Waiting for a report?

[vince69619]

whats stopping the owners of the site and the scenic just shutting up shop and leaving it to go to rack n ruin

Bottom line is money. That's what this is all about. They want to redevelop the site because that makes more money than a theme park, or selling the land for theme park use.

So once it has been established just how much money can be made from the land, it will be done. (Hopefully that will mean selling it to Mr Miller). Leaving the land empty will not get any money in, so I can't see that happening.

Vince.

[Bob]

whats stopping the owners of the site and the scenic just shutting up shop and leaving it to go to rack n ruin

It is an option I am sure they are considering. They would use it as leaverage to maximise the amount of space they could sell off. Having Dreamland open in it present state generates little revenue so it would be cheaper for them to close it. I think that could well happen.

[micktee]

Once again, members of this campaign [not all] are stating facts about the Dreamland site that they have not got a clue in what is going on!
Nick has stated the facts of the inspectors report that will be published on the 17th November, I also find it interesting that those who are local members, have not noticed that many of the old workshops and buildings are now being demolished, to tidy up the site.
Plans for the Sea Front and other ares of Margate that are in a poor state, have been reconised, and action is being taken, as I have sais before on this site it does not happen over night, and somebody has to finance it!
Perhaps BOB could put his hand in his pocket and buy a broom!!!!!
Cllr.Mick Tomlinson

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

many of the old workshops and buildings are now being demolished, to tidy up the site.

Or possibly to clear the site

[Nick]

Which buildings are being demolished? Many of the buildings at Dreamland, including the workshops, the large arcade at the back and several other structures are listed because they fall within the curtilage of the amusement park. It is a criminal offence to demolish them without listed building consent, and it comes with a prison sentence. If listed buildings are being demolished without consent, then the Listed Buildings/Conservation officer at Thanet District Council should be informed. If they cannot be contacted, then the police should be called to the site to stop the works.

Does anybody know which buildings are being removed?

Nick

[Nick]

I have put an item up on the News page about this, as a lot of people have been in touch and are concerned about what might be happening on the site.

http://www.joylandbooks.com/scenicrailway/news.htm

Nick

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

My guess is that they are going to demolish both of these buildings as well as the Scenic Railway in the very near future, since the financial profit in doing this will far outweigh any fine which will be levied.

[Sarah]

Being cynical doesn't suit you Vince and, let's face it, we already have more than enough defeatist voices on here.

Can we have the old positive, constructive and sensible Vince back please?

Sarah

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

I've seen enough Thanet development projects driven through "by fair means or foul" - Pleasurama and Mr G's arcade are two examples which spring immediately to mind- to have taught me some cynicism.

I consider it extremely unlikely that the developers will forget about the profit to be made from the Dreamland site simply because a local council does not see things their way, and Shipley Glen will have sent them a positive message, loud and clear.

I should make it clear that this is my personal opinion, and not that of the Campaign.

[porf]

Things don't always go the way the developers would like and that's what we need to aim towards.

As an example the attempt to demolish and redevelop a Listed early 30's house in Wentworth, Surrey backfired primarily due to actions of a campaigning group (The 20th Century Society).
The site was worth around £1 million with the listed building on it and around £5 million as a cleared site with planning permission for new housing. The owner illegally demolished the house and got just a relatively small fine, but the redevelopment of the site has now been blocked, effectively leaving him with a very expensive plot of land he can't build on.

http://www.c20society.org.uk/docs/press/050715_greenside.html

Whilst the above isn't an ideal example (the building was sadly demolished) it does show the efforts that can be made to disrupt development for profit. If a campaign or other individuals can increase the problems the developers face and lower the profit they stand to make they may choose to look elswhere for an easier profit. I don't believe we know how the contract between Godden and the developers is structured - it could for example contain clauses allowing them to walk away if development hasn't occured by a set date.

Personally I'm looking forward to the Inquiry publication as from the advance info it looks this should provide a very useful lever against the development of the site.

I feel we've recently seen an increase in the chances of stopping the redevelopment.

[Nick]

My guess is that they are going to demolish both of these buildings as well as the Scenic Railway in the very near future, since the financial profit in doing this will far outweigh any fine which will be levied.

Unauthorised demolition of a listed building carries with it anything from a fine to a prison sentence.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/Uk ... .htm#mdiv9

Your argument that the financial profit in demolishing the structure(s) would far outweigh any fine which may be levied is undermined by the fact that the Council can issue a 'listed building enforcement notice', which requires the owner to rebuild the building to its former state:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1990/Uk ... htm#mdiv38

So the owner pays his fine, or serves a prison sentence, then still has to rebuild the structure. And if he ignores the enforcement notice, he gets another fine, which increases the longer he ignores the notice.

This legislation is in place to stop the very situation you described from happening.

Shipley Glen is a very different situation. In that case, the structure was delisted due to a lack of evidence on its age. We have no such lack of evidence here at Dreamland; there is no doubt that the Scenic Railway was built in 1920 and is the oldest operating roller coaster in the UK. And English Heritage is right behind the listing, as anyone who saw their letter in response to the dreadful Margate Masterplan would know.

Nick

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

My point is that we should remain vigilant to the possibility that the developer will demolish these structures. After all, since he has no apparent interest in operating the site as an amusement park, it seems strange that he would spend money in demolishing any of the buildings on site. As far as being forced to re-build the structure, I see no evidence that the Regency building which contained Mr.G's arcade is about to be re-built, and I presume that this was both listed, and fully insured against the type of incident which befell it.


If you ever read Private Eye, then week in and week out, they carry reports on listed buildings which have been unlawfully demolished or have caught fire in unexplained circumstances which have culminated in the owner achieving his plan despite local opposition to development.

[Susan]

We have to be positive about this, the report is due in less than two weeks and we are optimistic it will contain some good news for us. It has been a long haul thus far and I am sure there will be much more to do but if this forum does nothing else it shows there a lot of people out there who care, who have stayed the course so far and will continue to do so.

Unfortunately those of us that live too far away cant help with the current situation but those of you who are local keep an eye on things; Nick has explained very clearly what has to be done, please do it and very quickly.[/i]

[Bob]

My point is that we should remain vigilant to the possibility that the developer will demolish these structures. After all, since he has no apparent interest in operating the site as an amusement park, it seems strange that he would spend money in demolishing any of the buildings on site. As far as being forced to re-build the structure, I see no evidence that the Regency building which contained Mr.G's arcade is about to be re-built, and I presume that this was both listed, and fully insured against the type of incident which befell it.


If you ever read Private Eye, then week in and week out, they carry reports on listed buildings which have been unlawfully demolished or have caught fire in unexplained circumstances which have culminated in the owner achieving his plan despite local opposition to development.

In theory a prison sentnce can be given but this is very unlikely, equally they can be made to reinstate the building but if its been destroyed that is not a real option so would in practice not happen. As far as I know only the Scenic Railway has listed Building status so only anything within the curtilage of the ride is in any case protected.

Its not going to be easy to keep Dreamland. Its going to be very tough to make a case for it being financially viable. It needs to be bound up with sorting out the entire town Centre and in providing other facilities that would attract tourists remember any real tourist season now only lasts perhaps a couple of months. The main focus should be on attracting Day & short break visitors. One needs to consider the UK climate as well so enclosing some or all of dreamland should be considered. Perhaps a glass dome over it. Parking will be another consideration. Most will arive by car if there is not easy cheap parking they will not bother.
Most councils attitudes seem to be to do there best to drive visitors away by making life as difficult as possible.

[dave771]

I see Bob has a great deal to say again but not a great amount of thought has gone into what he has said, just wanted to mention the following points regarding what has been posted by Bob,

Unless you are a judge how can you say a prison sentence is unlikely?

Why is rebuilding a damaged listed building not an option?

As well as the Scenic Railway there are at least three listed buildings on the Dreamland site that I can think of at the moment.

A very good case regarding Dreamlands viability has already been given at the enquiry last year which I think is before you joined the campaign, Nick Laisters proof of evidence can be viewed on this site if you would like to check this information as to viability.

On the concept plan if you have taken the time to look at it properly has already taken into account space for visitors travelling by car to the Dreamland site.

In future it may be an idea for some members to have a close look at all the work Nick and Sarah have put into this campaign since January 2003 instead of just looking at the last few months!