Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Thanks for replying, Roger.
Could you give the full name of LPA beyond the abbreviation, and even just a brief explanation as to their administrative and technical competence and their relation to DDC.
I take it your reply confirms that Western Heights and Farthingloe would not be protected from further planning and building in the future, once the present project were to go ahead.
This particular is essential, we need to know it at the Western Heights group based in Braddon, and it's worthwhile underling it for the Forum members too.
One of the arguments presented so far by those campaigning for the present development plan was that it is limited unto itself and therefore acceptable, implying there would be no further building projects.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Local Planning Authority = DDC = the people that process the planning applications
As mentioned the current plans are limited to the land that is owned by CGI and suitable for developing (a large proportion isn't at all practical to develop due to terrain, access and close proximity to listed buildings)
No-one can predict the future things, the world will change and so will people.
As Roger says each plan will be taken on it's own merit, won't mean a precident is set and doesn't mean other plans will just automatically be agreed.
To me there is a finite limit to what would be acceptable and practical to develop up there.....
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Reading this thread through I don't think I've seen anyone actively campaigning to have this proposed development proceed in its entirety, unchanged in any way. What I've seen are quite a number of people who are prepared to read all the paperwork and evaluate the contents of the application against their thorough local knowledge so as to come to a balanced and fair opinion as to the desirability, or otherwise, of the CGI proposals.
It can be noted from the available documentation that CGI have consulted extensively with English Heritage, The National Trust, Protect Kent, DDC, DTC, the Archaeological Society, Ancient Monuments, etc. and that a very large proportion of the planning application documentation derives from the findings of those consultations. Members of those organisations which have been consulted as part of the preparation for this documentation should be able to obtain details of questions and answers from their own organisation.
As I have a personal interest in local history and heritage, I've been wading through the documents myself to see what detrimental impact, if any, there will be on our heritage and how that might balance against any enhancements that this proposal might deliver to the existing and very real historical significance of the WH. In short, does the CGI proposal on balance preserve and enhance or destroy and obliterate?
As a first detailed read takes about 12 hours or so and a secondary read to highlight items of most importance to the site can be done over a couple of days taking the documents in 3 or 4 hour chunks, it behoves anyone who wishes to build a cogent argument against these plans, that stands any likelihood of being successful, to read these documents and understand them first before researching to find documentation and counter evidence on which to base a solid argument. I'm afraid that knee-jerk reactions that are not well argued and supported by archaeological/historical counter evidence will only serve to damage the cause of those who have already decided that they do not want any of this development to proceed.
The above is neither an expression of support for the plans or an expression of opposition to them. Neither is it the view or opinion of any organisation with which I am associated.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
Now that the documents are available it would be nice to hear opinions on the actual plans. What do people think of the designs for the houses? How do people feel about the job creating prospects of a pub/restaurant, a B&B, a 130 bed hotel and a 150 person conference centre? What do they think of the prospects for a museum/visitor centre in the Drop Redoubt?
Rather than another 33 pages of, "don't want it - don't like it", we are now in a position where we can start and have some creative discussion on the actual plans.
For those who have not seen anything, here is the DDC Planning breakdown of the application.
DOV/12/00440 1) Outline permission (with all matters reserved except access) for construction of:
a. Up to 521 residential units (Use Class C3)
b. Up to 9,335sqm 90 apartment retirement village (Use Class C2)
c. Up to 730sqm health facility (Use Class D2)
d. Conversion of thatched barn to pub/restaurant (Use Class A4/A3)
e. Conversion of stable block to retail shop (Use Class A1/A2)
f. Conversion of farmhouse to bed & breakfast (Use Class C1)
together with associated landscaping and ancillary infrastructure and works at Great
Farthingloe Farm, Dover
2) Outline permission (with all matters reserved except layout and access) for:
a. Construction of up to 85 residential units (Use Class C3)
b. Construction of up to 7,400sqm 130 bed hotel and 150 person conference centre
(Use Class C1)
c. Reconstruction of the Victoria Halls to provide 9 residential units (Use Class C3)
d. Conversion of the Drop Redoubt to a Museum/Visitor Centre (Use Class D1)
together with associated landscaping and ancillary infrastructure and works at land at
Wester Heights, Dover
3) Provision of pedestrian access network to facilitate enhanced recreations access
together with associated landscaping and works on land at Great Farthingloe Farm and
Western Heights, Dover
Site at Western Heights & Farthingloe, Dover
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 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Well put Neil
I know the Heights fairly well (I hope!) over 8 years of 'exploring' followed by 12 years of the Preservation Society, but it is still going to take me a lot of effort to understand the proposals. I will have to make several visits with the plans to fully understand the impact of the planning applications, and it certainly isn't something that can be done quickly over a cup of tea !!!
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 1694- Registered: 24 Feb 2016
- Posts: 1,087
Paul
I downloaded everything on the 7th and got through first detailed read on Saturday between lunchtime and 0100 Sunday whilst supervising some of our Eythorne youth through a sponsored read. I'm in the process of pulling highlights out at the moment, some I may be able to compare on the ground, but most I'll have to re-run through from a desk base research mode. Nowhere near your familiarity with the heights, just several years 'exploring' the hills and fortifications as a youth and, through a keen interest in history, a more than passing familiarity with anti-invasion fortification technology and methods through the ages. Always fascinated to learn more and the CGI documentation is proving an excellent resource and prod to do so.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Wish to thank Paul Scotchie for his straight forward reply: Local Planning Authority = DDC, and somehow DDC as a Council (not separate from LPA) are the people who process planning applications.
Wish to thank Paul and Roger for the clarification that further developments for buildings on W.H. and at Farthingloe are not at all excluded.
I have nothing against a kind of visitor centre at the Grand Shaft, do not oppose maintaining the former military infrastructure within acceptable limits of expense, nor oppose the maintaining of the green (grass/bushes/trees) to preserve the natural aspect of the area.
I am in favour of keeping the protected status of W.H. and Farthingloe and oppose building houses, hotel or conference centre B/B on any these sites.
SP Policies RS5 and S1 and LP Policies HS1 and TR1 are not respected in the proposal presented by CGI, as the proposed buildings would generate travel and journeys that would be car borne, unlikely to be on foot or by bicycle.
The shops are far away, mainly located in the town centres of Dover and Folkestone.
LP Policy HE5 provides that development which would adversely affect scheduled Ancient Monuments and nationally important archaeological sites or their settings will not normally be permitted.
In the proposals presented by CGI we have a combination of factors that clearly contravene against the Policies mentioned above, including the increase of traffic that would be generated between the two sites and the town centres, and the negative effect this would have on the protected areas as a whole, on their protected status and on the peaceful enjoyment of these areas by the public.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i couldn't help but notice that reply 666 came from alex, not that i am suggesting that it is in any way significant.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
howard alex is 667,neil is 666.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
reply not post brian.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Lara opened the subject with a post to PaulB, who replied in post 1, hence reply 1 is Paul B's post 1.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
so you admit to having the mark of the beast then alex?
not to worry though we are a broad church here on the forum.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Ho Howard!
To Lara: if you are reading, I've just emailed you the reply you asked for, it's in your email box. Sorry for the delay, only just opened the email box. Was out working half the day.
To all and sundry: last night, while doing some research, I came across astonishing information on the village of Braddon. I've only disclosed it to one person of the W.H. group. It is something absolutely astonishing.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Well share then if it is soooo amazing ! Or are you the replacement for Vic's "I've going nothing to say" posts ????
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Had to do some cross-checking today, Paul, and the test proved positive.
The information is authentic, I'm still savouring it.
It needs presenting, and will eventually appear.
SWWood- Location: Dover
- Registered: 30 May 2012
- Posts: 261
My guess would be that Alex has discovered that Braddon isn't a proper village.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Must be some more 'news' from several years ago, I really can't wait.....
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
To be fair towards the discussion point of the thread, I don't want to leave people in suspense, nor intend blocking the thread in any unfair manner; so what I came across needs presenting.
It will come out in due course of time, and it does seem that Braddon is the centre of attention.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
Probably something unknown to everyone, except Alex, King John, a Papal Legate...........................
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
may no the answer howard,