Guest 684- Registered: 26 Feb 2009
- Posts: 635
10 February 2010
14:2040188Andy Cooper said: "Sid, the answer is clearly 'living town'. My concern is that building a new town at Whitfield will kill Dover off, not regenerate it."
Totally agree, Andy. It's absolutely obvious that that's what will happen. Anyone who can't see that is either being disingenuous, deceitful or naive in the extreme. It'll be TescoExtraTown to the nth degree, while the town of old down in the valley rots and rots from within.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
10 February 2010
16:4640192There is too much over simplified thinking here.
Andy - developers will only build if there is a demand. We dont know what demand there will be over the next 30 years. The building may be very gradual and maybe at the end of 30 years there will still be room left for more houses within the planned developemnt area, maybe they will all be built within 10 years. No-one knows though many will guess.
The whole point is the market will take care of it. If there are not the jobs then people wont move down here and therefore the houses wont be built. If there is not room to expand the labour force locally due to no housing then there wont be an increase in business development and jobs wont be created (or at least surplus jobs over and above what the present working population need).
Stop talking as if the land will immediately be sold off to developers who will build x thousand houses. It does not work that way.
Think of this as no more than an 'outline' permission to develop the land in this way if the demand is there at any point over the next 30 years. No jobs, no demand, no houses and it works visa versa as well.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
10 February 2010
16:5540194Thanks for the reply Barry, and hope you`re right mate.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
10 February 2010
17:1140197Andy, I think Whitfield will be what it is now, a dormitory of Dover, nothing more.
Guest 684- Registered: 26 Feb 2009
- Posts: 635
10 February 2010
17:2240200"over simplified thinking"? Apologies for shooting from the hip and foolishly under-complicating things, then. Just saying it how I see it.
"Stop talking as if the land will immediately be sold off to developers," you say, Barry. Like that's never happened before! No precedent of any council plumping for the easy option by doing that very thing, is there?
Meanwhile I am in thrall to your upbeat outlook on the Whitfield project. I often agree with you, but we diverge wildly on this particular issue. Time will tell...
Cheers, Andy
Unregistered User
10 February 2010
17:4640206Andy C you quoted me correctly.
Watty
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
10 February 2010
18:0540208Andrew - the Council does not own the land so cant sell it. Developers will only buy from the owners when they see the potential of a return on it and that depends on demand.
Think about it - the law of supply and demand. Build a whole lot of houses without potential buyers and it has cost you a fortune as your asset sits there unsold, while you pay the costs of borrowing to buy and develop. Businesses who misjudge that go bust. A developer will only respond to how he sees the demand and when he can sell. People wanting to buy will depend on them wanting to move here and that, up to a point, depends on work availability. Remember also that the economy is weak and it will take a long time for demand to lift.
One thing that may happen. While costs are low some developers may buy up land ready and lease it back to the farmers until the market is right to build (the rent covering the borrowing costs). They could then progressively over many years release parcels of land for building gradually. There would some risk to that of course and developers may or may not be in a position to finance this given how badly they have been hit recently. The whole point is it is not all done at once.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
10 February 2010
19:0140217sounds to me that nothing will happen in the foreseeable future.
builders and developers are not buying land full stop at present.
i cannot see anyone wanting a lot of money tied up in land when they do not know whne they will build on it.
even in london with a great demand for housing, builders are not building simple because of people having trouble getting mortgages.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
Through the letterbox, half hour ago.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Behind the scenes and from interested parties there will be significant movement on this - before long wewill be told we were "consulted" and it is "in our interests".
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the moment i see the words "public consultation" i think to myself, no it is all decided anyway.
Absolutely - the decisions are made, then the consultation starts. Usually. Allegedly. I am mindful of the law!!!!!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
don't forget the "presentation" with artists impressions bern.
the harbour board are masters of this craft.
