Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
Whatever it is I bet one of our history orientated knowledgeable forum members knows all about it already.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
and the knights templers.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Are they related to the Knights Who Say Ni ??!!
Been nice knowing you :)
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
quite possably.
Guest 750- Registered: 12 Apr 2012
- Posts: 72
....am still ploughing through the proposals and am affording the necessary time to do so inbetween children, full time job etc......
Chris - I will have some concerns regarding the actualities of the proposal - style and height of dwellings, daylight and sunlight readings, private roads and many more to come.
Residents will be meeting again this Thursday to gauge feelings regarding the proposal and how these will proposals will directly affect them.
All again are welcome to attend 6pm Visitors Centre - Immigration Centre
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
not heard from lorraine on the proposals, must still be ploughing through them.
would take a few reads to get a full understanding, i don't envy the planning committe on this one.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
I might actually attend this one. Am looking foward to it.....
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Up at crack of dawn today!
The meeting yesterday on Western Heights was introduced by a spokesman from Defend Kent.
Firstly, anyone can make a representation to DDC on the CGI proposals to develop on W,H. and at Farthingloe, anyone in Dover or from anywhere in Britain.
The representations are NOT just limited to Braddon residents.
I will supply later on today the exact address AND reference number you must use when making a representation, as the signs were up ONLY in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development area, namely only at Braddon. I didn't take a pen and paper with me, so will go up again today and write the correct particulars down.
The representation should not be emotive, or emotional, but technical, ie, giving reasons that are in alignment with technical issues.
To give one example, to mention the impact of traffic in rural/green areas arising from new developments, is technical.
If you have any clue on standing development regulations applied by DDC, this might help, if you quote them.
The consultation period closes on 6th July 2012, NOT on 9th July as printed in the Dover Express. By 6th July, your representations must be received.
I'll give some more details later as to what was said.
For now, let it suffice to know that the CGI development proposals are not in line with DDC core strategy, which, as you may know, is amply booked out with development of houses from brown fields such as Maison Dieu Road next to the Job Centre, to enormous settlements such as Sholden or, mightier still, Whitfield.
CGI's proposals are an attempt to enter through the back door and add extra housing to the DDC core strategy, without respecting the core strategy rules.
DDC stands to gain plenty of financial bonuses by way of council tax (and double council tax) for extra housing development added to their already fully booked out core strategy.
More to follow...
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
At the meeting, I met with representatives from Sholden, and we agreed that DDC's development plans at Sholden, Whitfield and on W.H. and Farthingloe, are generally (note the word) not for the benefit of local residents living in the administrative boundaries, but for people who DDC want to attract to Dover District and settle here.
I made known my belief that this is contrary to the statute of a district council, and that it may be possible to find constitutional grounds to protest.
Fortunately we live in a democracy, and freedom of protest to official offices is allowed.
The overwhelming majority of people present at the meeting were completely against the CGI development plans, only one person in favour, and three or four undecided.
The general belief at the meeting was that NO jobs, or very few jobs, would be created through these developments, and that the developers spin off promises of many jobs, promises that never materialise.
Also, CGI are NOT a developer, but have stated they will sell the land to developers if they receive planning permission.
My understanding of this is, they are there to make a quick profit.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Many of those housing projects you mentioned Alexander are on a 25 to 30 year plan, so need to be started now to cater for the future children, some may not yet be born.
Youngsters of 10 to 15 years now, will in time, will need somewhere of their own to live, to aspire to - unless you are condemning them to live with their parents forever.
All (housing) developments take a while to get completed ready for people to move into, so we are not just serving the current population, but the future population too, whether they are the offspring of people already living here, or from people moving here.
It's another way of supporting people and helping to improve their lives, not saying, "you can live with your Mum and Dad because we didn't build enough houses, because we didn't have the vision for the future".
You and the other negatives are condemning and stopping progress for Dover - we will stay a backwater forever if you have your way.
Every one on here, at sometime or other, has said why do other Towns make progress, why do things happen in say Shepway or Thanet, or even Ashford ? This is why.
The Heights cover a vast area, this development as Paul showed earlier, covers quite a small part of it.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the planning notices are everywhere, saw loads up the western heights yesterday.
there is even one at the top of my road next to the path up to clarendon field.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Alexander #689, you don't need to go back up the hill with pencil and paper if you're sitting in front of a computer
http://planning.dover.gov.uk/online-applications/simpleSearchResults.do;jsessionid=B87238BEA8D5E84F1FA083B785FD8796?action=firstPage
And from that link - Standard Consultation Expiry Date Mon 09 Jul 2012
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
The signs were far better spread than normal, even Aycliffe got remembered and was well covered.
The speaker from the Protect Rural England Campaign spoke well and passionately but was also misleading on a lot of things. the local plans (Development Frameworks) are always noted as being 'flexible' and changes in circumstances, or opportunities, have to be taken into consideration. He also spoke about developers just wanting to make money, well there's a huge surprise, and preferring to build rather than restore old property. When I spoke to him he was not sure if their 'head office' were looking at the VAT laws that make it more profitable to build new than to restore.
Another speaker got very passionate about the roads and stated that CGI had paid no attention to them. Going through the plans I counted over 800 pages devoted to transport, complete with suggested improvements to junctions and proposals to take to Stagecoach for the bus routes.
It was nice to meet Lara and get the chance to catch up with her lovely mother.
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 750- Registered: 12 Apr 2012
- Posts: 72
It was a good meeting last night and views were heard both for and against the proposal.
The speaker Mr Andrew Ogden, from CPRE Protect Kent did give a very good speech and was interesting to hear of his dealings with the company CGI over Manston.
We will have another meeting next thursday - same place, same time where residents (and any others) can come to to share objections and views.
Chris - was a pleasure meeting you, am sorry mother was not at her best and appreciate what you said about dad.
Paul - was nice to meet you too and I hope the walkabout went well and woul dappreciate your comments following that walk - but maybe when your week has improved!
My concern is this differing onthe objections date - can anyone advise me on this?
Lara
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
If you aim for the 6th you can't go wrong and if anyone wants to speak when it goes to DDC Planning remember they will allow you exactly three minutes and you have to let them know well in advance.
Lara, paperwork emailed to you now.
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
Rather confused with him quoting 521 houses several times when that is Farthingloe and not Western Heights
All I'd like to say is that the group needs to ensure that they read all of the documentation as there were several mis-statements which were covered in there (like traffic management as Chris pointed out).
I have now been through it all both Heights and Farthingloe and I hope that I can finalise my own thoughts soon when I go back through some of it.
Like Lara said to me people need to stick to FACTS - there were some comments that can unfortunately only be taken as "nimbyism", what shouldn't have happened 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago is the past and can't be changed, and people need to be careful when throwing the 'someone must be taking 'bribes' comments around (though this was talking about Hythe)
Finally for now I don't think people should be transfixed on the company applying for permission - if I were a multi-millionaire with loads of money in the bank, I didn't want to make a huge profit, but wanted to apply for exactly the same thing as CGI and it was in the LDF, would people's thoughts on development be the same ?? I am sure they would so I don't think it should be part of people's argument
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Taking bribes was not mentioned at the meeting.
The presenter from Defend Kent mentioned a government provision about district councils having the opportunity to receive the full council tax for a period of time on extra houses built, and that this can become twice the amount of council tax at some point.
The exact details would need explaining here by someone acquainted with the technical specifics, such as a district councillor or officer, I'm only speaking out of memory.
He explained that, because councils are cash-strapped, this provision is tempting for a council to take advantage of. He didn't talk of personal enrichment here, but of council budget restraints.
I personally also thought that the comment on the roads being badly looked after on W.H. was counter-productive. My argument was - with those who I've been speaking too individually at these meetings - that Military Road is full of bends and not in a position to cope with increased traffic.
People would find it harder to enjoy the area if, when crossing the road, you can't see what's coming, and can't distinguish between the sound of a car that has just passed, and that of a following car which you can't see.
So you could not even cross the road at ease by judging if you can hear a car coming or not, as there would be many cars at the same time.
It wouldn't be the place I'd advise children to go and enjoy themselves, if the area became traffic infested.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Military Road takes a very large amount of traffic, mostly as a rat-run, traffic calming measures and road improvements could get rid of some of that problem....
You must have been at a different meeting to me then Alexander - there was a guy stood at the back of the room on the left that was talking about some development at Hythe near the Imperial Hotel that said that the Council or 'someone' must have been taking millions back-handers to have allowed it to have gone through !!!!
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Roger, I'm aware that the core strategy is over a 25-30 year period.
However, to plan 6,000 houses at Whitfield on farm and woodland, 1 mile from Dover, means planning to double Dover's population.
Add to that the brown field sites in Dover and elsewhere in the district that are being built on for housing, such as Crabble corn mill and the castle area, and then add Western Heights and Farthingloe, and the many empty houses in Dover, and I think we can start talking of a three-fold population increase over the next few decades, especially if the present CGI plan were to be added to with even more housing in a few years, or ten years, time.
Roger, people who have spoken with me at these meetings all disagree with the DDC core strategy, noting that the building of so many houses do NOT bring jobs, nowhere near the figures people try to spin over to us, but bring ever more people who will be looking for work!
They also point out that there are no new developments of factories to employ people, only housing, housing, housing. And we already have a high unemployment rate in East Kent.
Finally, Roger, you wrote about children not having to live with their parents.
Unemployed children are likely to live with their parents, Roger, and even children who are not unemployed but can't afford a mortgage or the rent, or who have already been home-evicted for being unable to continue to pay the mortgage.
Many adults in Britain return to their parents after home-eviction, often after their marriage has broken up through financial problems and bailiffs knocking on the door.
Sorry Roger, but these extra houses are ONLY for the wealthy, and you have stated on the Forum in the past that you wish for Londoners to come and settle here in Dover, Londoners with a good salary.
Of-course, Roger, these people have children, who would then be looking for work in Dover.
It is only you, Roger, who keeps telling me that I am for a backwards Dover, a ruined Dover. The people I talk with tell me the opposite.
And finally, the Defend Kent representative explained what we all know, except Roger: that workers building houses are just about all migrant workers, from elsewhere in Britain or from other countries, who then move on after the building is done.
