Listed Building Applications Submitted

[vince69619]

Barry we are not interested in your constant attempts to just argue that black is white.

It has been made really easy for you, we have only asked you the one question recently, try to stick to this, you can see it above, please try to focus. Do as much in depth research as you need, then in less than ten words, put together a simple answer.

If you can't cope on your own, ask Jimmy, he might know.

Vince.

[taffy]

Why don't we spend less time speculating about what will or will not happen re: the status of listed buildings? I think we should leave it to the experts and the council of course. Nick seems to have stated the case clearly, and Bob has prevaricated and thrown up meaningless smokescreens with minimal backing in fact. Let's leave the people concerned get on with it.

What we should do is see whether Bob can answer the straightforward question asked previously. I see little sign so far.

[taffy]

[b]HERE IS THE QUESTION IN CASE YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN BOB. PLEASE COULD YOU ANSWER IT?[/b]

Is this site, an amusement park site, available for sale at an appropriate price calculated by valuation professionals in the field at a market price for an amusement park?

This is the whole issue and a short, straight, answer would be appreciated.[/quote]

WE ALL LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR REPLY. YES OR NO WOULD SUFFICE.[/b]

[Bob]

[b]HERE IS THE QUESTION IN CASE YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN BOB. PLEASE COULD YOU ANSWER IT?[/b]

Is this site, an amusement park site, available for sale at an appropriate price calculated by valuation professionals in the field at a market price for an amusement park?

This is the whole issue and a short, straight, answer would be appreciated.

WE ALL LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR REPLY. YES OR NO WOULD SUFFICE.[/b][/quote]

At the moment the site is not for sale. Any sensible offers that are made would be considered on there merit.

[David Ellis]

I see you are another of the hot air experts that can run Dreamland and make a fortune. So if you are so clever why are you not making a bid for it ?

...and how do you expect us to do that if you have just admitted that the site is not up for sale!

If the site is up for sale at a price commensurate with the value of the land as an amusement park then someone may be willing to put in that bid your refer to...if it isn't even for sale then what relevance are your comments?

David.

[jmace9]

[b]HERE IS THE QUESTION IN CASE YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN BOB. PLEASE COULD YOU ANSWER IT?[/b]

Is this site, an amusement park site, available for sale at an appropriate price calculated by valuation professionals in the field at a market price for an amusement park?

This is the whole issue and a short, straight, answer would be appreciated.

WE ALL LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR REPLY. YES OR NO WOULD SUFFICE.[/b]

At the moment the site is not for sale. Any sensible offers that are made would be considered on there merit.[/quote]

Question for Bob

When you say any sensible offer will be considered would you consider one at the market price for an amusement park?


John

[taffy]

The word acocrding to Bob is:

1 The park is not for sale

2 The park might be for sale if an offer was made that was acceptable; he still won't say, however, if this offer needs to be for what its worth as an amusement park or otherwise. Anyway, why make an offer if it is not for sale!!

3 The park is in a state and needs improving by knocking things down. Why is it in a state I wonder? I can't possibly imagine.

A cynical person might suggest that businesses get into states when they are deliberately run into the ground in order to try and prove that they are not viable. A cynical person might also suggest that some 'businessmen' then try and make money by redefining what the land is for in order to realise greater profit potential.

Surely not...............



The logic and pretence behind Bob's stranger and more contradictory postings is quite surreal.

Taffy. 'They don't like it up 'em'!!!!!!!!!!

[Sarah]

Bob tells us that "his understanding" is that the Council won't object to the demolitions. He has no such understanding and, if he insists that he does, then he is making a very serious allegation about TDC's Planning Committee. Spit it out Bob, I'd like to hear it.

But he won't, because Bob's postings are about wearing us down and making us think that all the decisions have already been made, regardless of what we do. The message underlying all of his posts is "Why bother? Face the facts. Give it up."

Occasionally, we must all wonder if anyone in power will ever listen to reason on this subject. I know I do. I wonder if those people recognise that we do what we do because we believe in a future for Margate, not because we are daft sentimentalists stuck in some rose-tinted past.

But while I may sometimes get frustrated about the logic of our leaders, I don't believe that anything about Dreamland's future is cut and dried. It's all still to be fought for and nothing Bob says will stop us fighting.

So Bob. Give it up.

Sarah

[Susan]

Taffy, in response to your earlier posting about the status of the listed buildings, you are right Nick has stated it very clearly and correctly. However it still needs people to make their views known to the Council in order to inform their opinion before they make a decision. This cannot be left to Nick alone. In other places on this site there are details of how to do this on-line or by letter.

[Bob]

Bob tells us that "his understanding" is that the Council won't object to the demolitions. He has no such understanding and, if he insists that he does, then he is making a very serious allegation about TDC's Planning Committee. Spit it out Bob, I'd like to hear it.

But he won't, because Bob's postings are about wearing us down and making us think that all the decisions have already been made, regardless of what we do. The message underlying all of his posts is "Why bother? Face the facts. Give it up."

Occasionally, we must all wonder if anyone in power will ever listen to reason on this subject. I know I do. I wonder if those people recognise that we do what we do because we believe in a future for Margate, not because we are daft sentimentalists stuck in some rose-tinted past.

But while I may sometimes get frustrated about the logic of our leaders, I don't believe that anything about Dreamland's future is cut and dried. It's all still to be fought for and nothing Bob says will stop us fighting.

So Bob. Give it up.

Sarah

I would refer you to the posting on this site in which the Planning Mangers Report states quite clearly that for Dreamland to be successful it needs redevelopment . The recomendation quite rightly rejects partially the inspectors report and propses a sound and financvially viable way forward for Dreamland. I really think the Save Dreamland Campagian would prefer to close it down rather then save it. The whole campaign has moved to a very negative approach which is neither helpful or constructive to the saving of Dreamland

The council though is taking a strong and robust approach to ensure Dreamland is saved and enhanced and for the site to provide year round employment and facilities for Margate.

Perhaps now the Save Dreamland Campaign will see that this is in the best interests of keeping Dreamland open.

"The predominant use of the Dreamland site should be for leisure purposes providing a year round destination, attractive to visitors and locals alike. This leisure use could take the form of an amusement park on the whole or part of the site. However, if an amusement park is found not to be viable and sustainable then alternative leisure uses will be explored. Any leisure use will be expected to integrate with properties and land fronting Marine Terrace and adjacent at Arlington Square. A residential element may also be appropriate on the site, but only at a scale necessary to enable the leisure proposals to proceed, contribute to the new access road and enable other aspects of the site’s development and supporting infrastructure to take place including providing an appropriate parkland setting to the Scenic Railway. A green park around the scenic railway as a central feature would be required in order to provide an appropriate setting and high quality amenity space with pedestrian links within and beyond the site. A limited amount of retail use, restricted to the sale of goods in connection with the leisure and tourism elements on the site may be appropriate. A small (below 500sq m) convenience store to serve the immediate residential area and visitors would be acceptable

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

the new access road

That would be where MrG's arcade used to stand before it burnt down in mysterious circumstances?

[Bob]

the new access road

That would be where MrG's arcade used to stand before it burnt down in mysterious circumstances?

A New Entrance to Dreamland is essential. The current entrance is in no way satisfactory and its pretty well hidden from the road. A Bold New Entrance that can be clearly seen from the road that is attractve and inviting is absolutely essential for the future viability of Dreamland

[Vince, Charlie and Sam]

Well, what a stroke of luck that Mr G's burnt down then!

[vince69619]

Barry you keep complaining that the Save Dreamland Campaign is not interested in Dreamland being open.

Well show us the full plans you have for the site and if it's a good as you keep suggesting, then you will get support. You have the option to gain our support if that's what you really want.

Vince.

[coasternutter]

Just got back from Southend. Enough said!