Echo readers will know that Nick Storer is about to submit revised plans for his kiosks by the quay. http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/districts/purbeck/8751815.New_plans_lined_up_for_Swanage_bar_Gee_Whites/
I have not seen them yet but I wonder if he has contemplated anything as radical as The East Beach Cafe, Littlehampton. Take a look at http://www.eastbeachcafe.co.uk/html/picturegallery.html and you will be either amazed or horrified. I wonder how something like this would go down with the locals, to say nothing of PDC. It would certainly beat the off-season mess we have at the moment.
Posted by Anonymous to swanageview at 10:53 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
32 comments:
Mick not Nick I think you will find.
I bet the original complainants must be prety P**ssed off that PDC has failed to get the illegal thatch removed as yet, after 3 years is it? How about the EastBar missing balcony?
Very Flintstones. Yabba dabba don't.
hey but the thatch is wonderful. Lets have some more.
The Echo photo caption says "Nick" and shows someone with grey hair and a beard. I am getting confused.
That's definitely a photo of Mick in the Echo report. Good luck with your latest set of plans Mick.
Talking of Nick does anyone know what's happening with the Pier Head development? Things seem to have gone very quiet recently.
I was talking to Rick just the other day about the Pier Head and he said that I'd have to talk to Dick.
Right...Dick, Mick, Nick, Rick, please could you confirm otherwise we may have to write to to Trite,Bright or Knight.
How can thatch be illegal ??
http://www.simondale.net/house/newhaus.htm
Love and prefer the Simon Dale Designs - softer and more sympathetic.
Thatch on the quay is illegal because under the ancient stone quarrymen laws of 1888 it is forbidden to thatch over any building, monument or folly, with a penalty of stoning by the ruling quarrymen committee members. Rick, Mick be warned.......
Aren't stone quarryman and Masons inextricably linked? Is the Town Hall really a Lodge??
Burt and Mowlem were Masons, apparently. We should be told the truth about our little toytown.
Take a look at the masonic motifs in the council chamber. Just as well these things are not decided by the town council which in any case is on record as supporting the retention of the faked up thatch.
How come so much fuss about a thatch roof ??
Have a read of the planning documents at www.dorsetforyou.com and you will see.
Have looked at the numerous applications, solicitors letters, proof of outdoor preparation of food etc. What a huge amount of fuss about a thatched roof.
How can thatch, a natural material, be detrimental and not in keeping with any surrounding landscape.
In the bundle is the one from the planning officer which answers your question.
Why do you think that thatch is appropriate to this location, and that this pretend stuff, stuck on top of sheets of plywood, is suitable? It is a case of disguising rubbish with more rubbish.
So logically if he just had it re-done in really thatch that would be OK?
Again, it would be a lot easier of you were to read the planning officer's comments rather than ask for them to be paraphrased for you. In a word the answer to your question is no.
'It is a case of disguising rubbish with more rubbish.'
A bit like tarting up the Mowlem, eh??
We could save money by abolishing the post of planning officer.
A job created to create a job. Nothing more than that.
Then I could demolish my house and put up a huge block of flats for the second home trade, as could everybody else and we would not be arguing about building on Herston Fields, it would just go ahead.
I don't understand why the potential fire risk of 'natural straw thatch' hasn,t been raised.
Surely a purpose made false/fake thatch from an inert material presents no fuel in a fire.
Remember the 'Fish Plaice' fire with two dozen fire tenders, evacuation, and roads closed ?
I appreciate that false thatch may be a bit Disney World, but Swanage is rather Toy town so it blends.
I don't understand why the potential fire risk of 'natural straw thatch' hasn,t been raised.
An interesting question. Perhaps Mr Storer can reassure us that he consulted the fire service before putting his thatch on. On the other hand perhaps it slipped his mind.
The thatch adds greatly to the disney world atmosphere of that part of Swanage and the availability of water nearby means that the risk posed by fire should it ever threaten these beautiful buildings is minimal.
Its a fascinating idea but I am struggling to recognise an uglified Georgian mansion, various bars, assorted eateries and several bulky blocks of flats in Disney's work.
It does require quite a bit of imagination. But in the same way that disney world is bizarre, so is this corner of Swanage. The planners have allowed a strangely horrible mix of buildings to develop in what should really be the jewel in the town to compliment the sweep of the bay and the stone jetty. Unforgivable.
Its more panto than Disney. Mr Storer has built himself Robinson Crusoe's cabin. Unfortunately he did this very much in the spirit of Crusoe, without planning permission but now discovers he is not cast away alone on a desert island.
The fact that "strangely horrible" buildings have been permitted is scarcely a reason for having another one though, or do you think there should be no controls for this site?
I do find planning puzzling. UPVC windows were put in a residence a few yards away and PDC says it will take no action. The loss of the balcony across the road and the nasty plastic fascia which replaced it do not seem to bother them. All to the detriment of the area.
Looking at the downward spiral of this area over many years, I have to conclude that this is an area that the planners and the council are just not very interested in. Anything goes.....UPVC, thatch, ugly canopies, dilapidated pier head. horrible modern buildings. What a mix. Where else on the south coast would you see something quite so strange and out of keeping with the natural beauty? It is all to the detriment of Swanage, the inhabitants and visitors. Also completely unnecessary as it doesnt cost much more to apply sensible planning rules and encourage owners to be responsible and keep their buildings in a fit state to match the natural surroundings.
Yes well this is the problem. Take the White House tourist information:
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/5174768.jpg
-covered in signs. Then remember the Purbeck Hotel Pub made to take all the signs down. Banks are allowed illuminated signs, other businesses aren't. There seems to be quite a prejudice in favour of the status quo, and quiet little shops who don't disturb anyone
A slight correction. The Purbeck did not have to take "all" its signs down. It had to remove the illuminated plastic ones but kept plenty of wooden ones. However, the White House is a complete mess.
Why, oh why, are so many Swanage businesses run by people with quite so little visual awareness, not that the council is a.y better. You hear trader's expressions of bewildered frustration and rage against the planning system and realise they just do not have a clue. If you trade in a conservation area, in a listed building or close to one, it is pretty obvious that its going to be in your interest to work in sympathy with the surroundings and eschew rubbish like plastic fascias and illuminated signs. Similarly why do people fit upvc windows in old buildings.
"why do people fit upvc windows in old buildings".
Because UVPC wasn't available when they were built.
Having said that it is slightly more curious why the planners don't inforce it. (around the mill pond, above the Cauldron, in the wings of the Royal Vic, East Bar, above Jenkins etc)
That may be true but it rather proves my point. Do people in Swanage have so little awareness of the appearance of old buildings that they don't know any better or do they simply watch the ads for upvc on TV and assume it is the best thing? PDC's refusal to do anything shows that one can ask the same question of many councillors.
Post a Comment