I have had a response to some of my questions about Pleasurama from TDC below in red.Thanks for the comments. My understanding is that the applicants have been in discussion with the EA. As a result they have made changes to the design of the shopfronts, including built in shutters and 20mm glass. I agree with a need to relook at access arrangements and I intend to do so as part of a wider consideration of the area. The raising of the road at the back was partly in recognition of the point you drew to our attention, the lack of footings on the cliff protection structure.
In terms of the changes to plans, I do not recall this proposal ever including access to the cliff top from the apartments. The changes made do not have a significant impact on the external appearance of the building and the mix of uses and number of apartments stays the same, While the layout of the parking area and access has altered I do not feel this has a material impact and therefore consider that the plans do not need to be the subject of reconsultation.
Below my reply to them.
Does this mean you will deal with the bit where they have laid lose slabs and cobles on sand even directly on top of the sea defence?
Does it mean there will escapes to the cliff top? I believe that the EA meant the steps at the western end that went to the cliff top, I suppose no one could consider that any architect could build corridors 1m wide and 250m long for any other reason than emergency escape, they were hardly likely to reduce social problems and crime in the building.
Does this mean that the unnecessary roundabout that wiped out the seafront car park will go?
Does this mean that the road will be made one way again?
Does this mean that the herringbone parking will be reinstated?
After all this time have you forgotten that what passed the planning committee was a gull winged deco style building? The only problem was it was to high to fit in the space available, so having its gull wings flattened could constitute a significant impact on the external appearance of the building.
Does this mean that the promised local consultations will now occur?
Incidentally you may be interested to know that I emailed The chaps in charge of repairing the cliff, about the lack of footings and they emailed me back, saying that it was on 1m thick concrete foundations on solid chalk, so I hopped over the fence and took photos of me poking a stick under the base of the cliff façade, I still have their apologetic reply.
I believe they were ultimately behind the survey that says the incline is safe for 40 tonne down hill traffic, you can crumble some of the Victorian bricks down there between your fingers, so I couldn’t calculate its strength accurately how did they?
I also suggested to them that before they started on the façade repairs they considered putting cliff top escapes in, to save future expense.
I also emailed the previous contractor as soon as I saw that the new eastern road design was wrong, they went ahead anyway, I am trying to hold my cool here and use no expletives, the plan at the moment is for people to escape via Augusta Stairs through a sea full of cobbles, if the western escape is blocked during the storm.
Below my reply to them.
Does this mean you will deal with the bit where they have laid lose slabs and cobles on sand even directly on top of the sea defence?
Does it mean there will escapes to the cliff top? I believe that the EA meant the steps at the western end that went to the cliff top, I suppose no one could consider that any architect could build corridors 1m wide and 250m long for any other reason than emergency escape, they were hardly likely to reduce social problems and crime in the building.
Does this mean that the unnecessary roundabout that wiped out the seafront car park will go?
Does this mean that the road will be made one way again?
Does this mean that the herringbone parking will be reinstated?
After all this time have you forgotten that what passed the planning committee was a gull winged deco style building? The only problem was it was to high to fit in the space available, so having its gull wings flattened could constitute a significant impact on the external appearance of the building.
Does this mean that the promised local consultations will now occur?
Incidentally you may be interested to know that I emailed The chaps in charge of repairing the cliff, about the lack of footings and they emailed me back, saying that it was on 1m thick concrete foundations on solid chalk, so I hopped over the fence and took photos of me poking a stick under the base of the cliff façade, I still have their apologetic reply.
I believe they were ultimately behind the survey that says the incline is safe for 40 tonne down hill traffic, you can crumble some of the Victorian bricks down there between your fingers, so I couldn’t calculate its strength accurately how did they?
I also suggested to them that before they started on the façade repairs they considered putting cliff top escapes in, to save future expense.
I also emailed the previous contractor as soon as I saw that the new eastern road design was wrong, they went ahead anyway, I am trying to hold my cool here and use no expletives, the plan at the moment is for people to escape via Augusta Stairs through a sea full of cobbles, if the western escape is blocked during the storm.
Michael, well done and although, as you point out,there are still unanswered safety issues to be considered, could the 'red' be interpreted as a move by TDC in the right direction?
ReplyDeleteI am sitting here with the image of you poking around with a stick to confirm your suspicions about dodgy foundations! Heaven help us that the 'Bibliophile Bloke' has to point out to the 'professionals', something so basic. Can we really trust anyone to get a proper grip of this project?
Big well done Michael over.
ReplyDeleteI hope you found my email today interesting. You are getting the better of the Pleasurama development arguments. Probably saving lives.
My email today is on another Thanet issue. I am an engineer not a medical scientist. But you are right that some study should be done I think.
I do not believe assurances about cyclohexanone. This, thanks to Sericol, leaked to the water supply for thirty years before remediation started and now over a decade into remediation has remained residual with the EA prognosis of it being a threat to the aquifer for years to come.
Why did TDC not volunteer the information that cyclohexanone binds irreversibly on oestregen receptors in females ?
Thanet has not had the benefit of precautionary principle, risk assessment or epidemiological study.
My other news is that Chief constable Mike Fuller has sent Thanet Police Commander the duty to respond to my concerns about the access to Deal Royal Marines Barracks of James Shortt (bogus SAS man who was recently the cause of the cabinet security reports in the Sun by defence correspondent Newton Dunn).
So after all these years of Force solicitor advised silence re the Deal barracks bombing of 1989 there has been a glimmer of a change of Chief constable position.
I wait for Chief Supt Hogben's fob off letter ..... wonder what jargon it will feature ?
But if they start doing their duty properly I will be 100% behind them.
The sad history of that barracks was years of condoning fools for which someone was going topay for the folly. sadly it was eleven Royal Marines may they Rest in Peace but the cries for justice never dim.
To summarise:
(1) Well done you are dishing out a whole good dose of woparse re Pleasurama
(2) There appears to be a very worrying medical science reason for further study into the effcet of cyclohexanone contamination of the ater supply over decades. Thanet's double the average rate of ectopic pregancy being one such reason.
(3) The Kent Police wall of silence about failing to protect the Royal Marines at Deal in 1989 has crumbled slightly given the recent Cabinet Security fiasco involving the ubiquitous James Shortt.
On top of which I traced a tenant who had skipped with rent arraers and he elected to pay me some hundreds of pounds.
A pleasingly woparse day all round then.
Cheers (Whyte and Mackay)
Richard
LADYMANS@parliament.uk by email
ReplyDeleteMichael,
While I'm on line with you - your blog readers may be interested that I've just had an update from the Environment Agency about plane dimantling at the Airport.. After discussions between the Environment Management team and the airport operator it has been agreed that aircraft dismantling will be done in future in accordance with a new mobile treatment permit and the EA are now content that aircraft dismantling is now being carried out with all necessary safeguards in place.
Steve
Well done again.
ReplyDeleteRichard
James Shortt cabinet security breach Sun Report
ReplyDeleteChief Supt Hogben has been tasked to respond to me on the matter of James Shortt using Deal Barracks gym from 1975 to 1983 to teach paying servicemen and policemen his own (fantasy) version of close quarter battle. Off duty police attended to brush up on pistols skills.
Why was Mr Shortt now of Castle Bellingham Southern Ireland (with a history of secure access to the barracks) not investigated as part of the 1989 Deal Barracks IRA bombing inquiry ?
He has pursued a long career on the basis of his ex SAS claims. To the extent recently of breaching cabinet security.
Why did Kent Police fail to pick him up early in his career when tasked to investigate security at Deal Barracks 1988/89 and after they failed to do that to investigate the 22.9.89 bombing ?
Let us not forget either that some cyclohexanone from Sericol went walkies. It can be used in the backstreet manufacture of drugs and IEDs as it is explosive on contact with acid. So please Kent Police do not think the cyclohexanone matter is only an issue for the Environment Agency.
Richard
diesel contamination Berkshire interest for Michael re EA comments re drainage luck
ReplyDeleteSteve Ladyman by email
ReplyDeleteMichael
I spoke to Dave Green today and he said that the response 'we don't regard it as a material change' was what he was told too. It does make you think what would exactly constitute a material change!
I'll let you know when I get a response.
Steve
Bertie I find it unbelievable a combination of civil servants and politicians sticking to the rulebook with no one daring to stick their neck out and say. “The thing is obviously a death trap and must be redesigned.” Political expediency can only go so far and can’t change the laws of nature or basic scientific principles. One only has to consider instances where this has happened in the past the R101 air disaster is a prime example. A quick perusal of the flood risk assessment for the Turner Centre, where the sound advice of the technical experts has been followed, is enough to convince anyone sensible that a new design is needed.
ReplyDeleteRichard I am trying to find some more information about these health issues, but as you probably noticed it isn’t easy, I would think it possible that it got into some of the unmonitored boreholes used for crop washing and irrigation, I am pretty confident that it didn’t get into the public water supply.
I noticed something that made laugh that I think could give you a chuckle too, the Penguin book “Explosives” by John Read published in 1942 which makes the Anarchists Cook Book look like a primer has a note on the title verso that reads thus:
FOR THE FORCES
Leave this book at a post office when you have read it so that men and women in the services can enjoy it.
Steve sorry for muddling up your posts and comment I have sorted it now.
20.14 Thanks. Had this happened on the aquifer here the problem would have been much more difficult to resolve.