howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i have a lot of respect for cpre, wouldn't have much countryside left without them, but in this case they have got it wrong in my view as the development will be mainly unobtrusive on the heights.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Not to the CPRE jobsworths hiding behind the trees, Howard.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 761- Registered: 10 Jul 2012
- Posts: 115
Anyone know who produced this report that recommends the plans approval?
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Probably Peter Wallace and his team.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
someone put me out of my misery and let me know who peter wallace's team are please?
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Peter Wallace is the Case Officer who put together the planning report. He will have been supported by a team of planning dept. specialists who have dealt with different aspects of the report.
Watty
Guest 761- Registered: 10 Jul 2012
- Posts: 115
I'm sorry but this doesn't make sense to me. At the planning hearing all arguments for and against the plan will be presented and a decision reached based on this, along with the planning departments own investigations.
To publish this report before the meeting is like a jury and judge delivering their verdict before the case and all the evidence have been heard.
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
Mike this is normal procedure for all planning applications that go before the Planning Committee.
The report is published in advance of the meeting to allow the public to view the decision process .
The meeting is in public.
Guest 761- Registered: 10 Jul 2012
- Posts: 115
Thanks for explaining.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
having read that report i got to the bit about relevant planning history and was quite taken aback by 00781 and 00782.
in both cases application was made to demolish two derelict buildings and build 5 houses and 2 residential units in their place.
i am at a loss to understand why anyone would object and also why the applications were rejected.
must be a valid reason i suppose but lost on me.
Guest 761- Registered: 10 Jul 2012
- Posts: 115
#91 Howard, I think one of those buildings is listed so demolition would not normally be allowed and both are within the scheduled monument area which English Heritage published some very strong views about not too long ago so maybe that was the reason. I wonder how these revised plans sit with them as ultimately nothing can happen within the Scheduled Monument area without their approval? - The section covering English Heritage in the report is a little vague.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
thanks mike, my understanding of listed buildings is that the owner has to maintain them to a set standard, don't know what happens if they don't.
will go up and photograph them in the next few days so that people can see the dreadful state they are in.
i suspect your comments about english heritage are the real reason nothing gets done.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
The general consensus of EH present and former staff with whom I am acquainted is that EH is not competent to be the custodian of a whelk stall, let alone our national monuments and cultural heritage.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 967- Registered: 9 Jun 2013
- Posts: 28
Yet again because people are not jumping for joy over the plans we are ruining the heritage and stopping dover from 'growing' apart from homes and people exactly how is dover going to grow? Are people really that nieve to think that all of dovers empty shops will suddenly be thriving businesses? And as for the heritage how can you justify selling off some of the history! Yes I live on the heights but the houses infront of me have been scrapped so my 'veiw' is not affected yet I still oppose as the whole of this site is a historical monument and should be preserved not developed and the proposed plans for farthinglow are an absolute eye sore but hey ho who cares right as long as there is space lets develop! And on a final note the already struggling hotels in are town are now to compete with yet another one surely this will do more damage?
Rollin wiv the punches
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the heritage part of the western heights can only be saved with an influx of money that this development would bring, volunteers can only do so much and english heritage cannot/do not spend much if any money on it.
the proposed hotel/conference centre, if it happens, is designed to bring people in that would not normally stay in dover so current businesses would not be affected.
Guest 967- Registered: 9 Jun 2013
- Posts: 28
Like all the other hotels in the area they surely are not for residents to stay in so visiters coming into town that would normally stay at the already established in the area will have yet another contender to fight with and it may be the end of their business. Building more houses is not going to rescue dover! And the whole of the western heights is a heritage not just the grand shaft and the drop redoubt.
Rollin wiv the punches
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
I make one outsiders view on your views howard,
I recall argueing when certain people on here and in the wider audience were saying the high speed train link will bring Londoners down in droves to live on places like the Folkestone Road.
Of course as I warned then, it wouldn't happen.
The danger of the argument that allowing building to finance heritage could well go the same way,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
The Planning Committee meeting this Thursday will be my first DDC duty since Jean passed away, I am looking forward to discussing this, so won't comment on my thopughts here.
Don't forget that this is outline, so it is mainly the principle of development, not the detail, that would come (if it is passed) later.
Roger
Guest 967- Registered: 9 Jun 2013
- Posts: 28
Roger may I ask what that means as surely the details are the plans that have been submitted. Can they gain planning permision and then change plans add more? ( sorry if its a stupid question )
Rollin wiv the punches