Thanet Times (22/11/05, Page 4)

[RowBot]

Dreamland has bright future says inspector

Dreamland looks set to remain an amusement park after a goverment official ruled the site and Scenic should stay.

Residents, traiders and campaigners are thrilled at the planning inspector's verdict that there could be "limited development" recognising the theme park had a "powerful influence on the traditional holidaymaker".

The Grade II listed Scenic Railway was hailed as an "extra-ordinary building" with a viable future even as a stand alone attraction.

Save Dreamland leader Nick Laister said the report was an important victory. "The council maintained Dreamland was no longer viable and was happy to aloow the site to be redeveloped," he said. "We knew that was completely wrong, and we presented what the inspector considered to be compelling evidence. Not only is the operation viable, it is the single most important tourism site in the district".

Councillors will decide whether to accept or reject the inspector's sugguestions next year.

Property firm Waterbridge, which brought the Deamland site earlier this year, says it will ask people what should be done with it.

Chairman Toby Hunter said he was determined to create "a world class leisure destination" if people were prepared to move away from the park's "slot machine" image.

Mr Hunter said a public consultation on the site's future will be held next year.

Sorry for any spelling mistakes was in a bit of a rush when writing this, plus there was some comments from people and I will add them a bit later.

[vince69619]

Given the amount of news and publicity that the Inspector's report is generating (as reported on the News page on this site), does this make it harder for the council to go against the report?

Vince.

[RowBot]

Ya i was thinking the same thing. Surely the council can't go against this if so many people are talking about it and wanting something to happen but ya never know surpose with TDC

[Zoidstar]

I dont want to sound a doom mercant but...

I dont think the inspectors report is leagaly binding its just a recomendation.

Should a developer move in and buy the land and submit a proposal for i dont knoe lets say an IMAX cinema nightclub and houses than the council MUST consider the plans as if the inspectors report did not even exist.

I think thats how it works...

[Nick]

I dont want to sound a doom mercant but...

I dont think the inspectors report is leagaly binding its just a recomendation.

Should a developer move in and buy the land and submit a proposal for i dont knoe lets say an IMAX cinema nightclub and houses than the council MUST consider the plans as if the inspectors report did not even exist.

I think thats how it works...

That is not quite correct.

Firstly the posts above were, I think, acknowledging the fact that the Inspector's Report is not legally binding, and were asking whether the publicity makes it more likely that the Council will accept the recommendations.

The large amount of publicity that this part of the Inspector's Report has received in the local press, and the strong support for the recommendations by local residents and businesses, will undoubtedly increase the chances of the recommendations being accepted. Given the amount of local interest, there would be a major backlash against the Council if they ignored these recommendations.

Secondly, if a planning application is submitted, the Council DOES have to take into account the Inspector's Report. They cannot ignore it. The report is a material consideration, and the policy for Dreamland in the RDD Local Plan is now substantially weakened. This situation will remain until the Council publishes its Proposed Modifications.

I hope that clarifies things.