Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Thanet council planning just what’s the point

Earlier in January I received an email highlighting the rebuild of a property destroyed by fire, on the front of Cliftonville in Lewis Crescent, apparently the owners failed to follow planning guidance to rebuild the property in the style of the original.rebuild

Of course its a phenomena in these parts which frequently occurs when developers are given an inch, they’ll often take a mile (well a few metres at least).

In a bold move officers suggested to the planning committee that it might be a jolly good idea, if Thanet council had the balls to have this building demolished.

No surprise that the committee compromised (that may be an exaggeration), it was decided to allow “officers” and developers to get together and report back so that the committee could review the situation at a later date.

All well and good, still if the council were that serious, how is it the building, which was apparently already occupied prior to their deliberations of the planning committee, now appears to have,considerably fewer of the 29 flats vacant. I took a quick gander at the building yesterday and to me it still looks, every bit as cheap and nasty, as it did in January.

I get the impression that despite the building being under threat of demolition, neither the developers or residents are too troubled by TDC’s planning department or planning committee. Why?


  1. I prefer what is there now to what was there I must say the previous old building had been empty for years and showed signs of having been so. So what you are surgesting is knock it down. It could not have been built without the planning officer knowing about it surely it had to have buiding inspectors and plans to work from

  2. You would think so Don but I have to go with Iain on this one.

  3. If the council inspectors keep a close check on the builders WHILE the work is going on and not after it is finished they can avoid these embarrassing situations.

    Let's not kid ourselves though, this type of thing has been going on for years all around the country and is nearly always sorted out with a little common sense from both sides.

    To knock this development down would be be unforgivable especially during the current property crash and recession.

  4. If anyone had half a brain at TDC they'd be saying to developers at the outset that failure to comply with submitted and approved plans will result in a seriously draconian fine - maybe 30-50% of the eventual point-of-sale profit margin.

    Now why might that not be popular amongst our elected classes?

  5. The building previously on the site, far from being empty, was occupied by elderly residents who, having lived there for 30 years or more were forced to move to allow the refurbishment as flats to take place.

  6. But the problem is that the developers use the NHBC to oversee that building (they are cheaper than TDC) and TDC only get involved when its finished.

  7. I quite like it though I do think the corner tower is in fact an intercontinental ballistic missile pointing at the 'Dear Leader' in Pyongyang.