Inspectors Report - Read it here first!

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

Wonderful news, and I just want to say thanks to Nick, Sarah and Dave for their unstinting hard work on Dreamland's behalf. Fingers crossed, we should now be able to start looking forward to a new era for our park, and let's hope TDC act as swiftly as possible in ensuring that Dreamland is operated properly, by a new owner, for the coming season.

Vince

[vince69619]

Bob - so nice to see you are back. Are you going to congratulate Nick and his helpers on their result?

About this 40% you are so fixated upon, would that be the 40% that your pal Jimmy owns? Does he know that any profit from his 40% of amusement park compaitble development will HAVE to go towards the sucessful running of the amusement park?

So are you telling us that Jimmy is going to do an almighty climb down and have a fully populated amusement park back on his land? Funny, we all thought he would be selling now, rather than running a loss making amusement park.

Didn't you tell us just a few days ago that it's not viable to run an amusement park on the site? So what else can Jimmy do but sell?

Vince.

[Sarah]

Steady now comrades! Without wishing to be the voice of doom, the Inspectors' recommendations are not binding; compelling yes, binding no. It's possible that TDC, in their infinite wisdom, will choose to ignore those elements of the Report that do not accord with their views.

Tonight's BBC South East report interviewed Chief Exec Richard Samuel and he was sounding less then receptive (Nick has uploaded the file onto the Latest News page). If this interview was carried out in the last couple of days (rather than being old footage, which I doubt it was) we still have an almighty battle on our hands. And it may still be a long one.

Of course, we are all feeling a bit triumphant; the Inspectors' Report was far more positive than I, for one, had dared to hope. Dreamland's owners will not be happy with it, but I doubt that anyone there is looking up the dialling code for Southend just yet.

This is an important battle to have won, but we have not won the war. This is not the end and we mustn't start thinking that Dreamland's future is assured because we have to start preparing for the next round of battles.

God, I sound like a Regimental Sergeant Major (and a rather gloomy one at that). Sorry!

Sarah

[RowBot]

lol well nicely said sarah since this probally isn't even half the battle and even if the park does go running 100% the campaign will still prob be here looking over the scenic and all of the other elements the campaign stands for

[vince69619]

Hi Sarah,

I did ask how far this is in the whole saga, and didn't get much of an answer.

Now we know we can get results, we can battle on into the next round. Let's see what Bob and Jimmy have for us!

Vince.

P.S. 01702 - I know because my family are there.

[Sarah]

Ah, duly chastised for not providing an answer! Here's my best stab at one:

TDC Officers now prepare a report on the Inspectors' Report, more trees die needlessly, and then present that Report to Council. Perhaps before Christmas, perhaps not. Decisions are made and then the Plan goes back out to public consultation. At the press conference it was suggested that the consultation would happen in February 06. If they stick to their schedule.

So now you see what I meant about the next round of battles.

Sarah

[Bob]

Bob - so nice to see you are back. Are you going to congratulate Nick and his helpers on their result?

About this 40% you are so fixated upon, would that be the 40% that your pal Jimmy owns? Does he know that any profit from his 40% of amusement park compaitble development will HAVE to go towards the sucessful running of the amusement park?

So are you telling us that Jimmy is going to do an almighty climb down and have a fully populated amusement park back on his land? Funny, we all thought he would be selling now, rather than running a loss making amusement park.

Didn't you tell us just a few days ago that it's not viable to run an amusement park on the site? So what else can Jimmy do but sell?

Vince.

Yes Dreamland as a 100% Amusement Parck is certainly not viable, hence the need for a mix of amusement Park with suitable etail outlets. It is the way forward and that also seems to be the view of the council who are now looking to take a sensible way forward. The plans for Residential & Hotel & High Street shopping outlets having been dropped. Food, Souvenirs. This aproach should permit a viable facility.

With a 100% Amusement park it is highly unlikely anyone could be found to run it as it would loose money. A closed Dreamland benefits no one.

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

It is viable, once you remove "The land will triple in value if it has planning permission" from the equation.

Vince

[vince69619]

Bob - so nice to see you are back. Are you going to congratulate Nick and his helpers on their result?

About this 40% you are so fixated upon, would that be the 40% that your pal Jimmy owns? Does he know that any profit from his 40% of amusement park compaitble development will HAVE to go towards the sucessful running of the amusement park?

So are you telling us that Jimmy is going to do an almighty climb down and have a fully populated amusement park back on his land? Funny, we all thought he would be selling now, rather than running a loss making amusement park.

Didn't you tell us just a few days ago that it's not viable to run an amusement park on the site? So what else can Jimmy do but sell?

Vince.

Yes Dreamland as a 100% Amusement Parck is certainly not viable, hence the need for a mix of amusement Park with suitable etail outlets. It is the way forward and that also seems to be the view of the council who are now looking to take a sensible way forward. The plans for Residential & Hotel & High Street shopping outlets having been dropped. Food, Souvenirs. This aproach should permit a viable facility.

With a 100% Amusement park it is highly unlikely anyone could be found to run it as it would loose money. A closed Dreamland benefits no one.

Notice that none of the suggestions that Bob is a pal of Jimmy Godden have been answered. This speaks for itself, so now we know for sure that Bob is one of Jimmy Godden's henchmen.

Also if you read exacly what Bob has written, it's actually a climb down because he's accepting that any development will be in sympathy with a working amusement park, it's only the scale that is still off. But some food and souvineers is normal for a park, but not 40%! And suddenly just food and souvineers is enough to make Dreamland viable! If that's all it needed Bob, why didn't you say so before?

Vince.

[Bob]

Hi Sarah,

I did ask how far this is in the whole saga, and didn't get much of an answer.

Now we know we can get results, we can battle on into the next round. Let's see what Bob and Jimmy have for us!

Vince.

P.S. 01702 - I know because my family are there.

The Outcome of the Inspector report is no suprise. It is pretty much as was expected. It rules out the total redevelopment of the site but excepts that some small scale retail development of the site is acceptable. The likely outcome is that about 60% to 70% of the site will be retained for the amusement park and 30% to 40% for small retail outlets. A probably possibility is for the mix to be slightly variable so that in the Summer the amount given over to the amusement park will increase and the retail will reduce. This approach substantially improves the commercial viability.
A strong possibility is to turn an area of the site over in the Winter to a small local Farmers/Craft market.

[David Ellis]

I think with the right investment and park management, something along the lines of the concept "I Dream of Dreamland" envisages, the park could be totally financially viable as an amusement park with minimal retail usage.

All the place needs is someone with vision and belief, and a large pile of cash! The campaign has identified potential operators, who would want to make it a successful amusement park in its own right. Why shouldn't it work?

David.

[Bob]

I think with the right investment and park management, something along the lines of the concept "I Dream of Dreamland" envisages, the park could be totally financially viable as an amusement park with minimal retail usage.

All the place needs is someone with vision and belief, and a large pile of cash! The campaign has identified potential operators, who would want to make it a successful amusement park in its own right. Why shouldn't it work?

David.

There are a number of reasons as to why it would not work. The site is not large enough to become a major attraction and in any case is in the wrong location. The UK holiday market no longer exists. Dreamland would predominantly attract the day tripper market. They would be perhaps prepared to travel up to 40 miles to an attraction the size of Dreamland and would expect a high quality attraction in a good and attractive location. The likely season would be no more then 3 months. In those three months it would have to make enough to keep it going for the rest of the year when it would be trading at a substantial lose. Even sites such as Thorpe park close for about 6 months of the year..

Many people in recent years have tried to make a go of Dreamland in its current form and all have failed,

[Graeme]

Many people in recent years have tried to make a go of Dreamland in its current form and all have failed,

Maybe, but who'd know that it existed? There was a really well-chosen selection of rides there for the 2001 and 2002 seasons (Frisbee, Looping Star etc), but I only heard about them arriving when someone on an internet forum saw them.

I really enjoyed visiting those years, but not once did I see any leaflets for the park in my local Tourist Informations up in Essex, Suffolk etc. Compare that to Adventure Island, Southend. Every year, the Tourist Infos are packed with its leaflets. You can't forget it exists.

[Nick]

Yes Dreamland as a 100% Amusement Parck is certainly not viable, hence the need for a mix of amusement Park with suitable etail outlets. It is the way forward and that also seems to be the view of the council who are now looking to take a sensible way forward. The plans for Residential & Hotel & High Street shopping outlets having been dropped. Food, Souvenirs. This aproach should permit a viable facility.

Knowing as we now do that you are one of the owner's associates your post is actually very interesting, and only partially incorrect. I am pleased to hear that you have dropped your plans for residential, hotel and high street shopping outlets. I was confident enough in Thanet District Council to know that, following the overwhelming results of the Margate Masterplan, they would have steered you away from what you originally planned. The Council would have suffered from a huge loss of confidence from the people of Margate if it had ignored their wishes.

The idea of some leisure retailing on the site, comprehensively developed as part of an upgraded Dreamland (with the profits tied into the Dreamland upgrade via a Section 106 agreement) is also something that we have openly accepted as a compromise way forward.

Your comment that Dreamland is certainly not viable as a 100% amusmeent park flies in the face of what the independent inspector said, though. He said he had been given no evidence that it wasn't viable, even referring to the so-called 'evidence' given to him by the site's owner. He saw through the current state of the site as a management issue, as we have all known for so long.

With a 100% Amusement park it is highly unlikely anyone could be found to run it as it would loose money. A closed Dreamland benefits no one.

I can tell you 100% that a buyer could be found for the entire site. Philip Miller of Southend Adventure Island has told me, and continues to tell me, that his preference is to buy the entire site and operate the whole thing as an amusement park. His Adventure Island, at about half the site of Dreamland, is too small and does not allow him to invest in major rides. He wants to put some big rides on the park.

Just thought I would correct you there, but thanks for clarifying your plans for the site. It is possible that we can work with you depending on:

a) The size and form of the retail development, and how well it integrates with the park, and
b) How the proceeds would be used to improve the appearance of the park and how it guarantees a quality amusement park operation (i.e. not a seasonal travelling fair with a big roller coaster in the middle).

Nick

[Danny87]

Great news I've been reading and definitely a step in the right direction. I think the park is big enough to be viable myself if the space is utilised correctly you can fit a lot of attractions in there. The compromise of having certain retailing areas makes sense to me, although I don't know if I'm right in thinking that these places will be like traditional seaside/fair souvenir and gift shops (or units), but thats the sort of thing that would be really nice to see in my opinion. I think the other thing that would really be needed would be more exposure/advertising at least in the South East to show that the place actually exists!

I'm really pleased for everyone who's worked hard to get this far; I know it's not over yet but it certainly is encouraging. I wish I could have done more to help that's all!