EXCLUSIVE: Development vision for harbourside

EXCLUSIVE: Development vision for harbourside

DEVELOPMENT: Artist's impression

DEVELOPMENT: Weymouth & Portland Borough Council Offices on North Quay, Weymouth

DEVELOPMENT: David Evans

First published in News
Last updated
by

THIS is the vision for Weymouth’s North Quay after the council leaves the prominent harbourside site.

The indicative artist’s impression has been produced by Poundbury architects Ben Penreath & Associates which have been appointed by Weymouth and Portland Borough Council to produce an outline planning application for a ‘sympathetic’ mixed development for North Quay.

The plan complements proposals for the old fire station nearby involving the same architects.

Recreating the historic route of High West Street, the scheme involves some 65 residential units plus commercial space.

The council decided last year to dispose of the site which has been its base for more than 40 years. Refurbishing the offices would cost more than £2 million.

Proposals have now been drawn up to transfer council operations to three different sites – including moving almost 100 staff to Dorchester. Relocating would save £220,000 a year.

The management committee is being recommended to back relocation options at a meeting next Tuesday.

Councillors will be told various sites were examined.

The capital costs associated with moving to the three sites amount to £450,000 but there are revenue costs on top. Selling the Guildhall and North Quay will help the council finance the move.

The majority of the council’s staff, those involved in ‘back office’ partnership work, would relocate to West Dorset District Council’s South Walks House in Dorchester. Concerns have been expressed that the local economy will be dealt a blow by the transfer of so many workers out of Weymouth.

Former president of the Weymouth and Portland Chamber of Commerce Mark Blunden said it was another example of jobs being ‘bled’ from Weymouth to Dorchester.

About 80 staff involved in local and back office functions would relocate to the council’s Crookhill Depot at Chickerell. Consultants have been appointed to develop plans to make ‘maximum practical use’ of the offices.

For ‘front of house’ operations, the council would take over space upstairs in the Mulberry Centre (behind the library) in Commercial Road where a handful of staff would be based. This new ‘civic suite’ would include a council chamber for meetings.

Environment Director David Evans said in a report: “Conver-sion of the Mulberry Centre and Crookhill Depot to accommodate staff delivering local services is recommended by far the cheapest of the options available. The accommodation is already in the ownership of the council and the revenue costs are already part paid for in existing budgets.”

COUNCIL finance and assets spokesman Peter Chapman said: “Full Council agreed to dispose of North Quay in February 2013 following public consultation which gave overwhelming public support for the move.

“Management Committee will look at a range of options for future development of the borough council’s North Quay offices and alternative accommodation arrangements for staff and the services they provide.

“Once achieved this will provide a significant capital receipt from the sale of the building and potentially save up to £220,000 reduction in annual running costs – helping protect services and the jobs that deliver them.

“The council will retain a town centre presence for both public enquiries and public meetings and the report to the committee proposes the use of the Mulberry Centre for these purposes.

“A sympathetic development of the North Quay site would improve the harbour setting while also providing housing.”

Comments (66)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:47am Thu 27 Feb 14

Be_Happy says...

Oh what a surprise.

P.S. The Portland town council offices still exist and are empty except for the top floor, could you not use them?
Oh what a surprise. P.S. The Portland town council offices still exist and are empty except for the top floor, could you not use them? Be_Happy
  • Score: 6

7:43am Thu 27 Feb 14

arlbergbahn says...

Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be.
Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be. arlbergbahn
  • Score: 7

8:42am Thu 27 Feb 14

railwaychickenboy6 says...

So front of house would be transferred to Mulbury house, now let's sea, the TIC was in a prime site in the see front, then moved to the pavilion then to Tom & Erins now it's totally gone, makes me wonder where they will move it to when Mulbury house becomes to expensive
So front of house would be transferred to Mulbury house, now let's sea, the TIC was in a prime site in the see front, then moved to the pavilion then to Tom & Erins now it's totally gone, makes me wonder where they will move it to when Mulbury house becomes to expensive railwaychickenboy6
  • Score: -5

9:15am Thu 27 Feb 14

Lanedor says...

About time - the sooner they move out the better!
About time - the sooner they move out the better! Lanedor
  • Score: 3

9:15am Thu 27 Feb 14

Weymouth Guy says...

Surely it is the responsibility of the Council to support jobs in the borough, not to ship them up to Dorchester to justify WDDC spending £10 million(?) on its carbuncle of an office. Yet more jobs going out of town, more congestion on the A354 with the additional pollution. And to add insult to injury, the local council tax payers are financing yet more consultants to enable this drain on the local economy to happen. Shame on the local councillors who are not just letting this happen, but seem to be actively supporting it.
Surely it is the responsibility of the Council to support jobs in the borough, not to ship them up to Dorchester to justify WDDC spending £10 million(?) on its carbuncle of an office. Yet more jobs going out of town, more congestion on the A354 with the additional pollution. And to add insult to injury, the local council tax payers are financing yet more consultants to enable this drain on the local economy to happen. Shame on the local councillors who are not just letting this happen, but seem to be actively supporting it. Weymouth Guy
  • Score: 8

9:27am Thu 27 Feb 14

Lanedor says...

Weymouth Guy wrote:
Surely it is the responsibility of the Council to support jobs in the borough, not to ship them up to Dorchester to justify WDDC spending £10 million(?) on its carbuncle of an office. Yet more jobs going out of town, more congestion on the A354 with the additional pollution. And to add insult to injury, the local council tax payers are financing yet more consultants to enable this drain on the local economy to happen. Shame on the local councillors who are not just letting this happen, but seem to be actively supporting it.
From what I read it seemed that they are thinking of keeping a smaller 'back office function' at Crookhill, a smaller accessible office for the public and others would operate out of Dorchester. Also some council workers operate from home now (wonder if you knew that?) It seems to make sense as it will release a prime harbourside site which should generate some decent money if it is redeveloped and the funds used in the manner they should be! Also, I thought that the relief road was built to ease congestion so what is the problem there? Anyway any who are moved for the purpose of their work will, I am sure, have free buses put on for them for a period of time!
[quote][p][bold]Weymouth Guy[/bold] wrote: Surely it is the responsibility of the Council to support jobs in the borough, not to ship them up to Dorchester to justify WDDC spending £10 million(?) on its carbuncle of an office. Yet more jobs going out of town, more congestion on the A354 with the additional pollution. And to add insult to injury, the local council tax payers are financing yet more consultants to enable this drain on the local economy to happen. Shame on the local councillors who are not just letting this happen, but seem to be actively supporting it.[/p][/quote]From what I read it seemed that they are thinking of keeping a smaller 'back office function' at Crookhill, a smaller accessible office for the public and others would operate out of Dorchester. Also some council workers operate from home now (wonder if you knew that?) It seems to make sense as it will release a prime harbourside site which should generate some decent money if it is redeveloped and the funds used in the manner they should be! Also, I thought that the relief road was built to ease congestion so what is the problem there? Anyway any who are moved for the purpose of their work will, I am sure, have free buses put on for them for a period of time! Lanedor
  • Score: 1

9:42am Thu 27 Feb 14

arlbergbahn says...

Weymouth Guy wrote:
Surely it is the responsibility of the Council to support jobs in the borough, not to ship them up to Dorchester to justify WDDC spending £10 million(?) on its carbuncle of an office. Yet more jobs going out of town, more congestion on the A354 with the additional pollution. And to add insult to injury, the local council tax payers are financing yet more consultants to enable this drain on the local economy to happen. Shame on the local councillors who are not just letting this happen, but seem to be actively supporting it.
Both how many of these jobs are really needed to be duplicated in two places only eight miles apart? Don't forget that all this comes from public money. Surely it's the wholly unnecessary duplication, and the sheer incompetence of this organisation that you're so anxious to see remain, that's the drain on tax payers, not an entirely sensible rationalisation?
[quote][p][bold]Weymouth Guy[/bold] wrote: Surely it is the responsibility of the Council to support jobs in the borough, not to ship them up to Dorchester to justify WDDC spending £10 million(?) on its carbuncle of an office. Yet more jobs going out of town, more congestion on the A354 with the additional pollution. And to add insult to injury, the local council tax payers are financing yet more consultants to enable this drain on the local economy to happen. Shame on the local councillors who are not just letting this happen, but seem to be actively supporting it.[/p][/quote]Both how many of these jobs are really needed to be duplicated in two places only eight miles apart? Don't forget that all this comes from public money. Surely it's the wholly unnecessary duplication, and the sheer incompetence of this organisation that you're so anxious to see remain, that's the drain on tax payers, not an entirely sensible rationalisation? arlbergbahn
  • Score: 0

10:47am Thu 27 Feb 14

eylesdf says...

They are dragging this out. So how many staff are actually involved and what do they do. We have figures of almost 100, 80, a handful, the majority. Is there a mix and match of options including one that leaves out Dorchester. Also what is the potential value of the old offices. I can see this continuing for a few years yet.
They are dragging this out. So how many staff are actually involved and what do they do. We have figures of almost 100, 80, a handful, the majority. Is there a mix and match of options including one that leaves out Dorchester. Also what is the potential value of the old offices. I can see this continuing for a few years yet. eylesdf
  • Score: -1

11:00am Thu 27 Feb 14

rjimmer says...

"Selling the Guildhall and North Quay will help the council finance the move." @@@@@ It should more than just 'help', I would think. What will the rest be spent on? Pensions?
"Selling the Guildhall and North Quay will help the council finance the move." @@@@@ It should more than just 'help', I would think. What will the rest be spent on? Pensions? rjimmer
  • Score: -2

11:48am Thu 27 Feb 14

brian10 says...

No doubt they will approve their own planning application on the site to get the most money from the sale, unlike the numerous objections they made to prevent development of the old Weymouth fire station
No doubt they will approve their own planning application on the site to get the most money from the sale, unlike the numerous objections they made to prevent development of the old Weymouth fire station brian10
  • Score: 1

12:13pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Caption Sensible says...

I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester.

Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".
I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester. Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local". Caption Sensible
  • Score: 15

12:14pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Panyan says...

A Premier Inn may generate a few jobs.
A Premier Inn may generate a few jobs. Panyan
  • Score: -1

12:19pm Thu 27 Feb 14

arlbergbahn says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester.

Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".
Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly.
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester. Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".[/p][/quote]Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly. arlbergbahn
  • Score: 3

1:22pm Thu 27 Feb 14

JamesYoung says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester.

Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".
No, it must not. It's expensive and inefficient.
Unitary authorities are the way forward.
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester. Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".[/p][/quote]No, it must not. It's expensive and inefficient. Unitary authorities are the way forward. JamesYoung
  • Score: 2

1:23pm Thu 27 Feb 14

JamesYoung says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester.

Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".
Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly.
Exactly. I suspect there are far more people travelling from Dorchester and further afield to Weymouth everyday than the other way around too. So, a few hundred council jobs are moving to Dorchester. The Granby provides more employment.
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester. Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".[/p][/quote]Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly.[/p][/quote]Exactly. I suspect there are far more people travelling from Dorchester and further afield to Weymouth everyday than the other way around too. So, a few hundred council jobs are moving to Dorchester. The Granby provides more employment. JamesYoung
  • Score: 3

1:28pm Thu 27 Feb 14

JamesYoung says...

So here's an idea.
Gift the land to a Community Land Trust. Allow it to be used for the development of proper affordable homes for local people. This land is owned by the council, but it's effectively OUR land. It's time it was used for OUR benefit not that of property developers.
So here's an idea. Gift the land to a Community Land Trust. Allow it to be used for the development of proper affordable homes for local people. This land is owned by the council, but it's effectively OUR land. It's time it was used for OUR benefit not that of property developers. JamesYoung
  • Score: 7

2:47pm Thu 27 Feb 14

albula40 says...

railwaychickenboy6 wrote:
So front of house would be transferred to Mulbury house, now let's sea, the TIC was in a prime site in the see front, then moved to the pavilion then to Tom & Erins now it's totally gone, makes me wonder where they will move it to when Mulbury house becomes to expensive
The tourist office is now in Pilgrim House in Brewers Quai square. Just for information.
[quote][p][bold]railwaychickenboy6[/bold] wrote: So front of house would be transferred to Mulbury house, now let's sea, the TIC was in a prime site in the see front, then moved to the pavilion then to Tom & Erins now it's totally gone, makes me wonder where they will move it to when Mulbury house becomes to expensive[/p][/quote]The tourist office is now in Pilgrim House in Brewers Quai square. Just for information. albula40
  • Score: 5

3:05pm Thu 27 Feb 14

DucksQuack says...

Will they be putting a Costa there so that Peter Chapman can enjoy his favourite coffee experience?
Will they be putting a Costa there so that Peter Chapman can enjoy his favourite coffee experience? DucksQuack
  • Score: -4

5:37pm Thu 27 Feb 14

blobby96 says...

tom and erins is up for sale, these councillors enjoy there coffee they will be able to pop along to tims cafe(jacks) after there meetings surely??
tom and erins is up for sale, these councillors enjoy there coffee they will be able to pop along to tims cafe(jacks) after there meetings surely?? blobby96
  • Score: -1

6:02pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Weymouth Guy says...

In response to comments on my posting:
Lanedor: Yes I know that some jobs will be kept in Weymouth and that some work from home, but 100 jobs to go to Dorchester - this is not what I would expect from our local councillors who are supposed to support the local economy. Moving from this prime site makes sense to another local area though what the money will be wasted on remains to be seen. The relief road is the Dorchester Road relief road and it has succeeded in moving traffic away from the Dorchester Road, but actually getting to Dorchester at 8 or 9 in the morning is no quicker. The transfer of staff to Dorchester will only add to this, mileage is far more likely to be paid than a bus pass, again paid for by us.

Albergahn: This is not about job reductions from duplications, but moving jobs from Weymouth to Dorchester, causing a drain on employment in the Borough. Rationalisation I can understand where appropriate, reduction in job opportunities, supported by our councillors by transferring them to Dorchester I cannot. Adding to traffic on already congested roads is nonsensical. As for incompetence, I am not sure which one is the worst!
In response to comments on my posting: Lanedor: Yes I know that some jobs will be kept in Weymouth and that some work from home, but 100 jobs to go to Dorchester - this is not what I would expect from our local councillors who are supposed to support the local economy. Moving from this prime site makes sense to another local area though what the money will be wasted on remains to be seen. The relief road is the Dorchester Road relief road and it has succeeded in moving traffic away from the Dorchester Road, but actually getting to Dorchester at 8 or 9 in the morning is no quicker. The transfer of staff to Dorchester will only add to this, mileage is far more likely to be paid than a bus pass, again paid for by us. Albergahn: This is not about job reductions from duplications, but moving jobs from Weymouth to Dorchester, causing a drain on employment in the Borough. Rationalisation I can understand where appropriate, reduction in job opportunities, supported by our councillors by transferring them to Dorchester I cannot. Adding to traffic on already congested roads is nonsensical. As for incompetence, I am not sure which one is the worst! Weymouth Guy
  • Score: 3

7:00pm Thu 27 Feb 14

wurzelbasher says...

Anything would be an improvement on that 1960's concrete abomination!
Anything would be an improvement on that 1960's concrete abomination! wurzelbasher
  • Score: 8

8:14pm Thu 27 Feb 14

PHonnor says...

The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local.
The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local. PHonnor
  • Score: 5

8:23pm Thu 27 Feb 14

I'mavoter says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester.

Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".
Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly.
The point you are missing arlbergbahn, is that these people that are currently employed in Weymouth , spend money In Weymouth .Many of them nip out and buy their lunch locally, buy their fuel locally, etc etc. this revenue to local business would be lost when staff are moved to Dorchester , making more Weymouth businesses even more vulnerable .
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester. Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".[/p][/quote]Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly.[/p][/quote]The point you are missing arlbergbahn, is that these people that are currently employed in Weymouth , spend money In Weymouth .Many of them nip out and buy their lunch locally, buy their fuel locally, etc etc. this revenue to local business would be lost when staff are moved to Dorchester , making more Weymouth businesses even more vulnerable . I'mavoter
  • Score: 7

8:40pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Caption Sensible says...

I'mavoter wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester.

Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".
Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly.
The point you are missing arlbergbahn, is that these people that are currently employed in Weymouth , spend money In Weymouth .Many of them nip out and buy their lunch locally, buy their fuel locally, etc etc. this revenue to local business would be lost when staff are moved to Dorchester , making more Weymouth businesses even more vulnerable .
You've got it!
[quote][p][bold]I'mavoter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: I like the concept of design but not the relocation of jobs to Dorchester. Weymouth is an independent borough and has been since the 12/13th century. Local governance must remain that; "local".[/p][/quote]Heavens above, they have modern communications like telephones and the Inter Net now. It isn't the 12th century. It really makes no difference if local government is here or a few miles away. All this silly "us vs them" Weymouth vs "Dorch", as people from Weymouth always insist on calling it, really is very silly.[/p][/quote]The point you are missing arlbergbahn, is that these people that are currently employed in Weymouth , spend money In Weymouth .Many of them nip out and buy their lunch locally, buy their fuel locally, etc etc. this revenue to local business would be lost when staff are moved to Dorchester , making more Weymouth businesses even more vulnerable .[/p][/quote]You've got it! Caption Sensible
  • Score: 1

12:18am Fri 28 Feb 14

david_divenghy2.1 says...

If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong? david_divenghy2.1
  • Score: -2

12:24am Fri 28 Feb 14

tictac19700 says...

Why don't they buy the old Officers Mess on Portland and refurbish it, plenty of parking available and would get rid of that eye sore and generate some well needed income for the Island.
Why don't they buy the old Officers Mess on Portland and refurbish it, plenty of parking available and would get rid of that eye sore and generate some well needed income for the Island. tictac19700
  • Score: 0

12:27am Fri 28 Feb 14

ksmain says...

Why not a nice high quality hotel to bring in more business.

Instead we get the Poundbury look - fake Georgian style housing that looks like that box-like, ugly, rabbit hutch and built-on-top of each other look that characterises Poundbury. Wonder if it will attract the soulless atmosphere and lack of people that I see every time I drive through Poundbury as well?
Why not a nice high quality hotel to bring in more business. Instead we get the Poundbury look - fake Georgian style housing that looks like that box-like, ugly, rabbit hutch and built-on-top of each other look that characterises Poundbury. Wonder if it will attract the soulless atmosphere and lack of people that I see every time I drive through Poundbury as well? ksmain
  • Score: 5

12:39am Fri 28 Feb 14

ksmain says...

david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
I do.

There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.
[quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]I do. There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now. ksmain
  • Score: 4

12:49am Fri 28 Feb 14

david_divenghy2.1 says...

ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
I do.

There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.
Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods.

I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]I do. There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.[/p][/quote]Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods. I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you. david_divenghy2.1
  • Score: 0

1:49am Fri 28 Feb 14

ksmain says...

david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
I do.

There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.
Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods.

I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.
And I am so pleased for you too!!! Maybe you need to buy a large mirror.

There are plenty other nice units for them to choose from already. I just fancy something different along the harbour than just more characterless housing. Something that can earn some income and jobs to the area that is sorely needed. Like some of the business that is being set up in Dorchester.
[quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]I do. There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.[/p][/quote]Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods. I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.[/p][/quote]And I am so pleased for you too!!! Maybe you need to buy a large mirror. There are plenty other nice units for them to choose from already. I just fancy something different along the harbour than just more characterless housing. Something that can earn some income and jobs to the area that is sorely needed. Like some of the business that is being set up in Dorchester. ksmain
  • Score: 3

2:12am Fri 28 Feb 14

david_divenghy2.1 says...

ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
I do.

There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.
Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods.

I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.
And I am so pleased for you too!!! Maybe you need to buy a large mirror.

There are plenty other nice units for them to choose from already. I just fancy something different along the harbour than just more characterless housing. Something that can earn some income and jobs to the area that is sorely needed. Like some of the business that is being set up in Dorchester.
Still nice that you think that working people are such **** and you proclaim them as such, so you think these hard working people do not work hard enough to earn such a simple place by the water with thier families?
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]I do. There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.[/p][/quote]Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods. I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.[/p][/quote]And I am so pleased for you too!!! Maybe you need to buy a large mirror. There are plenty other nice units for them to choose from already. I just fancy something different along the harbour than just more characterless housing. Something that can earn some income and jobs to the area that is sorely needed. Like some of the business that is being set up in Dorchester.[/p][/quote]Still nice that you think that working people are such **** and you proclaim them as such, so you think these hard working people do not work hard enough to earn such a simple place by the water with thier families? david_divenghy2.1
  • Score: -3

8:11am Fri 28 Feb 14

arlbergbahn says...

david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
I do.

There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.
Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods.

I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.
Heavens, you think of yourself very highly, don't you. Have you given yourself a medal?
[quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]I do. There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.[/p][/quote]Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods. I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.[/p][/quote]Heavens, you think of yourself very highly, don't you. Have you given yourself a medal? arlbergbahn
  • Score: 4

12:10pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Lanedor says...

Weymouth Guy wrote:
In response to comments on my posting:
Lanedor: Yes I know that some jobs will be kept in Weymouth and that some work from home, but 100 jobs to go to Dorchester - this is not what I would expect from our local councillors who are supposed to support the local economy. Moving from this prime site makes sense to another local area though what the money will be wasted on remains to be seen. The relief road is the Dorchester Road relief road and it has succeeded in moving traffic away from the Dorchester Road, but actually getting to Dorchester at 8 or 9 in the morning is no quicker. The transfer of staff to Dorchester will only add to this, mileage is far more likely to be paid than a bus pass, again paid for by us.

Albergahn: This is not about job reductions from duplications, but moving jobs from Weymouth to Dorchester, causing a drain on employment in the Borough. Rationalisation I can understand where appropriate, reduction in job opportunities, supported by our councillors by transferring them to Dorchester I cannot. Adding to traffic on already congested roads is nonsensical. As for incompetence, I am not sure which one is the worst!
In response to the above - who has said that 100 jobs will definitely go to Dorchester? There was some mention of some possibly moving and some going to the Crookhill Depot which is in Chickerell and a smaller accessible office opening at the Mulberry Centre. What can justify the Council occupying this prime site? Surely a site such as this is worth a fortune and if they use the money wisely they can relocate elsewhere and have some funds over. Why duplicate jobs when both councils are only 8 miles apart. They have already amalgamated the Housing, Council Tax Departments and the Refuse is due to be operated (if not already) by Dorset County Council and the Dorset Waste Partnership. It doesn't mean that the workers whose jobs move to Dorchester won't still spend their money in Weymouth!
[quote][p][bold]Weymouth Guy[/bold] wrote: In response to comments on my posting: Lanedor: Yes I know that some jobs will be kept in Weymouth and that some work from home, but 100 jobs to go to Dorchester - this is not what I would expect from our local councillors who are supposed to support the local economy. Moving from this prime site makes sense to another local area though what the money will be wasted on remains to be seen. The relief road is the Dorchester Road relief road and it has succeeded in moving traffic away from the Dorchester Road, but actually getting to Dorchester at 8 or 9 in the morning is no quicker. The transfer of staff to Dorchester will only add to this, mileage is far more likely to be paid than a bus pass, again paid for by us. Albergahn: This is not about job reductions from duplications, but moving jobs from Weymouth to Dorchester, causing a drain on employment in the Borough. Rationalisation I can understand where appropriate, reduction in job opportunities, supported by our councillors by transferring them to Dorchester I cannot. Adding to traffic on already congested roads is nonsensical. As for incompetence, I am not sure which one is the worst![/p][/quote]In response to the above - who has said that 100 jobs will definitely go to Dorchester? There was some mention of some possibly moving and some going to the Crookhill Depot which is in Chickerell and a smaller accessible office opening at the Mulberry Centre. What can justify the Council occupying this prime site? Surely a site such as this is worth a fortune and if they use the money wisely they can relocate elsewhere and have some funds over. Why duplicate jobs when both councils are only 8 miles apart. They have already amalgamated the Housing, Council Tax Departments and the Refuse is due to be operated (if not already) by Dorset County Council and the Dorset Waste Partnership. It doesn't mean that the workers whose jobs move to Dorchester won't still spend their money in Weymouth! Lanedor
  • Score: 0

12:13pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Lanedor says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
I do.

There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.
Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods.

I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.
Heavens, you think of yourself very highly, don't you. Have you given yourself a medal?
Regarding the comment about Social Housing around the harbourside - I see no problem - what I would like to know is why they allowed a probation hostel to be built in such a prime site?
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]I do. There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.[/p][/quote]Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods. I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.[/p][/quote]Heavens, you think of yourself very highly, don't you. Have you given yourself a medal?[/p][/quote]Regarding the comment about Social Housing around the harbourside - I see no problem - what I would like to know is why they allowed a probation hostel to be built in such a prime site? Lanedor
  • Score: 3

2:17pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Bert Fry says...

david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
One thing for certain David, if you had been elected, I couldn't see many women moving in.
[quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]One thing for certain David, if you had been elected, I couldn't see many women moving in. Bert Fry
  • Score: 3

3:54pm Fri 28 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

Bert Fry wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
One thing for certain David, if you had been elected, I couldn't see many women moving in.
Quite right Bert and DD would have childrencleaning chimney but only the girls!
[quote][p][bold]Bert Fry[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]One thing for certain David, if you had been elected, I couldn't see many women moving in.[/p][/quote]Quite right Bert and DD would have childrencleaning chimney but only the girls! woodsedge
  • Score: 1

4:52pm Fri 28 Feb 14

Caption Sensible says...

Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-) Caption Sensible
  • Score: 5

6:07pm Fri 28 Feb 14

ksmain says...

david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
ksmain wrote:
david_divenghy2.1 wrote:
If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens.

Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure.

I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?
I do.

There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.
Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods.

I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.
And I am so pleased for you too!!! Maybe you need to buy a large mirror.

There are plenty other nice units for them to choose from already. I just fancy something different along the harbour than just more characterless housing. Something that can earn some income and jobs to the area that is sorely needed. Like some of the business that is being set up in Dorchester.
Still nice that you think that working people are such **** and you proclaim them as such, so you think these hard working people do not work hard enough to earn such a simple place by the water with thier families?
Ah Mr Divenghy!

Firstly, nice of you to put your opinion on how I feel about working people. Seeing as you don't know me, I too am a 'working person' and have been so for 32 years. And clearly you only responded to half of my post - no comment on what would be the, surely laudable idea of using a prime piece of real estate to produce worthwhile business and jobs for 'working people' in the town which are sorely needed given the exit of more jobs up the road.

I see you hint at your aspiration to be a Councillor at the beginning of your first post. Just for your info I expect any Councillor I would vote for to be aligning themselves to the wider view of the local area they represent and not the narrow interest of just a few of the areas workforce. And by that I mean to represent the area and to try to promote it by development of the local economy to create future wealth for the area to benefit all of the local populace - the wealth generating better facilities and services in the area, as well as putting much needed money into other businesses (including those of the workers you are heralding). Instead you disappoint with the notion of benefiting just a few of the local people by building property that generates little in benefits for the whole of the local area, meanwhile excluding others that surely also merit this treatment?. There are other areas in Weymouth which, I am sure, will be a really nice place for these, I am sure, very competent workers to reside.

I feel we sorely need local Councillors to think more with the wider view.
[quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]david_divenghy2.1[/bold] wrote: If we had a council of the people ( as you would have if you elected me) they would build social housing as part of the finest harbor-side apartments. In those apartment shall be housed those social housing tenets who have earned the right to be there, through their hard efforts, cleanliness, decency and exemplary exhibition to those others as citizens. Money no object..only their actions and forthright discipline and deeds as measure. I dare anyone to debate that. as wrong?[/p][/quote]I do. There are places for Social Housing and it isn't on prime commercial land around the harbour. We already have too many housing units there at the moment as it is now.[/p][/quote]Nice to know that you think the average plumber, driver, hard working decent man of Dorset with a family is a piece of **** not worthy of a few places amongst the Gods. I am so proud to be the man that I am. compared to you.[/p][/quote]And I am so pleased for you too!!! Maybe you need to buy a large mirror. There are plenty other nice units for them to choose from already. I just fancy something different along the harbour than just more characterless housing. Something that can earn some income and jobs to the area that is sorely needed. Like some of the business that is being set up in Dorchester.[/p][/quote]Still nice that you think that working people are such **** and you proclaim them as such, so you think these hard working people do not work hard enough to earn such a simple place by the water with thier families?[/p][/quote]Ah Mr Divenghy! Firstly, nice of you to put your opinion on how I feel about working people. Seeing as you don't know me, I too am a 'working person' and have been so for 32 years. And clearly you only responded to half of my post - no comment on what would be the, surely laudable idea of using a prime piece of real estate to produce worthwhile business and jobs for 'working people' in the town which are sorely needed given the exit of more jobs up the road. I see you hint at your aspiration to be a Councillor at the beginning of your first post. Just for your info I expect any Councillor I would vote for to be aligning themselves to the wider view of the local area they represent and not the narrow interest of just a few of the areas workforce. And by that I mean to represent the area and to try to promote it by development of the local economy to create future wealth for the area to benefit all of the local populace - the wealth generating better facilities and services in the area, as well as putting much needed money into other businesses (including those of the workers you are heralding). Instead you disappoint with the notion of benefiting just a few of the local people by building property that generates little in benefits for the whole of the local area, meanwhile excluding others that surely also merit this treatment?. There are other areas in Weymouth which, I am sure, will be a really nice place for these, I am sure, very competent workers to reside. I feel we sorely need local Councillors to think more with the wider view. ksmain
  • Score: 4

9:04pm Fri 28 Feb 14

portweylad says...

It would be good if the development includes pedestrianisation of the quay side. Some nice outdoor eateries for a warm summers night watching the sun set over the gasworks.
It would be good if the development includes pedestrianisation of the quay side. Some nice outdoor eateries for a warm summers night watching the sun set over the gasworks. portweylad
  • Score: 3

10:10pm Fri 28 Feb 14

high68 says...

theres no vision what so ever in this boring poundburyesque plan. Have some real vision !!
theres no vision what so ever in this boring poundburyesque plan. Have some real vision !! high68
  • Score: 0

11:34pm Fri 28 Feb 14

EtaoinShrdlu says...

Looks like Jug Ears could be behind the design.

Social housing? Build some more at Littlemoor where they have had years of experience.
Looks like Jug Ears could be behind the design. Social housing? Build some more at Littlemoor where they have had years of experience. EtaoinShrdlu
  • Score: 1

8:32am Sat 1 Mar 14

arlbergbahn says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds. arlbergbahn
  • Score: -2

11:13am Sat 1 Mar 14

ksmain says...

portweylad wrote:
It would be good if the development includes pedestrianisation of the quay side. Some nice outdoor eateries for a warm summers night watching the sun set over the gasworks.
I totally agree. Sticking more houses on the quayside will shut that avenue for good and create another area very close to the town lacking any atmosphere or character. Pedestrianise it, a nice hotel with good facilities, some nice restaurants or cafes with seating outside overlooking a really nice prime area will IMO give the area a lift and benefit other businesses locally.
[quote][p][bold]portweylad[/bold] wrote: It would be good if the development includes pedestrianisation of the quay side. Some nice outdoor eateries for a warm summers night watching the sun set over the gasworks.[/p][/quote]I totally agree. Sticking more houses on the quayside will shut that avenue for good and create another area very close to the town lacking any atmosphere or character. Pedestrianise it, a nice hotel with good facilities, some nice restaurants or cafes with seating outside overlooking a really nice prime area will IMO give the area a lift and benefit other businesses locally. ksmain
  • Score: 2

5:55pm Sat 1 Mar 14

Caption Sensible says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come.

It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability.

And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.[/p][/quote]Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come. It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability. And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town. Caption Sensible
  • Score: 2

7:46pm Sat 1 Mar 14

arlbergbahn says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come.

It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability.

And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.
Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.[/p][/quote]Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come. It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability. And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.[/p][/quote]Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent. arlbergbahn
  • Score: -4

9:23pm Sat 1 Mar 14

Caption Sensible says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come.

It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability.

And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.
Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.
It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas.

And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.[/p][/quote]Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come. It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability. And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.[/p][/quote]Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.[/p][/quote]It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas. And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two… Caption Sensible
  • Score: 2

11:46am Sun 2 Mar 14

oldbrock says...

railwaychickenboy6 wrote:
So front of house would be transferred to Mulbury house, now let's sea, the TIC was in a prime site in the see front, then moved to the pavilion then to Tom & Erins now it's totally gone, makes me wonder where they will move it to when Mulbury house becomes to expensive
good comment, just had few days in WEYMOUTH, no TIC, WEDNESDAY to Dorchester,went to the TIC there and they said there has been a lot more work there since the WEYMOUTH TIC disappeared, now then, to a holidaymaker/visitor to WEYMOUTH, staying in WEYMOUTH, not in DORCHESTER, where is the sense in having a TIC in DORCHESTER but NON in the prime seaside town of the area? another point at the risk of boring the reader, we keep hearing about cutting services to save money, especially those to the sick, weak and vulnerable, ok then, the lazy also BUT never ANY mention of cutting expenses to councillors, who, in several cases are retired businessmen bored wi nowt to do, get their pensions topped up, do the meetings and prevaricate to get more meetings and so preserve THEIR expense regime, do people realise just how much they get as basic expenses, THEN all the boltons, time this was sorted, then we would get councillors who really serve the population and NOT just their moneydraining class ridden selves, NO chance under the corrupt society we have slipped into by default and people NOT voting at elections AND they all know it........
[quote][p][bold]railwaychickenboy6[/bold] wrote: So front of house would be transferred to Mulbury house, now let's sea, the TIC was in a prime site in the see front, then moved to the pavilion then to Tom & Erins now it's totally gone, makes me wonder where they will move it to when Mulbury house becomes to expensive[/p][/quote]good comment, just had few days in WEYMOUTH, no TIC, WEDNESDAY to Dorchester,went to the TIC there and they said there has been a lot more work there since the WEYMOUTH TIC disappeared, now then, to a holidaymaker/visitor to WEYMOUTH, staying in WEYMOUTH, not in DORCHESTER, where is the sense in having a TIC in DORCHESTER but NON in the prime seaside town of the area? another point at the risk of boring the reader, we keep hearing about cutting services to save money, especially those to the sick, weak and vulnerable, ok then, the lazy also BUT never ANY mention of cutting expenses to councillors, who, in several cases are retired businessmen bored wi nowt to do, get their pensions topped up, do the meetings and prevaricate to get more meetings and so preserve THEIR expense regime, do people realise just how much they get as basic expenses, THEN all the boltons, time this was sorted, then we would get councillors who really serve the population and NOT just their moneydraining class ridden selves, NO chance under the corrupt society we have slipped into by default and people NOT voting at elections AND they all know it........ oldbrock
  • Score: 0

11:57am Sun 2 Mar 14

oldbrock says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
right on! and, when all the offices are sold off etc, will the money be used to pin back the EVER increasing council tax or will it be kept by to ensure the councillors expenses can continue to rise while a greater percentage of the population have seen little or NO rise in their income, rather severe DECREASE, for the last 5-6 years due to other PARASITES: incompetent BANKERS and THEIR increases in bonus while the banks make a loss.......
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]right on! and, when all the offices are sold off etc, will the money be used to pin back the EVER increasing council tax or will it be kept by to ensure the councillors expenses can continue to rise while a greater percentage of the population have seen little or NO rise in their income, rather severe DECREASE, for the last 5-6 years due to other PARASITES: incompetent BANKERS and THEIR increases in bonus while the banks make a loss....... oldbrock
  • Score: 2

12:13pm Sun 2 Mar 14

oldbrock says...

ksmain wrote:
Why not a nice high quality hotel to bring in more business.

Instead we get the Poundbury look - fake Georgian style housing that looks like that box-like, ugly, rabbit hutch and built-on-top of each other look that characterises Poundbury. Wonder if it will attract the soulless atmosphere and lack of people that I see every time I drive through Poundbury as well?
nice one, we passed through POUNDBURY on the way back from Bridport FEB$th, there was NOBODY there! apart from the building works like the new McCarthy&Stone with attendant soil on the road near it, there was NOBODY, looked like a larger version of TRUMPTON off the TV years ago, all regimented and pinned back, no character, like an abandoned filmset, starting to show a bit of tiredness due to severe wet winter, it was only as we slipped across the " unseen frontier" into Dorchester proper, normal, everday scene, traffic and PEOPLE. You have a valid point, does WEYMOUTH really need THAT? Another scenario that will do NO good is the very common practise of building dwellings close in rows with the front door tipping straight out onto the, in some cases, VERY narrow paths, do not the residents deserve a bit of greenery, a decent width path and some sort of "buffer" betwixt front door and aforesaid path? OR is that reserved for the everswelling ranks of the selfimportant and their unearned bonuses, class system yet again at work in this country
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: Why not a nice high quality hotel to bring in more business. Instead we get the Poundbury look - fake Georgian style housing that looks like that box-like, ugly, rabbit hutch and built-on-top of each other look that characterises Poundbury. Wonder if it will attract the soulless atmosphere and lack of people that I see every time I drive through Poundbury as well?[/p][/quote]nice one, we passed through POUNDBURY on the way back from Bridport FEB$th, there was NOBODY there! apart from the building works like the new McCarthy&Stone with attendant soil on the road near it, there was NOBODY, looked like a larger version of TRUMPTON off the TV years ago, all regimented and pinned back, no character, like an abandoned filmset, starting to show a bit of tiredness due to severe wet winter, it was only as we slipped across the " unseen frontier" into Dorchester proper, normal, everday scene, traffic and PEOPLE. You have a valid point, does WEYMOUTH really need THAT? Another scenario that will do NO good is the very common practise of building dwellings close in rows with the front door tipping straight out onto the, in some cases, VERY narrow paths, do not the residents deserve a bit of greenery, a decent width path and some sort of "buffer" betwixt front door and aforesaid path? OR is that reserved for the everswelling ranks of the selfimportant and their unearned bonuses, class system yet again at work in this country oldbrock
  • Score: 0

12:20pm Sun 2 Mar 14

Caption Sensible says...

oldbrock wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
right on! and, when all the offices are sold off etc, will the money be used to pin back the EVER increasing council tax or will it be kept by to ensure the councillors expenses can continue to rise while a greater percentage of the population have seen little or NO rise in their income, rather severe DECREASE, for the last 5-6 years due to other PARASITES: incompetent BANKERS and THEIR increases in bonus while the banks make a loss.......
Talking of council tax....

What happens if a full merger occurs and the Weymouth & Portland tax payer then has to pay directly to a council based in Dorchester? With no direct representation in the borough. In effect another town will be benefitting from massively increased tax revenues at the borough's expense.

No wonder WDDC want this prize so much!

The more I think of it the more I am against this merger.
[quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]right on! and, when all the offices are sold off etc, will the money be used to pin back the EVER increasing council tax or will it be kept by to ensure the councillors expenses can continue to rise while a greater percentage of the population have seen little or NO rise in their income, rather severe DECREASE, for the last 5-6 years due to other PARASITES: incompetent BANKERS and THEIR increases in bonus while the banks make a loss.......[/p][/quote]Talking of council tax.... What happens if a full merger occurs and the Weymouth & Portland tax payer then has to pay directly to a council based in Dorchester? With no direct representation in the borough. In effect another town will be benefitting from massively increased tax revenues at the borough's expense. No wonder WDDC want this prize so much! The more I think of it the more I am against this merger. Caption Sensible
  • Score: 4

7:55pm Sun 2 Mar 14

arlbergbahn says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come.

It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability.

And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.
Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.
It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas.

And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…
so what d'you recommend then? just elect the right people, and Weymouth & Portland Council will lead us all into a blissful tomorrow? How the hell could we possibly ever get the chance to do that? it makes absolutely no difference at all who anybody votes for does it, if the EXecutives and the Officers are manifestly incompetent. So just for the sake of local pride and determination that Dorch shall never ever ever dominate the mighty Borough of Weymouth & Portland, we should just put up with a corrupt and utterly useless gang of imbeciles?
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.[/p][/quote]Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come. It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability. And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.[/p][/quote]Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.[/p][/quote]It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas. And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…[/p][/quote]so what d'you recommend then? just elect the right people, and Weymouth & Portland Council will lead us all into a blissful tomorrow? How the hell could we possibly ever get the chance to do that? it makes absolutely no difference at all who anybody votes for does it, if the EXecutives and the Officers are manifestly incompetent. So just for the sake of local pride and determination that Dorch shall never ever ever dominate the mighty Borough of Weymouth & Portland, we should just put up with a corrupt and utterly useless gang of imbeciles? arlbergbahn
  • Score: 0

8:00pm Sun 2 Mar 14

Caption Sensible says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come.

It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability.

And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.
Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.
It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas.

And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…
so what d'you recommend then? just elect the right people, and Weymouth & Portland Council will lead us all into a blissful tomorrow? How the hell could we possibly ever get the chance to do that? it makes absolutely no difference at all who anybody votes for does it, if the EXecutives and the Officers are manifestly incompetent. So just for the sake of local pride and determination that Dorch shall never ever ever dominate the mighty Borough of Weymouth & Portland, we should just put up with a corrupt and utterly useless gang of imbeciles?
You stand for election then and sort it out...
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.[/p][/quote]Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come. It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability. And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.[/p][/quote]Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.[/p][/quote]It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas. And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…[/p][/quote]so what d'you recommend then? just elect the right people, and Weymouth & Portland Council will lead us all into a blissful tomorrow? How the hell could we possibly ever get the chance to do that? it makes absolutely no difference at all who anybody votes for does it, if the EXecutives and the Officers are manifestly incompetent. So just for the sake of local pride and determination that Dorch shall never ever ever dominate the mighty Borough of Weymouth & Portland, we should just put up with a corrupt and utterly useless gang of imbeciles?[/p][/quote]You stand for election then and sort it out... Caption Sensible
  • Score: 1

11:41pm Sun 2 Mar 14

ksmain says...

Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come.

It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability.

And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.
Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.
It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas.

And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…
You're slightly out with the population.

2011 Census:

Weymouth = 52,323.
Portland = 12,400.

Chickerell is in West Dorset and therefore outside the borough.
[quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.[/p][/quote]Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come. It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability. And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.[/p][/quote]Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.[/p][/quote]It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas. And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…[/p][/quote]You're slightly out with the population. 2011 Census: Weymouth = 52,323. Portland = 12,400. Chickerell is in West Dorset and therefore outside the borough. ksmain
  • Score: 0

10:26am Mon 3 Mar 14

Caption Sensible says...

ksmain wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Caption Sensible wrote:
Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that.

Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation.

And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked!

But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)
Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.
Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come.

It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability.

And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.
Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.
It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas.

And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…
You're slightly out with the population.

2011 Census:

Weymouth = 52,323.
Portland = 12,400.

Chickerell is in West Dorset and therefore outside the borough.
Key word 'agglomeration'. The contiguous built-up area. Irrespective of political boundaries. The area, which in my opinion, should form the basis for a new unitary authority (which would of course also afford an opportunity to get rid of the dead wood and allow the area to move forward).
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caption Sensible[/bold] wrote: Although I like the idea of having an original looking Weymouth water frontage once more I cannot get my head around the fact that the council will have gone AWOL and set up camp in a neighbouring town. A competitor town at that. Could you imagine Poole Council in Bournemouth and vice-versa? Bristol in Bath? Southampton in Portsmouth? No way would this happen. I thought "localism" was the rallying cry of Cameron and co.? This is another step towards centralisation. And this is yet more asset stripping of Weymouth, this time it is the whole council which is being nicked! But maybe, as the council will be in absentia and not fulfilling their oaths, a new council could form and which may for once be good for the borough? ;-)[/p][/quote]Well, that just shows the silliness of unnecessary duplication due to territorialism, local nationalism and this idea that the next door town to you is a "rival". Some places, like Bath & Bristol, are obviously big enough to need their own councils, but it really is quite silly and pointless to duplicate facilities for Weymouth and Dorchester & West Dorset. I'm afraid that argument's just the flag waving "us vs. Them" attitude, rather than being based on any practical grounds.[/p][/quote]Are you seriously saying Weymouth and Portland is not big enough to have it's own council? The place is going to get even bigger in years to come. It has nothing to do with territorialism; it is about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability. And how can any prospective business, developer or entrepreuneur be persuaded to set up in the borough when it is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? But rather has to be administered by another town.[/p][/quote]Is not deemed competent enough to run its own affairs? well it's not is it. You wouldn't call WPBC competent, would you. What kind of image do they convey to any prospective business, developer or entrepreneur ? That they're a bunch of useless buffoons. It's about ancient rights, heritage, sovereignty and local accountability?? So the place should be run by a gang of incompetent nincompoops just in order to preserve ancient rights and sovereignty? What is this? Some medieval city state? it's not being run by Dorchester, that's just where the WDDC happen to be based. And anyway, so what if it was? This "ancient rivalry" and squabbling with neighbours is so hilariously juvenile. Do you honestly think that any investor or Entrepreneur is going to be deterred from investing in Weymouth because the council that administers it has its head office in Dorch? And how many investors or Entrepreneurs have there been investing in Weymouth recently; yes, that's right. And why might one reason for that be? Because the Council that so jealously preserves its Independence and its Ancient Sovereignty is so manifestly incompetent.[/p][/quote]It is up to the people of Weymouth and Portland to run their own affairs and elect those worthy of office, similarly for Dorchester. There can indeed be shared responsibilities and cost savings made where possible, but clear demarcation lines have to be set. One of them is the siting of the seat of governance for each of the two quite separate and different areas. And surely a town of any status or self-esteem should have its own town hall? Especially when it is an agglomeration of 70,762 persons (Census 2011). How can a town be taken seriously if this is not the case? Where will all the investment go once the two councils are formally merged and based in Dorchester? Now let me think about that for a second or two…[/p][/quote]You're slightly out with the population. 2011 Census: Weymouth = 52,323. Portland = 12,400. Chickerell is in West Dorset and therefore outside the borough.[/p][/quote]Key word 'agglomeration'. The contiguous built-up area. Irrespective of political boundaries. The area, which in my opinion, should form the basis for a new unitary authority (which would of course also afford an opportunity to get rid of the dead wood and allow the area to move forward). Caption Sensible
  • Score: 2

10:31am Mon 3 Mar 14

Caption Sensible says...

The Weymouth Agglomeration:

http://www.citypopul
ation.de/php/uk-aggl
o.php?cid=E34004617A
The Weymouth Agglomeration: http://www.citypopul ation.de/php/uk-aggl o.php?cid=E34004617A Caption Sensible
  • Score: 0

1:15pm Wed 5 Mar 14

cloton says...

PHonnor wrote:
The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local.
This is very true, they build flats affordable to no one apart from holiday makers, which buy and let for holiday use only put no money in the local economy!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]PHonnor[/bold] wrote: The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local.[/p][/quote]This is very true, they build flats affordable to no one apart from holiday makers, which buy and let for holiday use only put no money in the local economy!!!!!!! cloton
  • Score: 0

1:15pm Wed 5 Mar 14

cloton says...

PHonnor wrote:
The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local.
This is very true, they build flats affordable to no one apart from holiday makers, which buy and let for holiday use only put no money in the local economy!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]PHonnor[/bold] wrote: The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local.[/p][/quote]This is very true, they build flats affordable to no one apart from holiday makers, which buy and let for holiday use only put no money in the local economy!!!!!!! cloton
  • Score: 0

1:15pm Wed 5 Mar 14

cloton says...

PHonnor wrote:
The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local.
This is very true, they build flats affordable to no one apart from holiday makers, which buy and let for holiday use only put no money in the local economy!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]PHonnor[/bold] wrote: The plans look ok, I hope the development will not be more "assisted living" apartments for retirees, there are enough of those types around town, problem being with such a sought after location they will be up market apartments and not affordable for the average earning local.[/p][/quote]This is very true, they build flats affordable to no one apart from holiday makers, which buy and let for holiday use only put no money in the local economy!!!!!!! cloton
  • Score: 0

1:20pm Wed 5 Mar 14

dorsetj says...

surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??
surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism?? dorsetj
  • Score: 0

1:41pm Wed 5 Mar 14

nknights says...

dorsetj wrote:
surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??
well what use is the towns boost, if local residents cannont afford to live there anymore due to high rent costs in holiday homes, it means the appartments will barely be used, and will only benefit people in the summer months, not an all round economy saver.....
[quote][p][bold]dorsetj[/bold] wrote: surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??[/p][/quote]well what use is the towns boost, if local residents cannont afford to live there anymore due to high rent costs in holiday homes, it means the appartments will barely be used, and will only benefit people in the summer months, not an all round economy saver..... nknights
  • Score: 0

1:45pm Wed 5 Mar 14

ewoods says...

dorsetj wrote:
surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??
Let me think dorsetj, I bet you are one of these with multiple holiday homes/lets. You may well have done well in life and been able to afford these, but this is locking out locals from the opportunity to buy. People like you will kill these so called 'tourism' spots in the not too distant future as there will be no locals left in the towns.
[quote][p][bold]dorsetj[/bold] wrote: surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??[/p][/quote]Let me think dorsetj, I bet you are one of these with multiple holiday homes/lets. You may well have done well in life and been able to afford these, but this is locking out locals from the opportunity to buy. People like you will kill these so called 'tourism' spots in the not too distant future as there will be no locals left in the towns. ewoods
  • Score: 1

1:55pm Wed 5 Mar 14

cloton says...

arlbergbahn wrote:
Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be.
Lets try and be a little bit hopeful?
[quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be.[/p][/quote]Lets try and be a little bit hopeful? cloton
  • Score: 0

2:06pm Wed 5 Mar 14

dorsetj says...

ewoods wrote:
dorsetj wrote:
surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??
Let me think dorsetj, I bet you are one of these with multiple holiday homes/lets. You may well have done well in life and been able to afford these, but this is locking out locals from the opportunity to buy. People like you will kill these so called 'tourism' spots in the not too distant future as there will be no locals left in the towns.
Sadly not, I work hard to pay the mortgage for just a single home, what I'm saying is that tourism is good for the economy, I take your point about investors driving the price up, as has very publicly happened in Cornwall - but I don't think that this is happening here.
[quote][p][bold]ewoods[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dorsetj[/bold] wrote: surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??[/p][/quote]Let me think dorsetj, I bet you are one of these with multiple holiday homes/lets. You may well have done well in life and been able to afford these, but this is locking out locals from the opportunity to buy. People like you will kill these so called 'tourism' spots in the not too distant future as there will be no locals left in the towns.[/p][/quote]Sadly not, I work hard to pay the mortgage for just a single home, what I'm saying is that tourism is good for the economy, I take your point about investors driving the price up, as has very publicly happened in Cornwall - but I don't think that this is happening here. dorsetj
  • Score: 0

2:13pm Wed 5 Mar 14

ewoods says...

cloton wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be.
Lets try and be a little bit hopeful?
It is hard to stay hopeful when the council are involved.
[quote][p][bold]cloton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be.[/p][/quote]Lets try and be a little bit hopeful?[/p][/quote]It is hard to stay hopeful when the council are involved. ewoods
  • Score: 0

2:16pm Wed 5 Mar 14

ewoods says...

dorsetj wrote:
ewoods wrote:
dorsetj wrote:
surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??
Let me think dorsetj, I bet you are one of these with multiple holiday homes/lets. You may well have done well in life and been able to afford these, but this is locking out locals from the opportunity to buy. People like you will kill these so called 'tourism' spots in the not too distant future as there will be no locals left in the towns.
Sadly not, I work hard to pay the mortgage for just a single home, what I'm saying is that tourism is good for the economy, I take your point about investors driving the price up, as has very publicly happened in Cornwall - but I don't think that this is happening here.
I am sure that same thought was said about Cornwall many years ago.
[quote][p][bold]dorsetj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ewoods[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dorsetj[/bold] wrote: surely holiday lets help boost the town's primary income source - tourism??[/p][/quote]Let me think dorsetj, I bet you are one of these with multiple holiday homes/lets. You may well have done well in life and been able to afford these, but this is locking out locals from the opportunity to buy. People like you will kill these so called 'tourism' spots in the not too distant future as there will be no locals left in the towns.[/p][/quote]Sadly not, I work hard to pay the mortgage for just a single home, what I'm saying is that tourism is good for the economy, I take your point about investors driving the price up, as has very publicly happened in Cornwall - but I don't think that this is happening here.[/p][/quote]I am sure that same thought was said about Cornwall many years ago. ewoods
  • Score: 0

3:56pm Wed 5 Mar 14

cloton says...

ewoods wrote:
cloton wrote:
arlbergbahn wrote:
Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be.
Lets try and be a little bit hopeful?
It is hard to stay hopeful when the council are involved.
if that is the attitude you pursue, I am not sure that the residents have much hope....
[quote][p][bold]ewoods[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cloton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arlbergbahn[/bold] wrote: Well, it does look a bit Poundbury, but still, surely anything would be an improvement on the ugly cube that's currently there. So when they do Relocate, does that mean the whole incompetent gang of Officers and Executives who've messed up everything will simply be Relocating as well, so they'll still be in their very competitively paid positions and still able to mess everything up, or is there any prospect of actually getting rid of them altogether? Admittedly, that'd then mean that Robert Gould and W.D.D.C. would be in charge, though, so I'm not sure how much of a step forward that would be.[/p][/quote]Lets try and be a little bit hopeful?[/p][/quote]It is hard to stay hopeful when the council are involved.[/p][/quote]if that is the attitude you pursue, I am not sure that the residents have much hope.... cloton
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree