Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,577
trouble is you my be sarcastic
but its true
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 1168- Registered: 21 Jan 2014
- Posts: 18
Good evening.
Well after 4 days the e-petition has over 400 signatures. The petition is also available now as a traditional paper petition and we have a small army of volunteers encouraging people to sign. If you want to help, let me know.
Naturally, I want to keep this post alive and to do so will comment on an earlier post. Of course councils do not build shopping or leisure centres. That is evident in Folkestone, Ashford, Thanet, Maidstone, Hastings............ The common thread seems to be DDC. Asda didn't build here. Parkridge didn't build here. Macarthur Glen didn't build here. Am I right in thinking they all wanted to?
Alan Shirley
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Its all in the pass now and it will not help by keep going on about it,today tomorrow ok, and as we know there is no funding in the pot with more cut back coming later in the year D.D.C got to save 1million pounds .So what will a meeting in the town hall do if you fill it up it holds only 400 at the most,even if you get the 1600 still only avery small number in the D.D.C. Area . I t do nothing .Councils in the pass years have let Dover down if we got nothing done in the good years. All you will get is the public ending up shouting out what they think is best for the town,so count me out, but will chair the meeting.
Guest 977- Registered: 27 Jun 2013
- Posts: 1,031
Given the speed that the petition is getting signed and the interest it is generating I would hope the council might see it would be beneficial for all if they arrange a public meeting to explain the position as much as they can as soon as possible, rather than be seen as being forced into it when the number is reached (which it will be in spite of Cllr Matcham's cynicism).
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Not all of them did Alan.
It had been stated on here (and other places) in the past, that the Planning Officers were obstructive to developers; since those times, there has been a restructuring of the Planning department and all developers will be happy to tell you that DDC Planning and the senior Regeneration officer have bent over backwards to help them bring their development to fruition.
On that tour of the regeneration sites around the District, every single developer, whether it was a housing or commercial development, or whatever, all said the same thing.
ASDA didn't build here because they chose not to, not because of DDC.
Parkridge, I don't know what they didn't build here.
Macarthur Glen was stopped from building here by the local Labour party; it had received planning permission, but Labour said no, so they went to Ashford and did very well for themselves and for Ashford.
The stage we are at with the DTIZ, is the closest and furthest anyone has ever got; if you have questions of DDC or the Developer, ask after it has started, not before and put it in jeopardy; no one will thank you if it goes pear-shaped.
Roger
Guest 1168- Registered: 21 Jan 2014
- Posts: 18
That Roger, is a confront to civil liberty. How long do you suggest I wait until it is started? Or is that commercially sensitive?
Why on earth are you so worried about being questioned. For you to accuse me of putting this project in jeopardy is incredible. If you and your colleagues are competent, you will find a public meeting a pleasure. having been involved in major developments, I do have some commercial acumen and have always welcomed information sharing. It is you singly Roger who has become hyper-defensive and increased cynicism is a direct consequence.
Your resolve increases my own. As for Parkridge, 2008/2009 - 120 jobs and a £12m development at Whitfield rejected by Council after recommendations of senior planning officer. Public domain.
Alan Shirley
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Yes but as Mr Walkden has al;ready said he is gone now and I agree that the planning dept then did nothing for Dover the new one has not had time yet to get their feet under the table yet.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,658
Thinking about the comments from Roger has made me doubtful that the project as secure as we have been led to believe if a simple petition about how DDC behave can put the whole project in jeopardy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
sorry to see party politics being dragged into it by roger, all parties have been working together on this and have always been in broad agreement.
Guest 943- Registered: 15 May 2013
- Posts: 449
Jan,your observation seems to me, to be valid..With respect,Roger, your comments do seem to be peculiar..Look to the future and listen to the petitioners.
Guest 1154- Registered: 3 Jan 2014
- Posts: 8
Being fairly new to the area it is hard to say about bringing Dover into the for front but I will say this, I think Dover is a very nice area, little traffic, plenty of places to park when you go shopping, lots of different types of small shops, some unusual, to be honest it has a lot going for it, 2 main frozen food supermarkets and 3 main chain supermarkets, plenty of fuel stations, restaurants, carvery's, coffee bars, bakery's and untold reasonably prices clothes and shoes stores, so as it happens, it has much more going for it than a lot of other places, I suppose it is a little short on night out activities but at the end of the day people only have an amount of money to cover everything so the more ways they have to spend, the thinner they will spread it, not very good for the small business, but I love Dover.
jbb
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i think roger could have worded things in more detail, with respect to him i think he was trying to put across a case that investor confidence could take a dive.
we know that cineworld and marks and sparks are on board with a hotel group last i heard which means that other main players will be looking at dover to see whether to open up here.
we know that the petition will lead to a meeting that will attract a lot of publicity, how would potential investors view this?
Guest 1103- Registered: 3 Nov 2013
- Posts: 759
101
Keith, I know I am ;)
112
I think Howard, if this is handled positively, I am sure they will see it from the same or similar perspective. As they can see People want better for Dover and also the power behind it too. People Power is all about this and actually I am looking forward until the petition is full in numbers and the first public meetings.
Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud. Maya Angelou ☺🌈🌄🌌🌏🌍🌎
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
what do you think will be gained by a public meeting heike?
i attended a similar one to that proposed when i first moved here, just a bear pit atmosphere with it being stage managed by a professional brought in from outside.
the late peter wells was the leader then and wasn't a great pr man, the audience let off steam and that was that, the most fervent discussion was about the amount of water used in public lavatories.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Howard, the only reason I mentioned Labour is because Alan asked about MacArthur Glen not developing here and gave that reason why they didn't come here.
If I worded it badly, then I apologise, but yes it is about (potential) investor confidence. I am not afraid of DDC transparancy at all, I just think the timing is wrong.
Thanks for your posting Alan. Your posting was:
"That Roger, is a confront to civil liberty. How long do you suggest I wait until it is started? Or is that commercially sensitive?"
Sorry you take that view Alan, it is not intended as an afront to your cvil liberties.
"Why on earth are you so worried about being questioned. For you to accuse me of putting this project in jeopardy is incredible. If you and your colleagues are competent, you will find a public meeting a pleasure. having been involved in major developments, I do have some commercial acumen and have always welcomed information sharing. It is you singly Roger who has become hyper-defensive and increased cynicism is a direct consequence".
I personally am not worried and I know that DDC can answer any questions thrown at them (I remember the meeting Howard mentioned and it was not good for anyone). I have every confidence in the officers ability and involvement in the DTIZ. I am also proud of the small part I have played in the DTZ. I am of course aware of your substantial business acumen Alan. I am not hyper-sensitive, I just don't agree with your approach on this and think the petition will be counter-productive - at this time. I'm also sorry/sad, that it has made you more cynical - of DDC, me, or DTIZ. ?
"Your resolve increases my own. As for Parkridge, 2008/2009 - 120 jobs and a £12m development at Whitfield rejected by Council after recommendations of senior planning officer. Public domain".
This has nothing to do with resolve Alan, it's just my view that's all. Thank you for the information on Parkridge; I don't remember that application, but will look it up.
Roger
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I 100% agree with Mr Walkden on this one, a public meeting at this time will not be of anyhelp even might work against itself. Things are moving even that it be very slow but moving they are so best not do anything at might stop it again,It is time to just sit it out and see what happens over the next year.
Guest 756- Registered: 6 Jun 2012
- Posts: 727
The question is so simple, what has been acheived so far ( in detail) and what has yet to be done. Throw in the costings and we will all be better informed. Not rocket science is it ?
A public meeting is not the right way to impart this information, maybe an exhibition would answer more without the need for the loudest voices to dominate the proceedings.
Very few people can work effectively when under attack and I fear that is what this "meeting" will become, and the detail will be lost in the process.
Just my 'umble opinion.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Roger, I think I know you well; and I know that you are hard-working, totally honest, well-intentioned and trying your best for Dover. But the days are past when a politician could say 'You can trust me' and be believed. That's why councillors and officers need to keep their hands where people can see them every minute of the time. Openness is paramount nowadays- if things are being hidden, people will assume the reasons are sinister, or that someone is trying to cover something up.
That's why I welcome this petition - if DDC and its officers truly are whiter than white, then you all have everything to gain from this process. If there are skeletons in the cupboard, then the guilty ones will be exposed.
Regarding ASDA, they pulled out of DTIZ when they realised that buying the NETTO chain of stores would provide them with a Dover presence. That's all. Nothing sinister there, just unfortunate timing. Remember that in early 2005 we sunk our life savings into a business in Dover on the strength of promises that DTIZ would be up and running within 2 years. Those promises both from Bond City and from the council.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 1168- Registered: 21 Jan 2014
- Posts: 18
You make some very sound points here Lesley. There is certainly a danger that some people will seek to turn a public meeting into an unacceptable attack on officials and councillors. I very much hope that, if the Leadership team at DDC do in fact engage in a public debate, that proper protocols and courtesy will be observed by all participants. I do not want a street-fight, I just want to be given information so that any judgement of competence is fair and reasonable.
For my part, this is not a witch-hunt. It is intended as a civic-minded and professional request for our Council to be more transparent. The criticism of some on this Forum of my approach has raised the level of my concerns but I do not seek answers from Councillors who are not part of the Leadership Group or from local personalities who claim to know what is going on. In hind-sight, I have been foolish to engage with them as they are not the people I am challenging, and this is not the place for a serious debate. I regret allowing myself to be goaded into retaliation but this town has been so terribly ignored by its senior representatives that emotions run high.
Having lived in Australia for over 20 years, I enjoy the symbolism of their federal parliament building in Canberra. You can walk on a grassed area over the roof of this building symbolically to show that the people are "above" parliament. I know that's a tad esoteric but it is the very opposite of the ignorance and aloofness that I observe in this little town by many of our representatives.
Alan Shirley
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Thank You Lesley and Peter - I agree with both your postings.
Thank you also Alan; I think your approach to this - and your postings have all been very rational, honest and articulate; no one should/could criticise your view that you feel Dover has been neglected over many years - I think we would all agree with that.
There are many discussions taking place with many developers who want to invest in various areas of Dover (Town) and how we can help them bring their plans to fruition; something I am sure we all want and Dover deserves.
Jean and I moved to Dover in 1994 and bought the Linden Guest House in Folkestone Road; it was quite soon after that, that I realised how important it was to Dover, it's businesses and residents that tourism is improved and Dover move forward to become a cleaner, more welcoming Town, one that people will want to visit from miles around. Sadly this still hasn't been achieved, but I honestly believe it will be - soon.
That's why I put myself up to be a Councillor.
Roger