Redevelopment- a Foregone Conclusion?

[Bob]

Bob, I wonder if you would care to expand on your own personal vision for Dreamland? You say that the site needs to make a return on the large investment needed- which of course it does- but nowhere have you been specific as to what exactly you feel should be the new format for the site.

Do you have in mind something which will attract money inwards towards Thanet- if so, would you explain what sort of attraction you mean- or do you simply envisage some type of retail development which will merely dilute the available local spend?

The plain would be to have Dreamland as predominantly an Amusement Park but supplemented by small retail facilities some of which you would normally expect at an amusement park in any case such as restaurants. Takeaways, Sweet/Gift shop. Tee-shirts etc. Probably a small market area particularly at off peak times. The sort of outlets you would see at a small factory village if you have ever been to one. Craft Stalls etc. Possibly a small farmers market say one day a week selling local produce.

[Neil]

The plain would be to have Dreamland as predominantly an Amusement Park but supplemented by small retail facilities some of which you would normally expect at an amusement park in any case such as restaurants. Takeaways, Sweet/Gift shop. Tee-shirts etc. Probably a small market area particularly at off peak times. The sort of outlets you would see at a small factory village if you have ever been to one. Craft Stalls etc. Possibly a small farmers market say one day a week selling local produce.

Firstly have you read the inspector's report Bob? May I point you to the point "He stated that the site is not suitable for retail development, although he did state that souvenir shops and craft shops could “continue to flourish on a minor scale' (98 ) which is a sound conclusion. " In other words if they reject the inspector's report it is not because they want to allow a few gift shops to be built.

Secondly Bob they have spent a fortune buying the park (I think this Yorkshire devlopment company spent something like 25 million on a 60% share so please do correct me if I'm wrong"). The only way they are likely to get this money back is building high value devlopment (flats, dense housing, super market and other forms of retail). We all know that this Yorkshire devlopment company aren't planning to run it as it is with a small farmers market tacked on. While as people have said before they are being coy about what their precise plans are, I can't see this being on the agenda.

[Bob]

The plain would be to have Dreamland as predominantly an Amusement Park but supplemented by small retail facilities some of which you would normally expect at an amusement park in any case such as restaurants. Takeaways, Sweet/Gift shop. Tee-shirts etc. Probably a small market area particularly at off peak times. The sort of outlets you would see at a small factory village if you have ever been to one. Craft Stalls etc. Possibly a small farmers market say one day a week selling local produce.

Firstly have you read the inspector's report Bob? May I point you to the point "He stated that the site is not suitable for retail development, although he did state that souvenir shops and craft shops could “continue to flourish on a minor scale' (98 ) which is a sound conclusion. " In other words if they reject the inspector's report it is not because they want to allow a few gift shops to be built.

Secondly Bob they have spent a fortune buying the park (I think this Yorkshire devlopment company spent something like 25 million on a 60% share so please do correct me if I'm wrong"). The only way they are likely to get this money back is building high value devlopment (flats, dense housing, super market and other forms of retail). We all know that this Yorkshire devlopment company aren't planning to run it as it is with a small farmers market tacked on. While as people have said before they are being coy about what their precise plans are, I can't see this being on the agenda.

You clearly have not read the inspectors report properly. He clearly stated that appropriate small scale retail development would be permit and went on to give some examples. So I am afraid you are incorrect on that.

You have not read the Councils Planning recomendations neither. I would suggest that people on here should read these documents and not just make guesses at what they think they contain.

[Susan]

I hope Bob you are not suggesting the Inspector's recommendations and those made by the Council Officers are the same. They certainly are not.

The Inspector was very clear about what he saw as the best future for Dreamland and the development he mentioned was very different to that you suggest.

Please dont insult me by suggesting I haven't read it as I can assure you I have, every last word of it, and the same goes for the report and appendix prepared for the Council meeting.

[Neil]

I hope Bob you are not suggesting the Inspector's recommendations and those made by the Council Officers are the same. They certainly are not.

Bob, if you really think the inspector and Council Officer are saying the thing then answer this question. Why did they vote for option 'c' and not option 'b'? As has been said we have already proven that is viable. With this in mind the devlopment company will be trying to make sure it doesn't succeed. On several occassions TV companies have wanted to film on the site (normally for news reports) and the owners have refused to allow them. Inevitably a feature on a main stream news channel would be fantastic punlicity. Hence havn't you ever wondered why the operators have been keen to turn them down?