A new Pleasurama Site Development Task and Finish Group is to be set up as a priority project for the Overview and Scrutiny Panel.
This follows a meeting of cabinet held last night (Wednesday 29 May) in which members gave their full endorsement for Scrutiny to review all of the options for the development of the site in Ramsgate.
The developers were given a four month period following a meeting of Cabinet in January to satisfy the council that the finance was in place for completion of the development or to ensure an agreement was in place for the construction and operation of a hotel.
As the four month period passed without the criteria being met, Cabinet has now agreed to a review of the options for the site, which include continuing discussions with the current developer or considering alternative options. This will still involve careful consideration of the potential financial and legal implications if the site was not able to be developed as agreed.
Cabinet Member for Operational Services, Cllr Alan Poole, said: “The council is very keen to see the plans for this important site in Ramsgate come to fruition.
“Discussions are still underway with the developer, and will continue with the aim of resolving the current situation to develop the site as agreed, but we have to be realistic. We’ve waited a considerable amount of time for the developer to meet their obligations, and whilst we acknowledge the challenging economic climate, but there has to be a conclusion.
“Cabinet has agreed to a review of the situation to progress the regeneration of this prime site quickly and efficiently, however there is no doubt that this will involve some detailed and challenging discussions.
“The current development has planning permission, leases and an agreement in place so any alternative proposal would need to be carefully considered to ensure the finances and legal position could make this a viable option.
“We’re confident that Scrutiny will conduct a thorough and considered review and are hopeful that this will allow us to progress with a positive plan for the future development of this site.”
Here we go again. When will they ever learn. Now another load of duffers will be only too pleased to pretend they know what they are doing and without receiving proper independent legal advice beforehand. Yet another looming TDC blunder that could cost us dearly again!!
ReplyDeleteYou're not wrong PJ.
ReplyDeleteAgree with the above: if Dreamland can be cancelled/CPO'd etc etc etc then so can Pleasurama. It's failed already. Don't waste another Summer. The idle coppers should feel a few collars at TDC and SFP.
ReplyDeleteThe situation at Dreamland and Pleasurama couldn't be more different. What an entertainingly ill informed comment.
ReplyDeleteThis is well drafted diplomatic speak. The translation of which is that we (TDC) want shot of SFP, we will go to law, it will be a hard road, but SFP is finished.
ReplyDeleteMy original point was that before TDC make any decisions, or risk embarking on possession proceedings they need good independent legal advice for a proper specialist lawyer, not the in-house brigade. That lawyer would of course have to be told exactly what has gone on from the very start, otherwise his advice may be flawed. With officers not used to holding records of meetings or decisions, inexperienced Councillors attending meetings with the developer etc, that may be difficult. Getting rid of SFP in what are very complicated circumstances is unlikely be that easy.
ReplyDelete