After five months, I really have lost count of how many emails, I have finally had my request for the Pleasurama development agreement officially refused.
Click on the link for the correspondence http://www.michaelsbookshop.com/foi/id18.htm please leave the officers surnames out of any comments, my emails in red theirs in black to make it easier to follow.
This isn’t the end of the matter, as I will pursue it to the bitter end, something that will probably take several more months, mainly because there is a point of principle here.
As the Pleasurama saga roles on it would seem highly likely that the site will stand deserted for another summer season, during which it could be used both for parking and leisure, something that would be highly beneficial to Ramsgate during these harsh economic times.
So if you see some more bankrupt and closed businesses in the town during the next year, you may consider that a contributory factor to their demise will be a failure by highly paid and very senior council officers to face up to and admit the practical problems related to building on this site to the existing plans.
In this particular instance the development agreement is important because the council are using a technical regulation to hide information that would normally be in the public domain, for a development of this size and significance.
The key public document would normally be the planning agreement, something that most importantly when considering the years that this unused and hideous building site has blighted the main leisure part of the town, would have set out some sort of time scale for the development.
There is no development agreement because one isn’t mandatory and the reason it isn’t mandatory is because the council own the site.
The picture, click on it to enlarge is of the site being used normally.