Joyland Books

Posted: **02 Oct 2008, 17:21**

The following job offer appears in today's issue of Attractions Management.

I guess my main concern is that the site appears to be leasehold and possibly shared between multiple operators - not sure how much stability and future security this would give the park. Will it be enough for anyone to invest at the levels needed?

Re-reading it it also appears the whole site may be available. Have the redevelopment plans (shops/houses etc.) been put on hold? If so is this just another stop-gap scheme?

Opportunity to recreate a legendary amusement park

Location: Margate
Company: Margate Town Centre Regeneration Co.

Opportunity to recreate a legendary amusement park

Live the Dream

Remember the excitement of being taken to the seaside?

Remember the amazing sight of the amusement park, the flashing lights, the smell of candyfloss - and the joy at being allowed “just one more” ride?

Perhaps no amusement park in Britain sums up the English summer of our youth more than Dreamland in Margate.

No longer in use, the site includes a Grade II Listed Scenic Railway, a Grade II* Listed Cinema and various other buildings in different states of repair.

Permission exists for amusement park uses on the site, and expressions of interest are invited for operators wishing to take up the leasehold of all or part of the site for development and operation of an amusement park, including the Scenic Railway, to the best modern standards.

Those who are interested in living the dream will be asked to provide details of proposals for all or part of the site, a business plan, and certificates of qualification and insurance to run the park.

In the initial instance, if you are interested in discussing the opportunity, please contact Ross Stewart on 0118 929 xxxx/xxxx by 10th November 2008

Posted: **02 Oct 2008, 19:29**

It sounds like 2005 and 2006 all over again.

Posted: **02 Oct 2008, 19:49**

Getting the place open again may be helpful. An operator may undertake restoration of the grounds a little at a time if they can get some income generated.
There's basically 2 routes this could go.
1> Sink a bunch of time and money into it all at once and open it a s a fabulous new Dreamland, or,
2> Open the park and re-do a section of it each year over maybe 5 or 6 years.

Route 3 is that someone comes in and operates it with traveling rides as a big slab of concrete, which it already is. Not my favorite option, and not going to generate any real interest.

Posted: **02 Oct 2008, 20:03**

is this about opening the park again in the near future ?

Posted: **03 Oct 2008, 13:58**

lol

Who in there right minds would fix the place up, fill it up with rides, spend all that money etc on a leasehold.

Does anyone know if the scenic was actually insured?

Posted: **03 Oct 2008, 17:02**

less of the sarcasm mate

Posted: **04 Oct 2008, 11:35**

And of course it could be another ruse to allow someone some limited scope (at their own expense) to try to run a park, then those responsible for the longer term use of the site to be able to 'demonstrate' that an amusement park on the site isn't viable...

Posted: **04 Oct 2008, 12:37**

EAS what are you trying to say ? that an amusement park is not viable on the dreamland site ? of course an amusement park is viable on the dreamland site and allways will be viable , its just people that have no interest in dreamland that think other wise

Posted: **04 Oct 2008, 12:51**

I am saying that as far as the new planning brief went, some commercial partial site development was allowed in order to fund the work to repair the Scenic and the cinema (enabling development) and have a heritage park on site.

This is bypassing that process. It's clear the owners hadn't any plans in place, and the credit crunch has possibly put any thoughts of plans on hold. Looks like repair will be at the expense of a new leaseholder?

I am suspicious. I have learned to be suspicious over many years.

And look at the cash put in at Southport... to no avail.

The devil will be in the detail of any lease.

And remember that unless plans are in place soon, the council has said will step in with compulsory purchase. There are restrictions on the circumstances in which it can do that.

Posted: **04 Oct 2008, 18:06**

Where does it state the local authority will use powers to Compulsory Purchase. It could be an option but nowhere does it say they are planning to do so.

Posted: **04 Oct 2008, 18:25**

They have started the procedures whch end up with this.

It's not really something they can back out of if nothing is done.

That's why the procedures are so rarely carried out where listed buildings are concerned, and why we have so many at risk.

Posted: **05 Oct 2008, 09:23**

dreamland wrote:EAS what are you trying to say ? that an amusement park is not viable on the dreamland site ? of course an amusement park is viable on the dreamland site and allways will be viable , its just people that have no interest in dreamland that think other wise

Anything but a travelling fair type thing is not viable on the site while its owned by someone else, look at the cost of new or 2nd hand fixed rides, who is going to pay 1m+ per ride just to have JG then turn round and bump the rent up. So you rent the site, no doubt it will then fall on you to fix the cinema, the scenic etc. and as eas says, once you go bust the owners can then say a fair isn't economically viable.

I have been in the trade, I know how much rides cost, how much arcade machines cost, how much public liability insurance costs, health and safty standards etc the setup cost of getting dreamland up and running again will be eye wateringly high, we are talking 10's of millions before anyone has stepped through the gates. From a business point of view an empty field would be cheaper to get up and running as a funfair.

Its an old trick, been there with the owner of a listed building I used to rent

Posted: **05 Oct 2008, 13:29**

That's about my view too.

And no mention of the heritage park...

Will anyone be daft enough to take this on as it is? And if not - what claims will then be made that it isn't viable?

And the costs of repair now for the Scenic and the cinema will be rising daily.

The 'enabling development' would have aided the owners with that, albeit with a smaller park. However, with the current economic climate...

Unless there is something I'm missing, and the lease is very generous indeed, and the site owners genuinely wish for a long-term future, I smell rat.

Posted: **05 Oct 2008, 22:51**

but as a forum we have always smelt a Rat !!! but we have to stay positive rather than negative !! at least there is movement no body knows what years the lease is for or anything but as far as i can see any movement from the previous closed down dreamland ! is a bonus surely ! and now hopefully a u turn that Ramsgate or Folkestone never had the chance off, i think we have to be grateful for anything !!!

Posted: **06 Oct 2008, 10:15**

I don't think that something is better than nothing, no. I think some carefully controlled future is good, following discussions with all parties (including and especially the council and the regeneration agencies) and a long term plan.

Unless those are in place, I forsee all manner of problems.

Joyland Books

MTCRC seeks leasehold operators for Dreamland site.

MTCRC seeks leasehold operators for Dreamland site.