Have I missed something?

[stuart]

I thought that any developer had to prove that Dreamland is not viable as an amusement park before the site could be used for anything else?

Has this been proven?

If not then why are Waterbridge carrying out this big fob-off of a consultation and instructing architects?

[EAS]

It's because big developers think that national planning policies can be got round, if they throw enough cash at 'consultants' and legal challenges and stuff.

They think we are all daft and won't notice.