Subj:	Re: Pleasurama site
Date:	16/04/2004 12:15:24 GMT Daylight Time
From:	Michael Child
To:	jeff.kirkpatrick@btinternet.com
Right-click picture(s) to display picture options

Thank you for your prompt and courteous reply. As I have two year old twins I am unable to attend council meetings, I therefore contacted the council to find out what had happened during the meeting to make the decision over the sale of the old Pleasurama site the following is what I received in its entirety.

The Chairman reported that two questions had been received after the deadline for receipt of questions and they would be answered in writing by the Leader of the Council.

Nine questions from the public in respect of the development on the ex Pleasurama site were answered by Councillor J D Kirby and the Leader of the Council. Two members of the public who had submitted questions were not present at the meeting and in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules, the questions were not put and the response would be sent in writing.

"(A) the planning application approved by Planning Committee on 28th January 2004 be noted;

(B) the action taken to protect the Council's interests as detailed in paragraph 4 of the report be noted;

(C) the financial information contained in the restricted annex to the report and the likely financial receipt to the Council from the sale of the land at Ramsgate Boulevard to SFP be noted'

(D) the continuing efforts of officers and Cabinet Members to bring the development about, with a view to completing the necessary legal paperwork with SFP within a two month timeframe be noted and the agreement of Cabinet be required to the final terms for the disposal and development of the site, including the budgetary elements; and

(E) officers be instructed to report back to the Council meeting on 8th July 2004 on the progress on this project".

Amendment moved by Councillor R Nicholson, seconded by Councillor Harrison, that:

"in (D) above the words "the development about" be removed and replaced with "a satisfactory development about, which meets the original concept accepted by Council on 5th December 2002".

Amendment moved by Councillor Harrison, seconded by Councillor R Nicholson, that:

"in (C) above add the words "and agree a sum of £727,600 as an additional contribution to the provision of affordable housing".

As you may appreciate it is not easy to understand if you don't already know what it means and could be seen to beg questions on the meaning of public consultation.

I am afraid the bits missing from my previous email were probably due to my computing skills, these may be likened the those of a fairly advanced gerbil.

I am trying to find out the situation with relation to the old Pleasurama site after the council decision not to sell the land to SFP for the development that would have extended above the cliff top.

Am I right in assuming that "a satisfactory development about, which meets the original concept accepted by Council on 5th December 2002" means that planning permission will have to be sought again.

Or has planning permission granted for the 5th December 2002 concept. If it has are the plans available for inspection.

In a message dated 16/04/2004 03:03:26 GMT Daylight Time, jeff.kirkpatrick@btinternet.com writes:

I have received your note but fear certain words appear to have been lost in the ether as your message appears incomplete, e.g. "with relation to the old" - the old what?

Whilst writing, may I also comment that, with very minor exceptions, mostly, I understand, as required by English Heritage,the development would not have extended above the cliff top.

I am trying to find out the situation with relation to the old after the council decision not to sell the land to SFP for the development that would have extended above the cliff top.

Am I right in assuming that "a satisfactory development about, which meets the original concept accepted by Council on 5th December 2002" means that planning permission will have to be sought again.

Or has planning permission granted for the 5th December 2002 concept. If it has are the plans available for inspection.