howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#2
I can see both sides of the argument. I thought the original idea was to stop some of the rather silly objections that planners give to stop infill houses being built or extensions to a property, I did not realise it was intended to deal with large scale developments.
I am afraid that planning consent often seems to depend on who you know and how to work the system, I hasten to add I am not defaming planners. An example, a business that might not have got change of use to apartments deliberately put in their application around Christmas time as the public would be busy with other things, hence no objections.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 700- Registered: 11 Jun 2010
- Posts: 2,868
#3
There are STILL a lot unused flats, accommodation over shops, offices, and brownfield sites.
Until these are all used, restored and occupied, no new green sites should be taken, that is my view!
It's all about money, building on brown sites costs a lot more.
---------------------------------------------------
Lincolnshire Born and Bred
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#4
quite right there is no need to build on green field sites.
planning rules do need an overhaul but not to the detriment of our countryside or heritage sites.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#5
quite agree with posts 3 and 4
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#6
Agree totally with Kath. Touch not one blade of grass until every last unoccupied house, shop and brownfield site has been utilised. Force these wretched people to do something about their properties. I did many years ago with the ghastly Dover Bargain Centre in London Road, now the immaculate Paint & Decor Centre. A post on Dover Forum attracted the enthusiastic support of the Dover Express and the rest is history.
To give a single instance out of many, how is it that some execrable property developer was allowed to purchase the old Army Recruitment site on Townwall Street and then permitted the buildings on this historic site to decay into near ruins? This was part of the Royal Naval Air Service seaplane base in WW1 and part of the Guilford Battery prior to that. Quite apart from its historic relevance, it would have made a superb home for somebody. As it is, the unscrupulous developers are believed to be holding out for an asking price of ten times what they paid for it, see Jeff Howe's article in the thread below.
http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=105582&st=25Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#7
This is all a pitch by English Heritage to avoid a budget cut.
To be honest they are the last people I would trust to maintain historic sites - they only seem interested in "enhancing" the customer experience rather than actually preserving the fabric of the buildings
"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
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#8
reading this article make me think it will never happen, especially after the forests fiasco.
at the end of the day it is a serious vote loser for the blues.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/sep/03/conservatives-lost-touch-rural-grassrootsKeith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#9
howard;
im not so sure it wont happen, but that said the blues are difficult to guage these days, you once had a rough idea what they stood for, this is no longer the case, they set policy only to see the public opinion turn against them so they do a u turn.
then they have the added problem of the forgotten party(lib dems) giving them all manner of problems.
of course labour also needs to get its ar** in gear if it wants to form the next govt
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#10
having read the article it seems that the blues have got arrogant about their rural power base, we have had the forest issue, the high speed train plan to cut through the chilterns now the planning reforms.
the reds have seen this and have started trying to make inroads on blue territory, will be interesting to see how they get on.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#11
TONY BLAIR (Not my favourite) learnt that he needed middle england to get elected
and his aim of getting into number 10 was well calculated, and he ran with the mood of the people(im no fan of his) but he learnt of the need to take these people with him or risk losing.
he took no chances even up to the labour landslide he was still leaving nothing to chance, he was aware labour in the past years were on the brink of winning the general election and up would pop dennis skinner or tony benn with a speech in the commons which would scupper all chances.
oh dear scottiush tories realy dont want any thing to do with cameron on news just now.
more woes for leaderless david
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
agreed keith tony blair was a winner, he was lucky to have neil kinnock pave the way for him but still was the only person to lead the reds to power and keep them there.
there is no room for sentimentality as he showed with the ditching of "clause 4", nothing wrong with it but the image that it threw up did not strike a chord with the public.
brown and miliband are political pygmies, one lost them power and the other seems to be trying to make sure that they never regain it.
#13
Just wanted to say what a fabulous difference in the Dover Paint and Decor centre!! It is easy to see how much difference it makes to have well kept property in the town. And what happens when we don't....................
Nice one Ed.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#14
HOWARD;
I think the 2 major parties have lost there way
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#15
i can remember the issue about the dover bargain centre vaguely.
must have been about 8 years ago and ed's mother in law lived opposite at a time when siberian hamsters were running loose from the afore mentioned building.
