TDC approve planning guidance for Dreamland site

[porf]

From http://www.kentonline.co.uk/news/default.asp?article_id=38691

Historic amusement park to stay in town

A PLANNING blueprint to bring a historic Kent amusement park into the future has been approved.

Plans for the former site of Dreamland, in Margate have been given the green light by Thanet Council.

The bleuprint includes some residential development, but the majority of the site, including the listed Dreamland building and Scenic Railway, will remain and be incorporated into new amusement facilities.

Local people were asked for their views on the planning guidance and the majority agreed with its proposals, although there was a concern that as much of the site as possible should be retained for leisure to avoid more homes being built.

The residential space will help to fund the provision and operation of a new high-quality amusement park in the future.

The planning guidance for potential developers was developed by the council, liaising with a number of other organisations, including the Margate Renewal Partnership, SEEDA, Kent County Council, English Partnerships and the Save Dreamland Campaign.

Cllr Roger Latchford, cabinet member for culture and economy, said: "This planning guidance clearly sets out to prospective developers exactly what the council - and the local community - are looking for on the site.

"People have made it clear that they wish to keep an amusement park on the majority of the site and to avoid more house building, but we have to be realistic and accept that for the first to happen, it will probably need to be funded by an element of residential development.

"Now that this guidance is in place, we look forward to working with developers and seeing their ideas."

A second planning brief will now be prepared for the town's Arlington Square site.

Thanet council expects the Dreamland building to feature in any development

Report published 4:31pm on Friday 22nd February 2008

[uvegotmale2000]

well the plan dounds ok to me,but there must be a safeguard if the dreamland heritage site is rented out from the owners of the whole park

an agreed rent that wont be forced up ten fold in future years.That safeguard should be put in place in any contract so dreamland's future is secure and then rides will pay for themselves

im glad the council have agreed that the majority of dreamland should be used as a amusement park.

Looks like the council have woken up at last.i wonder how long it would take now to get Dreamland back open and up and running

I do believe nick stated a while park for it to open for the 2009 season.Is this still the case?

[EAS]

It's not exactly news, the Planning Brief, and consultation took place last year, as reported on this forum.

http://www.thanet.gov.uk/council__democ ... _plan.aspx

http://www.joylandbooks.com/scenicrailw ... gBrief.pdf

What happens next is up to the site owners. It's their site and until they put forward plans (taking into account the Planning Brief) nothing can happen.

I have major concerns regarding the question asked on the consultation about agreeing or not regarding keeping the Scenic Ralway. That's up to national Listed Building law and planning policy, not up to respondees to a local consultation. It begs questions about the competence of those involved with the questionnaire.

It is at least stated in the response:

The Scenic Railway
9 replies wanted to keep the Scenic Railway
2 replies wanted the Scenic Railway removed
4 replies referred to the statutory duty to retain the Scenic railway
Response: There is a statutory requirement to keep the scenic railway which is identified as the focal point of the amusement park in the brief.

http://www.thanet.gov.uk/pdf/Dreamland% ... lts%20(PDF).pdf

(if that doesn't work it's avaiable from the Thanet link above)


I also dispute that 'enabling development' of such a scale is a given or, indeed. desirable and whether or not that fits in with national policy.

[dave771]

Yes EAS it is news as it has just been approved ! just because the consultation was last year doesnt mean it was accepted and approved last year !

[EAS]

I know it was updated, but when was it approved?

Didn't think it was yesterday? Despite the news report dated yesterday? Maybe news travels slowly in Kent!

Feedback from this consultation has been used to produce an amended planning brief for the site, which is going to Cabinet for approval in December.

I'm trying to keep up to date with it as I'm also involved with another aspect of the site than the Scenic.

News page for this site:

The Brief was approved at Cabinet on 11 December and can be downloaded as a PDF document by clicking here. It will now form one of the main considerations for future planning applications.

The Planning Brief has been covered in the local press in the run-up to the Christmas period. The Isle of Thanet Gazette on 7 December had the following short report:
Arcade dream
Plans for the future of Margate’s fun park Dreamland have been met with positive responses following a public consultation on the site.

Launched in September, 229 people filled in a survey and 60 per cent of responses were in favour of the brief, which says Thanet council would like to see it developed as a heritage fun park with old fashioned rides. The authority would also permit some housing on the site, and a hotel.

The Save Dreamland Campaign generally supported the proposal but wants to ensure more than half the site remains an amusement park. Freshwater, the long leaseholders of Arlington Square, are supportive of the plans. The company hope to change the arcade into a mix of shops and homes, there are also plans to refurbish Arlington House.

At a meeting next Thursday, cabinet members are expected to recommend an Arlington planning brief is prepared.




This was followed by a further report in the same newspaper on 21 December:

Fun park backed by majority
Ideas to regenerate Dreamland have received backing from the public with the majority agreeing with Thanet council’s suggestions for the site.

Thanet council has put forward proposals for the seafront site to guide dealing with potential planning applications from developers. The brief proposes a mixed scheme with the majority of the site kept as part of an amusement park, along with homes. There was strong support for keeping the Scenic Railway, with 92 per cent of people either strongly agreeing or agreeing with this, while 97 per cent either strongly agreed or agreed with the idea of keeping more than half of the site as an amusement park. More than 85 per cent of people wanted the Dreamland Cinema building kept for leisure uses, with nearly three quarters favouring the provision of a 250-space public car park.

There was less support for homes and apartments, with 55 per cent disagreeing or strongly disagreeing with this idea.

Cllr Roger Latchford, in charge of culture and economy, said: “We have listened to people’s views and understand their concerns about the idea of enabling development on the site. We also hear what people are saying about wanting to keep the majority of the site as an amusement park, but unfortunately, one is unlikely to happen without the other. The simple truth is that some level of residential development would fund the future running of an amusement park and we have to be realistic about that.”

Other groups with an input into the plans are the Margate Renewal Partnership, South East England Development Agency, KCC, English Partnerships and Save Dreamland Campaign.

Planning Brief:

http://www.joylandbooks.com/scenicrailw ... gBrief.pdf

So if this is something else I'd like to know PDQ!

[dave771]

Im not quite sure which paper it was in EAS, what I do know is that when a news item comes up we try to get it on the site for everyone to see as soon as we can, but we do all have lives and jobs or businesses to run so dont always get the time to be on top of everything the moment it happens.

And what do you mean by involved with another aspect of the site other than the scenic?

[EAS]

There's the cinema too. The CTA is interested and I have a friend on the casework committee, to whom I pass info as and when. There's also the At Risk situation wth the cinema - I presume at the moment it's still fine, but...

The report dated Friday was, it seems, a little belated, , and as far as I can find the Planning Brief was passed in early December. I can't find any update, so will assume that's it.

[EAS]

I have to say the report on the News page regarding the ideas for the Dreamland Cinema from Waterbridge are worrying - removal of the wall and a glass one?

It's Grade II Listed and an important piece of cinema architecture.

[uvegotmale2000]

all toby hunter says is rubbish


he says we look forward to a exciting place for margate!!

Whats so exciting about another shopping mall?or resturants!

Margate cant even fill the shops they currently have.

this is a silly plan and i doubt anyone in margate would be excited at all!

[porf]

Yourthanet ran with this as well today.

The 1/2 page article can be found here : http://editions.pagesuite.co.uk//_pseditions/kos%20media/your%20thanet/2008-02-27/pdfpages/Page14.pdf

p.s. Just spotted Nick's news piece on a similar article in the Thanet Times which mentions that this was agreed "last Thursday"

[Susan]

I would suggest that some of the date confusion about this planning brief comes from the fact it went to Cabinet in December, when it was approved and we ran the story in our news items. From there it went to full Council for their approval which has now happened.

[EAS]

Interesting to note from that the highlighting of the development as being 'enabling'. I wait with interest, to see if it is genuinely enabling, and have passed this on to the CTA also.

[porf]

Hi Susan,

Thanks for that concise and definitive answer, certainly explains why it's back in the news.

Cheers

[EAS]

I haven't seen any updated guidance produced yet by EH since the consultation so the previous policy guidance on enabling development presumably still stands.

Enabling development is an established and useful planning tool by which a community may be able to secure the future of a heritage asset, and sometimes other benefits, provided it is satisfied that the balance of public advantage lies in doing so.

An example might be the construction of new housing in part of the grounds of an important historic country house or former rural hospital in a particularly poor state of repair so that the main building can be appropriately restored.

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/serv ... /nav.17634

And the outline of what that entails is here:

http://www.helm.org.uk/server.php?show= ... 6d7bdca339


Very briefly:

The Enabling Development Tests
English Heritage believes that there should be a general presumption against enabling development which does not meet all of the following seven criteria:

The enabling development will not materially detract from the archaeological, architectural, historic, landscape or biodiversity interest of the asset, or materially harm its setting
The proposal avoids detrimental fragmentation of management of the heritage asset
The enabling development will secure the long term future of the heritage asset, and where applicable, its continued use for a sympathetic purpose
The problem arises from the inherent needs of the heritage asset, rather than the circumstances of the present owner or the purchase price paid
Sufficient financial assistance is not available from any other source
It is demonstrated that the amount of enabling development is the minimum necessary to secure the future of the heritage asset, and that its form minimises disbenefits
The value or benefit of the survival or enhancement of the heritage asset outweighs the long-term cost to the community (i.e. the disbenefits) of providing the enabling development
These criteria may also be helpful in framing exception policies in local plans in relation to enabling development. If it is decided that a scheme of enabling development meets all these criteria, and so on balance is acceptable, English Heritage believes that planning permission should only be granted if:

The impact of the development is precisely defined at the outset, normally through the granting of full rather than outline planning permission
The achievement of the heritage objective is securely and enforceably linked to it, bearing in mind the guidance in DOE Circular 01/97, Planning Obligations or subsequent guidance documents
The heritage asset is repaired to an agreed standard, or the funds to do so made available, as early as possible in the course of the enabling development, ideally at the outset and certainly before completion or occupation
The planning authority closely monitors implementation, if necessary acting promptly to ensure a satisfactory outcome.
More detailed guidance on this and a range of case studies is contained in the full version of Enabling Development and the Conservation of Heritage Assets – Policy Statement and Practical Guide to Assessment (June 2001).

Presumably also the Planning Brief has now been adopted without alteration? Can't find anything which says not.