The stuff of dreams

projects portrait1A plan to regenerate the famous Dreamland site in Margate shows the usefulness of a key power in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, writes Martin Edwards.

In August, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government confirmed, without modification, Thanet District Council’s compulsory purchase order of the site of the world renowned but sadly derelict Dreamland Amusement Park.

In many respects, Dreamland is synonymous with Margate. It had developed in the nineteenth century as a leisure site in tandem with Margate’s development as Britain’s first holiday resort. In 1919, following a change in ownership, the site was transformed into an amusement park and named after Dreamland at Coney Island, New York.

In its heyday it attracted over half a million visitors each year and its success was integral to that of Margate. Since its closure in 2006 the site has rapidly deteriorated along with Margate’s fortunes. However, uniquely, Dreamland contains three listed buildings, two of them Grade II* including the famous Scenic Railway, which fell into disrepair and necessitated the Council in taking urgent action to preserve these buildings.

But the tide at Margate is turning. Spurred on by the phenomenal success of the new Turner Contemporary art gallery, the Council resolved to compulsorily acquire Dreamland under section 226(1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to create the world’s first heritage amusement park, to be developed in partnership with the Dreamland Trust and with offers of funding from the Government’s Sea Change Programme and the Heritage Lottery Fund. The development of the heritage amusement park at Dreamland was specifically aimed at achieving the objectives of the Adopted Local Plan policy T8.

In a 15-day contentious inquiry that was widely reported in the national media, the owners of Dreamland set out a different vision. Their nebulous plans included wanting to develop almost half of the site with over 450 houses, relocation of some of the existing buildings to a site some distance from Dreamland and separated by a railway line. In a short decision letter, accepting his inspector’s recommendations, the Secretary of State agreed with the inspector’s conclusion that the alternative proposals put forward by the objectors were “fanciful and unlikely to succeed”.

The Secretary of State concluded that the Council’s Phase 1 proposals described in the order would make a valuable contribution to the economic, social and environmental well-being of the immediate areas as well as the regeneration of Margate.

The decision provides an ample demonstration of the utility of section 226(1) (a) as a tool for urban regeneration. This power to compulsorily acquire land for planning purposes was significantly widened by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 with the stated aim of providing a positive tool to help acquiring authorities with planning powers to assemble land where this is necessary to implement the proposals in their community strategies and Local Development Documents. These powers are expressed in wide terms and can therefore be used by such authorities to assemble land for regeneration and other schemes where the range of activities or purposes proposed mean that no other single specific compulsory purchase power would be appropriate.

Martin Edwards is a barrister at 39 Essex Street. He advised Thanet District Council in the lead up to the making of the compulsory purchase order and represented the council at the public inquiry. Martin can be contacted by This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..