For those who have bothered to look at CGPs Application, you might have noticed TWO huge 'X' Type warehouses that are clearly intended as Chinamex's distribution centre. They are at the extreme North end of the site, closest to Acol; on agricultural land; have maximum intrusion into a rural chalk plateau view and worst of all sit on the Source Protection Zone 1 of an aquifer. A stroll around Manston last Saturday revealed oodles of space closer to the airfield that appears to be advertised for sale, but isn't included in CGP's application. Couldn't these monstrosities be placed at the South end of the site?A reader has sent me this e-mail which is slightly confusing:
"Dear Bertie,
I was poring over the Local Plan map last evening whilst waiting for the football to start and noticed that the area of the Manston Business Park (the controversial China Gateway scheme site) on it is designated B1. By contrast the acknowledgement I have received from TDC in reply to my objection states the proposal is:-
Redevelopment of land for B1c, B2 and B8. The notice advertising For Sale 62 acres at the entrance to the development, not redevelopment, lists B1, B2 and B8.
Perhaps one of your regular readers can tell me when the land itself was re-designated?
Puzzled of Broadstairs"
I would be delighted if anyone can tell us what these categories mean and were they changed? If so, how and when?
Another thought crosses my mind; who actually owns what, up at Manston Business Park in the area designated as Phase 1? I was under the distinct impression that this was not a 'speculative' development but it seems that CGP and its Chinese Agents, DTZ, are trying to sell plots, as is KCC , almost as if Phase 1 Planning consent is a foregone conclusion. If anyone has some spare time, please feel free to ring and e-mail the numbers on the signs in the pics (click on pics for enlargement.) and let me know what you have been offered in terms of 'plots'.
Another source tells me that signs have been commissioned and are being made for CGP already for this industrial Estate. I have asked for more details.
Some more interesting news is that Doug Brown at TDC has been working hard and has now obtained from the 'applicants' a travel plan revision and new proposals for drainage and a water state revision. Could it be that pressure from objectors and a great deal of commonsense from Doug Brown, has started to produce more sensible, even if more costly, proposals from CGP. I hope these will be widely available on The Planning Portal so we can all see them? If not, get onto Doug Brown and ask for details.
10 comments:
I have had to remove 2 comments placed on this site of a libellous nature and making unsubstantiated comments about the integrity of Councillors. Could I please ask all readers and commentators to remember that the law of libel applies to blogs and that wild allegations do the cause of the protesters against China Gateway no good whatsoever.
Puzzled of Broadstairs B1 all business use offices laboratories and light industry B2 all industry B8 storage distribution warehouses.
Might I suggest that now might be a good time to fire off some Freedom of Information requests as to the ownership?
Thanks, Michael. Matt Re. FOI:- good idea just hope the end result produces more than when the protestors at Wye asked for documents from KCC and Ashford Borough Council. They found Imperial College who had signed a concordat with KCC and ABC had ordered some to be kept back. The protestors or at least one of them got hold of the missing documents eventually but a hacker retrieved them and that's illegal.
It seems that the erstwhile supremo of Ramsgate ( Gerry O'Donnell )is getting hot under the collar about the lack of action from Cecil Street regarding the setting up of a mini Council for Ramsgate and has fired of a series of emails to anyone who will listen.
On Michael Childs Blog Tim Garbutt has joined in as well. From his incoherent ramblings it is very obvious that neither G.O.D. or T.G understand the first thing about Councils and Local government. reproduced below is my reply to Tim Garbutts post,
An interesting if somewhat off the wall post by Tim Garbutt, like most of the remaining members of Ramsgate First, (those that haven’t left or defected to the Tories) his proposal is full of holes.
1, You cant just vote off Charter Trustee’s they are appointed automatically by virtue of being ELECTED to Thanet Council, and incidentally don’t have the powers that Ramsgate First seem to think they have. Having a small ‘Council’ of 6-10 Members is not very representative is it, no prizes for guessing who would be on it.
2, Why not establish Monthly OPEN meetings of Ramsgate First, also no mention of how this is going to be paid for, Albion House is in the ownership of TDC at present.
3, Any Constitution would be subject to several Acts of Parliament and approval by the Secretary of State. You cant operate as a Council without Statutory Powers.
4, You cant have elections until you appoint a Returning Officer, again no mention of who is going to pay for these elections, estimated cost £60,000.00 about a pound per elector.
5, In the unlikely event that Tim Garbutt ever gets elected to Ramsgate Council eventually he will soon come to understand about Exempt Information and peoples salaries with few exceptions are deemed exempt, unless of course he would like to publish his earnings and exactly how he earns his money for all to see.
6, Fine, but just ask those unemployed in Ramsgate about stopping the prospect of jobs coming to the area. In fact it shows a myopic attitude to taking Ramsgate forward.
7, Again this demonstrates a fundamental lack of knowledge about how Local Government works and who funds what and how the money is raised.
In short it is an ill thought out argument and takes absolutely no account of how any of this is going to be funded, a Town Council will need a Chief Executive, Staff, both office and white collar, accommodation, vehicles, not to mention a lot of money to undertake the various projects that RF seem to think will regenerate the Town.
And how is this going to be paid for?
Well the current precept for Ramsgate wont cover it !
Yes! An interesting view-point but not really about CGPs Golden Gateway! Will pop across and visit Thanetonline.
Oh how i wish some commentators would research before blogging.
Post 22:32 you are dyed in the wool Labour support and will not move on into the 22nd century and you must except that.
A Parish council has a Parish clerk not a CE, apparently it works for Broadstairs and other Parishes.
So why not Ramsgate, or does it not suit the Labour M.O or even the Conservatives M.O of let the locals eat cake.
Under successive administrations Ramsgate has been left to rot that's why people voted for P.C when we had a referendum, dear god our soldiers are dying for our so called freedom and all you can carp on about is two people exercising that, get a life.
Malcolm
Well as Mike has directed people to some posts that I did back in May I thought to make it easier for anyone looking for them so click here to read them.
I have one question.
Whilst CGP and TDC are telling us how wonderful this development is for Thanet, how much will CGP's assets go up once planning permission has been approved?
A lot! I suspect somewhere between £30,000,000 and £40,000,000.!
Post a Comment