent to this discussion what is likely to happen in the future is.
This whole discussion has gone on for so long with the same things being said in one form or another over and over again so it is my opinion that those of us with an open mind are wasting our time posting here.
#1567. "i'm now convinced alexander doesn't read/digest other posters comments" from Keith
I could not agree more and that is why there is very little point in replying to him.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
unfortunately what started out as an excellent thread has degenerated into farce with more than one member to my certain knowledge avoiding posting as they think they will be jumped upon.
the viewing figures are massive and the feedback from the public is not good.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
lorraine,1 question.your referance #1 why should there be a legal review on ddc.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Sadly Alexander only had one agenda and that is to dis the Western Heights Preservation Society, despite deing told that they have submitted a comment AGAINST the planning application, and no matter what I say Alexander will just mix my words to turn it round and make out they are the bad guys. He really has no interest in working with anyone which he is proving very well.
I have set up a meeting so that different parties can see the work of WHPS and communicate what various ideas are and how we can work towards the future of the Heights.... no interest....
Lorraine I was interested in the Heights in 1991 (just) when I was still at school. Without putting words into Jeff's mouth, we didn't know each other, both not local, and at that early stage we wouldn't have felt right to get involved in something we knew very little about. Also I fail to see the relevance in me and Jeff writing a book, other that I actually have friends....
I want to work for the FUTURE of the Heights, I care little for past disputes and inflated egos, so similar to others I am going to refrain from posting on this thread until something worthy of comment comes up. Very sad position to be in....
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 764- Registered: 27 Jul 2012
- Posts: 82
You know what ?
I've deleted my response to Lorraine.
This is a pointless thread now.
I broke my own rule: 'Valid arguments only please'.
This should be about the future of WH, not egos.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
For Chris - [URL][/URL]
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
To summarise my view, in order to preserve the Scheduled Monument, the most important work in need of doing is prevention of further damage to the brickwork, and this involves removing the roots of trees and bushes from the walls, and resetting lose bricks.
It cannot be done on a voluntary scale, it must be paid work, as also anything to do with removing graffiti and repainting metal.
Such tasks as those mentioned here require much more than just a few hours on the odd weekend.
And the health and safety regulations need be in place, with qualified personnel directing the works.
We'll have to wait now for funding to come along. The topic of funding for the Scheduled Ancient Monument has been brought up and presented to the appropriate office. Much now depends on an appropriate reply.
The Scheduled Ancient Monument on Western Heights is at the attention of an office in London.
Guest 764- Registered: 27 Jul 2012
- Posts: 82
Exellent work, Alexander ! Care to elucidate ?