Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
No Keith, it's a definite maybe.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
A definately non-blickered view that carefully considers the opportunity available and would like to work towards the 'best' solution for the heritage, town, district, residents and an important national monument.
Been nice knowing you :)
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, it is clear to see that you HAVE campaigned for the CGI proposals to go ahead on Farthigloe and on Western Heights, and have again just proved this fact.
It is clear to see that you are waiting for the planning site approval consultation period to come to an end, which will be shortly.
The question is not whether you want to see financial investments in a Scheduled National Monument, but whether the people of Dover want to see houses and other buildings going up on W.H. and at Farthingloe. Which you do want to see happen and have campaigned for repeatedly.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
I suggest you READ my post Alexander and u;derstand what I have said!
Big difference between what we all WANT in an ideal world and what realistically we can get.......
Still I see no campaigning on my part, just my own personal view...
Been nice knowing you :)
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,707
Since when was sharing ones opinion on an internet forum campaigning?
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
errrrrrrrrrrrrr last election ross.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
Well, as my view is that if the proposals are rights for the heritage (once the full details are available) then I *could* support it, but if they are not I will oppose it......
Then as Alexander is adamant that I am for the developments, then one can only assume he thinks that the proposals by CGI would be good for the heritage
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 685- Registered: 5 May 2009
- Posts: 85
In the mid-1950s the part of the Western Heights fortifications that had housed the Drop Redoubt, the Grand Shaft Barracks and the Grand Shaft were handed over to Dover Corporation. They decided to use part of the Heights for industrial purposes; the four miles of moats as rubbish tips and the remainder, for London over-spill housing. Although in 1962 the Ministry of Public Building and Works scheduled part of the Heights as an Ancient Monument, the council dismissed this as a 'piece of nonsense'. This attitude galvanised many including ourselves, to protect what is now regarded as a NATIONAL ANCIENT MONUMENT.
In 1985, the Grand Shaft triple staircase was restored but the following year Dover District Council (DDC) proposed that the site of the former Grand Shaft Barracks was to be allocated for housing and a hotel. Along with fellow Dovorian, Jack Philips, we successfully objected to the proposal at a Local Planning Inquiry with the outcome that the Planning Inspector recommended a number of additional caveats. With the help and perseverance of DDC Director of Planning and the White Cliffs Countryside Project (WCCP), much was achieved during the following years: Clearing rubbish and scrub, introduction of Dexter Cattle to keep the scrub down, the 'Soldiers Life' trail, the north bastion steps, the wooden gates etc. In 1994, IMPACT - The Joint Environmental Initiative of KCC and DDC - started work on the faithful reconstruction of the Grand Shaft we see today. Indeed, I researched and wrote a DDC commended paper entitled Western Heights - A Future, putting forward proposals for future management to unlock the tourist potential of the NATIONAL ANCIENT MONUMENT. Something I will return to in another communication.
However, due to changes in personnel and policy by DDC and English Heritage (EH) much of this initial enthusiasm waned. Nonetheless, in 2000 Western Heights Preservation Society (WHPS), made up of enthusiastic volunteers, took up the cudgel. Possibly, due to financial pressures, the backing given to WHPS in restoring the National Ancient Monument was not forthcoming and the Western Heights is now on the Heritage at Risk Register.
The neighbouring Arthurian valley of Farthingloe, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), is equally important to the tourism potential of Dover. Its legend, peace, beauty and tranquillity compliments the military realism of Western Heights. In between the Western Heights Nature Reserve, which is NOT part of the proposed development, is of national ecological importance and the White Cliffs of Dover, beyond have been put forward as a World Heritage site.
Traditionally, for planning purposes, Western Heights and Farthingloe have been treated separately. However, China Gateway International have applied for outline planning permission to develop both sites as one, with:
615 -residential units (Use Class C3) = Farthingloe 521 + Western Heights 85 + WH Conversion 9
90-apartment retirement block (Use Class C2)
130-bed hotel and 150-person conference centre (Use Class C1)
In addition, a health facility, conversion of thatched barn to pub/restaurant and the conversion of stable block to retail shop.
If given the go-ahead by DDC, the council will receive the New Homes Bonus fund - this is a levy on money raised from the development that can be spent on the District.
We have strongly objected. to permission being granted to China Gateway International (CGI) to undertake the developments on Western Heights and Farthingloe.
Lorraine Sencicle
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
"Nonetheless, in 2000 Western Heights Preservation Society (WHPS), made up of enthusiastic volunteers, took up the cudgel. Possibly, due to financial pressures, the backing given to WHPS in restoring the National Ancient "
WHPS has never proposed any restoration nor been in any position to carry out any restoration, so there would never have been any backing to be forthcoming !!
However the world has changed, the finance less easily available and the heritage is deteriorating by the day - we need to come up with a solution......
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
This week's Dover Express has highlighted on the front page the fact that the National Trust is aiming at raising over £1 million to purchase a stretch of cliff-top between Dover and St. Margaret's, in order to prevent the stretch ever being developed.
It's the last piece of land they need to purchase in that area of the White Cliffs of Dover (from Eastern Heights to St Margaret light-tower) in order to preserve the whole area from developers, as the Dover Express points out: forever!
Quite clearly we can assume the National Trust is doing this after being alerted to the DDC corporate plan 2012-16 for Western Heights and Farthingloe.
It seems that many people do not want DDC to keep adding strips of woodland, farmland and White Cliffs in their core strategy/corporate plans.
We must fight on and stop this unwanted development process!
We must protect Western Heights and Farthingloe from development!
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Paul, I think the vast majority of people, in Dover and nationally, are not interested in the Napoleonic defences on Western Heights, but in the natural beauty of the area, including the Celtic Valley of Farthingloe,
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
If you say so !
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
Alex, it is more likely that EH are are aware of the governments planned valuation of the whole country, putting a commercial value on every stretch of countryside and natural visitor spots. This will mean a precise value being put on everything from Stonehenge to Mount Snowdon, a dangerous move as once valued they would all be down as 'treasury assets' and we know what governments like to do with assets.
Arthurian now Celtic, when will it get to Danish?
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 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
That's interesting about valuing assets.
The later Saxon kings also put a value on each estate, but possibly for tax reasons.
The Norman kings continued in this policy.
I am aware that Stonehenge might one day become a conference centre if the habit spreads from Dover (Scheduled National Monuments), and that Hadrian's Wall on the English side might become a long street of brick-walled houses (Napoleonic defences W.H. type), if we don't challenge the DDC Planning Department.
The National Trust have already realised this, and are trying to defend the White Cliffs of Dover Eastern side from the selling-off of the White Cliffs to developers in return for New Homes Bonus funds to DDC.
As for Arthur, wasn't he a Celtic Briton?
Either way, the Celts would have had their earliest settlements in and around Dover, before spreading inland as far as Orkney, the Hebrides, and Tipperary in Ireland and further beyond.
Civilasation in Dover is known to have flourished in the Bronze Age, and one can only assume in the Neolithic Age too.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
I'm still asking myself how the DDC corporate plan 2012-16, that claims the building of houses on Farthingloe and on Western Heights, in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and on a Scheduled National Monument, will attract tourism, can be considered as credible.
Who wrote this corp[orate plan? Are these people's notions on what they wrote to be taken seriously? Do they think people believe what they claim there?
Tourists are more likely to abandon these areas when they see hundreds of houses springing up and thousands of cars rushing along in areas of outstanding natural beauty and on scheduled national monuments.
What DDC is trying to spin off there is not worthy of a People's Republic 1950s style!
About time someone told them so!
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
There must be increasing interest in this topic, as my Western Heights article has been receiving many more views over the past week. I keep it updated.
Guest 685- Registered: 5 May 2009
- Posts: 85
Taking up Alexander's point (#976) about the 2012 Dover District Council Corporate Plan. This makes reference to the proposed development of Western Heights and Farthingloe. As the proposal has not been through the Due Planning Laws Process, it does not hold in law.
According to COUNSEL the LDF Adopted Plan published in February 2010 is the pertinent document with regards to Planning Permission - along, of course, the Government's National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
The CGI proposal is against the spirit of both LOCAL and NATIONAL planning legislation on many counts, discussed below. Most importantly, it is of a significant scale that it should have seen included in DDC's Local Development Framework Core Strategy (LDF) as a 'strategic site'. The Government's National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stresses that planning decisions should be made in accordance with the LDF/Local Plan. As neither site was identified in the LDF for development, if given permission, this will contravene statutory policies.
It has been said that the reason the proposal was not submitted for consideration during the LDF consultations was due to CGI being a new company, not set up until after the LDF was Adopted in February 2010. On page 4 of CGI's Planning and Regeneration proposal (CGI-P&R), it says that CGI has been in discussions with Dover District Council for three years - since 2009. Further, Commercial Group Properties (CGP) made it clear, in their company report of February 2007 that their intention was to develop both sites. According to Companies House, CGI registered on 25 June 2009, prior to which the company was registered as CGP. The CGP company report of February 2007 also included details of its Directors, these same people are also listed as Directors of CGI - copies of this and receipt acknowledge by DDC Planning Department. As a matter of interest, the firm changed its name from CGI-PLC to China Gateway International Limited on 2 May 2012.
CGI-P&R p16 para 6.5 states that a key element of the NPPF is the presumption in favour of sustainable development. However, in the footnote (NNPF page 4 footnote 9), it is made clear that this statement exempts policies relating to sites protected, amongst others, under the Birds and Habitats Directives and/or designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest; land designated as Green Belt, Local Green Space; Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and designated heritage assets - these exempt sites are applicable to both Western Heights and Farthingloe.
Lorraine
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Don't know if it's been mentioned in the many previous posts but an interesting read here, published by The Dover Society in 1996, ISBN 0-906124-12-3, got mine from the bookshop in Deal High St, £3.95
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
SAM or non-SAM - the Heights still need serious investment (unless you are Alexander who doesn't care about the heritage) and no one is able to come up with a viable alternative other than wait and hope an rich benefactor comes along....
Been nice knowing you :)
