Newson's on the Quay

[Happier diner]

30 minutes ago, Nellie said:

Were they told by their own engineering consultants?

In any event, it certainly helps their cause, both to reinforce that engineering advice, and to create an eyesore which no-one wants to see there for longer than necessary. 

I am sure it was either DBC or DOI.

[Max Power]

This seems a classic case of next to nobody wanting the old building, but somebody in government ignoring that fact to prove some obscure point!

The fact that it wasn't a listed building,until the developer purchased it, smacks of the usual way we treat people who try to invest in the island. We don't deserve inward investment as the place is run by small minded, tin pot dictators!  

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

This seems a classic case of next to nobody wanting the old building, but somebody in government ignoring that fact to prove some obscure point!

The fact that it wasn't a listed building,until the developer purchased it, smacks of the usual way we treat people who try to invest in the island. We don't deserve inward investment as the place is run by small minded, tin pot dictators!  

I agree, but I thought it was a registered building before they bought it. 

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/north-quay-development-given-the-go-ahead-by-planners/

All a bit confusing.

[mollag]

The present building has been held together by tensioning plates,for many long years, they are clearley visible from the pavement. [green ovals]They were installed most likely when the centre section collapsed and was demolished, maybe 50 years ago ?. Common sense seems to say it is beyond restoration, and if it was, what use would it be?

[Zarley]

3 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/dangerous-building-leads-to-road-closure-514222

 

What does Ramsey have to do with North Quay in Douglas?

[Happier diner]

7 minutes ago, Zarley said:

What does Ramsey have to do with North Quay in Douglas?

ooops. I'll look anew

[John Wright]

4 hours ago, 2112 said:

I have just looked at Kelproperties website, a large portfolio of properties and industrial/commercial developments both on the island and in the UK, as well as in South Africa. I doubt somehow that even some of the properties at the new North Quay development will be classed as affordable even for FTB. If it were made as a precondition of planning that a % of the apartments be FTB, I could envisage the scheme getting knocked on the head, due to the figures not adding up. What does make me laugh is the idea that they really want to save North Quay. Really? A property developer with a heart, and social conscience? There are parts of Douglas which are derelict land banks  and owned by large companies, especially by Tesco. These have been allowed to fester for years. 

Please identify the “festering” Tesco land bank? Building, or plot, by building or plot.

[Kopek]

In the area of Tesco perhaps? Opposite Tesco, I think are DCorp owned?

[2112]

27 minutes ago, Kopek said:

In the area of Tesco perhaps? Opposite Tesco, I think are DCorp owned?

Whoever it is owned by, private or public it is a mess, dilapidated buildings. I think it was the old sawmills. Ideal brownfield site for social housing.

[Kopek]

Opposite Tesco car park!!! At least it would push the price down, put some FTBs there! 🙂

[0bserver]

13 minutes ago, 2112 said:

Whoever it is owned by, private or public it is a mess, dilapidated buildings. I think it was the old sawmills. Ideal brownfield site for social housing.

A bigger Tesco ideally.

[Andy Onchan]

6 hours ago, 2112 said:

I’m not disagreeing with you. Firstly she should object or express her opinions as a private individual. Is she expressing views as a member of a society eg Victorian Society? 
 

Would the views of those overlooking the proposed development (South Quay Aoartments)  hold a greater sway? 

A former Planning Committee Member no less: https://www.tynwald.org.im/memoff/member/Pages/MaskaMM.aspx

[Mysteron]

4 hours ago, Nellie said:

I suspect that it is part of the developers strategy to have those supports, with associated disruption and eyesore, to reinforce the engineering view that the stone wall is unsafe and does not have a future. This sends out a message that 'if we don't get planning permission it's going to look like this for a long time.' 

Personally, I don't have a problem with that. 

Those supports look like very good Manx Lightning conductors....

[Gladys]

1 hour ago, 2112 said:

Whoever it is owned by, private or public it is a mess, dilapidated buildings. I think it was the old sawmills. Ideal brownfield site for social housing.

I think part if it is the old morgue. 

[Boris Johnson]

6 hours ago, jackwhite said:

I think there needs to be reform in many things from top to bottom.

We're stifling investment (not entirely sure I agree with this particular development) regardless of this particular situation. Things here are overly complex, needlessly so, and it just puts people off. It's also developed a culture of a small group of individuals trying to freeze everyone and anyone else out. I know of some businesses who are actively sabotaging efforts of others for no reason at all, other than malice. Telling people who they approach for assistance in various things that if they work with these people, they will not only stop using them but will also actively persuade their numerous friends in the industry to do likewise. 

It's little wonder we don't see the type and speed of innovation we see in the U.K and certain parts of Ireland (some of it is even further in the past than here). 

Personally feel a little fatigue of the whole thing and does make me wonder, long term, whether this is somewhere I wish to remain. 

You have seen the light, don't plan long term here.

Make a buck ASAP and leave, it's the way to go...................