Thanks Howard I still get the two muddled
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
most people do sarah, add in the county council and people get even more confused about who is responsible for what.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
Will the sign be visible from, say, Wilbraham Terrace - number 19 specifically?
Guest 694- Registered: 22 Mar 2010
- Posts: 778
hmmm i am a fan of the plans if we can make that blasted mast and sign smaller.... i dont understand why it needs to be that tall?
And... confuzzled. not that it normally takes much.. Dtiz.. is the whole flipping area surely? so why are we just starting in that corner? we have the old mfi site, the bus station which is gone, and the old multi storey...
good for them if we get it , but can we PLEASE get a plan for the rest of it... .
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
The hotel has the 'mast' to hold the phone aerials which can then be moved down froim Burlington House and then the eyesore can be demolished !!
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
It's exactly how Scotchie says - the planning applications are in for the Hotel and the rest of the site. the Hotel needs starting asap, so BH can come down.
The application numbers are DOV/11/1049 and 1050
Roger
Guest 694- Registered: 22 Mar 2010
- Posts: 778
and this is why Paul is a superstar and explains it just so!!
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
It amazes me that people object to such details as an LED mast. Why this meaningless vocabulary of 'inappropriate' or the planners' favorite 'not in keeping' gets wheeled out, I don't know. What do they want? Perhaps a hotel in the shape of a castle with the communications aerials fitted to an oversized flagpole flying the union flag?
People should think before objecting for the sake of it. It's the sort of ignorance one would expect from Prince Charles. I mean, do people think Canterbury cathedral (for example) was 'in keeping' when it was built. Things change.
As for the the mast (and that's all it is, not even the whole building) it is only a few metres taller than the Gateway.
As the the design, well it's ok isn't it? Nothing inspirational, but at least progress!
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
some good news,burlington house has been a grade 1 listed building.the good news is now that its grade 1 in can be demolished overnight like masion dieu did a few years back.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
You mean Brook House Brian ?
Roger
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
The design is for a big white box (nothing like Canterbury Cathedral - which was at the hight of ecclesiastical fashion for its time) with a 30 ft hight Advertising screen, directly facing the traffic coming out of the port. Exactly the sort of design discredited in the 60's. (But it gets rid of Burlington House so that's OK. after all Burlington House was considered a great design in its time and worthy of standing on its own, rather than as part of the development it was originally designed to be a part of.)
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
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
Firstly I don't think that Canterbury Cathedral was at 'one' time (although just an example) and also I think that I realise the difference between Perpendicular Gothic and Perpendicular LEDs!
Design discredited in the 60s? They'd do anything!
Burlington house is just the manifestation of bad post war planning and architects; never a good design! It's a mad cross between Brutalism and Bomb shelters. I suppose at least with this mentality of 'in keeping' the latter is a good precedent!
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
thats the one roger.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
Guest 708- Registered: 22 Dec 2010
- Posts: 102
What do they want !! are they saying it's not in keeping with Dover at its present state! Lets improve Dover and get paying visitors here again, giving them places to stay (it's the gateway to England), we have lost nearly all our guest houses for reasons we know, we now need to invest. Some councillors need to wake up and think what Dover wants not what they want for Dover, let get our town back on the map it's been a long time.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
fully agree paul we must move forward, the issue of distracting drivers was raised over the big screen in market square, hardly distracts pedestrians walking through.
If the new development needs to be more in keeping with Dover , given the current state of the place it should be , semi derelict with a collection of various ner do wells slumped across its main entrance. The logo should be a Lion led by a Donkey
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
"the mast should have a clean sharp finish that would look like render"
What the hell does this mean? Surely the best way to get something to look like render is to render it? Other than that what would you want something to 'look' like render. How funny.
To use planning terminology, we might perhaps suggest the Town Council is of 'poor design' and that it is not 'in keeping' with the progress of the town.
Perhaps we need a redesign?
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
The question to me would be, is the proposal what dover wants?
is the hotel with the big hoarding screen what the area requires.
2 locals (brian and chris)already objecting
interesting to note if another local(stewart dimmock)agrees with chris and brian
or will he be forced to vote his tory party?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS