So then...

[cliffc]

So things have still not really changed Dreamland is still in a state of limbo, who and when is the final say on if Dreamland is viable going to happen, this state od affers can not and must not drag on for many more years a definate anwser must be reached by the end of this year really.

Hi All

I think the following sums up what option C actually means, When Godden and Waterbridge make absoulutly sure that thay prove the site is not Viable, then thay can do what the hell thay like with the site (obviously within the bounds of the Listed Building Status and of course the lack of any unexpected combustion), and i am sure that when the council create there terms of viability documement this will be heavly biased towards the developers, one can only hope nothing happens until next years elections, which will produce a Labour majority on the TDC who will do there best to change the local plan to option A and take on board the recomendations of the Inspector. In the mean time the campain has to keep up the pressure and continue to be a thorn in the TDC and the devlopers side.


CLiff C

[Zoidstar]

We have just had the local elections a general is not utill 2008/9

[stuart]

We have just had the local elections a general is not utill 2008/9

Thanet will have local elections in 2007.

[Lou]

Well, why do they hold these meetings, i don't really understand it all. We seem to be going round in circles. How can they say if Dreamland is viable/not viable. I always thought to make a proper judgement on something you needed to have proper information.
If Dreamland does open this year, i hope they will not make their judgement on how it does over this small amount of time, with no real publicity and only a few rides.
It seems that TDC are making it up as they go along, and putting as many hurdles as possible in our way. Surely viability needs to be measured by Dreamland running at full capacity and with proper publicity.

[Sarah]

That was the essence of our conversation with TDC yesterday Lou. The 'viability test' in the Local Plan had no bones and was very vague. We were concerned that such a test would be based on a travelling fair, rather than an amusement park, and that it would take into account inflated land values. That's why we asked TDC to formulate some supplementary guidance on what evidence they would accept in relation to viability. That they agreed to do that is a very small victory, but a victory nonetheless.

Sarah

[Lou]

Thanks for that Sarah, sounds like you guys did a great job at the meeting. Perhaps TDC will realise that we are not just going to give up on Dreamland. We are going to give all it takes to get Dreamland up and running again.

I know in all my posts I keep on banging on about publicity, but I really believe if our cause was brought to light, we would have so much support nationally TDC would have to reconsider their option C.

[Zoidstar]

It will be intresting to see if the site is given the green light for redevelopment before the next elections then, could it be rushed through if the council wanted?

[Nick]

There is a short report of the meeting on the News page:

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

The meeting was very disappointing, and it was really, really depressing to see it degenerate into cheap political point-scoring. Imagine asking a classroom full of primary school kids to discuss Dreamland - the resulting debate would have been more intelligent and orderly. Whilst it made for great entertainment, sadly many of the important points about Dreamland were lost amongst accusations from each side that the other side is not as good as they are.

However, in the grand scheme of things, let's not lose sight of the fact that things are certainly not as bad as they could have been. The Policy the Council has adopted is (as a result of the Inspector's Report) just very, very slightly better than the Council's original 2003 Policy U-turn. (But I do mean very slightly.) Part 1 of the Policy is pretty much as the Inspector drafted it, and that takes precedence over the second part. Plus the amendment that we negotiated earlier that afternoon was an attempt to ensure that any viability assessment is not skewed by the inflated land values that the Council's short-sighted policy has created. After all, it is highly unlikely that an amusement park would be viable at the price that Waterbridge has reportedly paid for the site. There will be a consultation which we can get involved in, although I expect many people in Thanet are getting a bit fed up with so-called 'consultations', when the Council completely ignores what everybody says.

I think that we should also take some satisfaction from the fact that the policy now protects the Scenic Railway, which I am convinced would not have happened were it not for this campaign.

But the policy we have ended up with falls way, way, way short of what the people of Thanet wanted. It is certainly not a firm foundation for saving Dreamland. So we will keep on fighting.

Forthcoming chapters in this saga include the 'consultation' on the viability assessment and, in a month or two, the Council telling the Secretary of State that they want to adopt the plan, after which Ruth Kelly (not Prescott, of course, after last week's reshuffle) has 28 days to decide whether she wants to call it in...

And with Toby Hunter telling us that it could be the end of next year before a planning application goes in, this campaign is set to run and run!

[RowBot]

Thank you Nick for all the writing up about all the Meetings you went too and thank you for making it happen. Another consultation gone and yet another to come, seems like all we ever do in life is consult. SDC is gaining support day by day and lets hope Nick, Sarah and Dave can keep us all updated 24/7.

Ian (Always trying to look on the possitive side of things )

[Jim Douglas Jr.]

I just hope they realize that a restored Dreamland, which doesn't have to be "set up" every year, and could operate for a nice long season is what they should be basing their viability test on, and there's really no way to compare what it is now with I Dream of Dreamland.

Thanks to everyone who was able to attend.

[Nick]

Thank you Nick for all the writing up about all the Meetings you went too and thank you for making it happen.

Actually, the meeting reports on the News page were mainly written by Sarah, not me.

[Neil]

I've just been doing some history revision and have found an early reference to Sandy Ezekiel and his conservative Council.

The poet Percy Shelley says "The Tories neither see nor feel nor know". All the historians recon it's to do with Liverpool's government 1815 to 1821, but I recon it's a vision of the future and the situation in Thanet.

I suppose this is a bit of a bummer, but not entirely unexpected. We always knew it wouldn't be easy, but we're going to go all the way and let's face it we now know we have plenty of time to act.

So did a couple of the Conservatives rebel against the party this time? I think the result is closer than last time, but I'm not sure.

[DaveD]

The Conservative throng seem to have absolutely no idea how to turn around Margate's fortunes - they continually knock Dreamland, The Campaign and the possiblities new owners could bring, without doing any significant research or taking the time to evaluate popular opinion.

It's all very frustrating. The last council meeting I attended was noticable, not just for the dismissive approach to the Inspectors Report, but for the general apathy in TDC concerning the future of the town itself - the Labour Councillors made good points at the time, gave fresh perspectives on the subject and generally had the towns best interests at heart.

It's heartening to see that there was some barracking and lively debate - we don't need Dusty Yes Men clock-watching, hurriedly glossing over parts of the meeting; the public should be encouraged to give their thoughts and opinions on a significant level. This is a unique situation which affects the town and the already suffering tourist industry - let people have their say on a regular basis for gods sake.

Nick, I share your disappointment & agree that we've created the fly in the ointment for any prospective developer by managing to protect the Scenic, well, I say we but you were the one who managed to get it listed. It is heartening but worrying at the same time; if a flammable wooden structure is the only barrier between the Park's future and a multi-million pound development………



Dave

[Nick]

if a flammable wooden structure is the only barrier between the Park's future and a multi-million pound development………

That's what Toby's fencing is there for, to prevent vandalism (OK, I know what your comment was implying, but I am not going to go there!). Whilst I don't like the idea of any fencing right across the front of the Scenic Railway station (and other than creating an '"events area", that bit of fencing serves little purpose), I can definitely see merit in the rest of the fencing. The park does need to be properly secured. If it was replaced by fencing that didn't look like the type of fencing that Network Rail use to secure their goods yards, then we could probably back them on that.

[vince69619]

So change the fencing to something less industrial, push it back away from the station and put some smaller rides between the Scenic Station and the fence. Off we go!

Vince.