Thursday, 9 January 2014

A few Ramsgate and Margate pictures and a minor ramble.

My day off today, we went to the Works in Ramsgate garden centre, I was hoping the £2.99 sketch pad I use quite a few of would be in the sale, but despite masses of sale notices there didn’t seem to much of sale.

On to Cliftonville as I wanted a couple of artistic bits from Lovelys, most of the shopkeepers I spoke to in Northdown road seemed pretty gloomy and frankly people with social problems seemed to outnumber the ordinary shoppers making it difficult to shop.

A quick visit to The Turner Contemporary to visit the loo revealed that they are having an exhibition changeover so there isn’t much to see there apart from the John Downton Award for Young Artists which is an annual exhibition which encourages and celebrates the creativity of the county’s young artists.

Students, aged 11 - 18, from schools and colleges across Kent are invited to participate and the best examples of their painting and drawing submissions, here are the pictures of the pictures.

As you see it is well worth a look.

Having been inspired we went on to Café G for a light lunch, The Turner Contemporary café no longer seem to provide ordinary plain food, which is a pain as the view is very good.

Anyway inspired by the art of the youf of today I sketched the view from Café G. (Pitt pen size S)

On to Ramsgate where the sun was setting.
I may ramble on and add some more of the pictures when i have cooked supper.


  1. seems very quiet lately on here.

    Michael I see Councillor Driver seems to be saying Cardy might be onsite during the summer. What's your speculation on the leases if the 28th Feb comes and goes with no building taking place?

    1. Difficult one Barry, my guess would be that SFP would want to see some return on their involvement in the site and so would Cardy’s.

      My own take is that everyone has concentrated too much on the legal side and ignored the practical limitations of the site, flood risk and distance from the cliff to allow reasonable maintenance for the life of the development.

      This means that if SFP are taken out of the equation then the planning consent still stands and we could have another party complete this development where neither the flood risk nor the cliff has been properly assessed with relation to the development.

      Rumour at the moment is that RTC and Cardy Construction may have a go a joint venture to finish the development to the existing plans.

    2. Interesting. Would you think RTC would do this without an FRA?

    3. Barry I guess the key problem is that because the planning consent stands in perpetuity then anyone can take the existing and part built planning consent through the development process without a fra.

      What is unfortunate is that more emphasis hasn’t been placed on this aspect of the development which hangs around the developer not having experience of building between the cliff and the foreshore.

      I would say that if Cardy and RTC or any other potential developer were to come forward with an approach that was based on first having a proper assessment of the cliff and the flood risk so that these problems were related to the probable life of the development then I would be supportive of the development.

      On the other hand any developer wanting to build in the dark over the flood issue and the issue of being able maintain the cliff economically for the life of the development would be something that I would think should be opposed.

    4. Does planning consent really 'stand in perpetuity'? I am doubtless revealing my own ignorance but, I was under the impression that PC could / would lapse after a stated period if the project was not started or completed within a certain defined period? Not just here, but throughout UK on projects large and small?

    5. Col the problem here is that building work has started, my understanding is that once work has started the planning consent never expires.

      With Pleasurama the most money would be made by a developer building to the existing plans, if new plans were submitted then they would have to have an fra and the overall standard of the development would have to higher.

      Frankly it is surprising that aspects of these plans were passed in 2003, stairwells, roof, parking, sympathy for the surrounding conservation zone and so on. My own guess is that the density would have to come down to get new plans passed and this would mean a considerable reduction in profit.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. James Lyndon T Palmer is an ongoing spammer who given an inch will take a mile in his or her attempts to take over comment on this blog for his or her own purposes, I spam all of his or her comments from my mobile without bothering to read them.


Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.