Who would you prefer to see in ownership of Dreamland?

The Save Dreamland Campaign was launched by Joyland Books in January 2003 and is now supported by several thousand people. This is the place to discuss all aspects of saving Margate's famous amusement park and its iconic , Grade II listed Scenic Railway, Britain's oldest roller coaster.

Moderators: dave771, porf, Sarah

Who would you prefer to see in ownership of Dreamland?

Waterbridge (Toby and Jim)
1
5%
Paigle Properties
2
10%
Batman
17
85%
 
Total votes : 20

Postby Becks045 » 16 Nov 2007, 10:52

The involvement of Paigle with Dreamland is very bad news, I assure you.

The Sea Bathing on face value looks great but they have squeezed in an extra 500 flats new build which is not in keeping with the old hospital listed building.

There are no facilities and amenities in the area to cope with this huge influx of people which the council and Paigle are not worried about. Paigle have paid Thanet Council £1.2million which is why I expect Planning was granted for the extra new builds.

My fear is with them taking over Dreamland they will try and put as many new flats onto the site as possible. Yes, the area does need affordable houses but the average price of a flat at the Sea Bathing is £250k which is well out of the reach of Thanet residents. What the Sea Bathing has done is attract investors so in fact the majority of the completled flats are sitting empty as they struggle to rent them out. They are trying to charge £750 per month for a 2 bed flat. There is no way local people will pay that so the Sea Bathing is a ghost town.

Dreamland needs to be a tourist/leisure attraction which will bring people to the area. Flats/houses will not bring any new money to the area.
Becks045
 
Posts: 32
Joined: 14 Nov 2007, 09:49

Postby EAS » 16 Nov 2007, 12:08

Sadly, 'enabling development' is probably what saved the Sea Bathing Hospital in the end. It's not ideal, but developers need the cash to buy, the cash to repair, and some profit. That's why they do it.

We have to be pragmatic about re-use of Buildings at Risk I'm afraid. Better than the inevitable fire and a cleared site...
User avatar
EAS
 
Posts: 1886
Joined: 18 Sep 2006, 09:09
Location: North

Postby Jim Douglas Jr. » 19 Nov 2007, 17:02

Running a nice park should be plenty profitable.
Kyle & Herbie the Love Bug lll53
User avatar
Jim Douglas Jr.
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: 15 Mar 2006, 19:49
Location: San Francisco, California, USA

Postby EAS » 19 Nov 2007, 22:24

Yes, but that decision is not ours to make, sadly.
User avatar
EAS
 
Posts: 1886
Joined: 18 Sep 2006, 09:09
Location: North

Postby Becks045 » 20 Nov 2007, 15:54

Local residents must push as much as they can for the redevelopment of Dreamland as a tourist desintation.

Flats and houses will do nothing apart from line the pockes of the fat cats at the council and the developers.
Becks045
 
Posts: 32
Joined: 14 Nov 2007, 09:49

Postby EAS » 20 Nov 2007, 17:28

Yes but there is a Planning Brief and the local authority makes the decisions. It's private land and local people don't have the final say.
User avatar
EAS
 
Posts: 1886
Joined: 18 Sep 2006, 09:09
Location: North

Previous

Return to Save Dreamland Campaign Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests