Unregistered User
Well here we go again.
Same old players, same old arguments.
David Little asked for information, he has it. This is good news.
There are no dates until legal agreements are signed.
You can't compulsory purchase without a scheme.
Scheme will be put on the table when public interests are met by the developer.
It is ready to go.
Has been tested with other agencies to avoid planning objections & will be launched when the above are met.
Developers need to ensure they have pre-lets tied up before venturing into legals.
Developers buy Burlington & other outstanding sites not DDC.
If you, the public want DDC to incur debt to buy these properties & pay back capital & interest with your council tax, also expect low or no council tax increases, keep services going whilst grant is being reduced by 30-40%, then I'm happy to go government to say Dover residents want to be allowed to increase council tax to horrendous %'s.
Won't go into likely cost of purchases [£xmillion] but each £50k [approx] spent adds 1% to your council tax.
Watty
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
I fail to see the problem with relocating the masts, as well as the hills there are plenty of tall buildings in the vicinity of Burlington House.
To quote Eliza Doolittle from the film version of My Fair Lady " Come on, Dover! Move your bloomin' arse!"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Unregistered User
No problem relocating the masts they will go onto the new hotel to be located on the old Thompson garage site. The masts are where the owners of Burlington House makes his money, you'll find plenty of takers but not plenty of happy neighbours.
Watty
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Mr Watkins Sir ,you say the same old players saying the same old things,well sir the same could be said about your council.indeed sir I am saying it and have done so now for some years,we the public hear the same old story being said by the same old faces at the council.
As for the mast,s in this day and age things have moved on, part of my job was. up to a year or two was helping put up the platforums to put the masts on ,and even then I was told that there is no need now to have them on the tallest buildings anymore.
Unregistered User
Indeed Vic and we get elected to do the job.
So other than the masts which I'm sure you have researched, what have you to say about the rest of the process.
Watty
Guest 684- Registered: 26 Feb 2009
- Posts: 635
Thanks for the clarification, Paul. I'm sure you can understand Dovorians' all-consuming frustration at the continued lack of physical/tangible progress at DTIZ, however.
Come the glorious day, eh?!
Hope all's well,
Andy
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Watty
Put an imaginary top 'secretive' government dept in Burlington House and maybe the Taliban or Al Queda will do the job for you .All the DDC then have to do is find the necessary 70 virgins in lieu of fee's.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Unregistered User
Marek, thanks for the "out of box" thought.
I think they originally had one of those Depts. located there.
Do you know the number of the other group you recommended for the solution?
Watty
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
You said it yourself sir you have got elected so get on with it ,as I said before you are a good leader but you need to look at the team working with you,and you already know my feeling on the planning dept.You are pushing ahead with the Whitfield development which none of the public want to see done, so put the same energy into the one in Dover by showing more active operation and action.and please do it so I see some of it before I die.
Unregistered User
It's not the energy expended Vic but the market demand for Dover retail & site constraints.
Sorry Vic, you ought to rephrase the statement from "none of the public" to "some of the public".
Watty
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
As you know I am on the parish council I have yet to fine one person who wants it,your own district cllr at whitfield and that is both of them have told you that they to are against it going ahead..You keep going on about this and that and why Dover is not moving,but we say again how are all the other towns around us doing it and we are not? I will tell you why because their councils have said we must act and act now and said "Sod it" lets get on with it and see what happens.
Unregistered User
On one hand you are me telling that a solution for the Town Centre that defies commercial logic is acceptable and then telling me the one with commercial logic using the principle you want applied is wrong.
Strange old world.
Watty
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
We are talking about a parish that does not want or need a big housing development.
And a town which needs a develoment which all the public want to see. You cannot look at them in the same light,and you know that anyway.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
at the risk of being repetitive vic, the district councillors recently elected for whitfield stood without being opposed to the development.
those who did oppose were rejected by the electorate, this suggests that the development issue is not that high on the residents agenda.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
A couple of points on the above.....
"Folkestone, Ramsgate and Margate are getting their arses in gear in 'challenging' economic times. Why can't Dover?"
- Folkestone had De Hann and his millions to spend
- Ramsgate and Margate are suffering just like Dover and out of town has killed their town centres
"Compulsory purchase needed on Burlington House now. Thanet have done it with Dreamland, and so should we. There's plenty of hills around Dover for those damned mobile phones masts, last time I looked!"
- The purchase of Dreamland is from a grant I beleive so I don't think anyone will be sending a loads of money to preserve it!! Totally different thing!!
- The owner is making a killing on the masts - why would he want to lose the income !!
Been nice knowing you :)
Unregistered User
Switching arguments Vic when it does not suit is not a good tactic.
Look at the topic on the Charlton Centre.
Another development mistake that creates an eyesore in Dover.
Good local people have invested in businesses in those units & seen their investments disappear.
Why does that fail?
Retail and economic analysis tells the story.
Why does Tesco overtrade and look for more retail space?
Why are High Sts nationally failing?
It's called public preference.
Watty
Actually it's called a reduction of choices and a few shady cons to get the public in, thereby impacting the opposition and closing the field.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
Watty
This is not criticism but why was it thought necessary to locate the council offices at Whitfield and not in town?. Those office workers looking for sandwiches coffee ,evening meal shopping and the last minute items may have used the High St etc keeping the town alive.
Again not knowing the background were Tesco's ever offered the DTIZ site for development as an option?.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Unregistered User
And the public decide, do they not?
Watty
Whatever the reasons, it sends an unwelcome message about local reps supporting the town centre. (In relation to Mareks post)
