Hotel Talks must include Public
"West Dorset District Council won’t be attending an open session with Lyme residents, working only with ‘Save Three Cups as Hotel Group’ (good), and Town Council (all but one I believe absent from all 3 public meetings on ‘the Cups’ in 2009). All 235 attenders voted for compulsory purchase at June 5th meeting: next day 1,397 of 1,400 people signed a ‘compulsory purchase’ petition.
Does anyone feel it’s ‘limited democracy’ meeting the Town Council but not being ready to talk openly with Lyme residents?
When I reported the crumbling Three Cups’ condition to a West Dorset District Council meeting, 23rd March 2009, an officer said “When we sent someone down there a few months ago, everything was perfectly alright”! When I asked if Palmers should act, he said“That’s not Palmers’ current business objective”.
I called in the Health & Safety Executive, forcing urgent council safety action. Guttering had previously crashed 70 ft on to a public area and a tile had ripped into a neighbour’s car.
Urgent structural repairs, scaffolding, emergency railings, and later more structural work followed. Then more work. Incredibly, on May 21st, I was banned from further direct contact with Conservation/ Building Control officers.
Chesterton Humberts, acting for Palmers, released the “Historical Assessment” they purchased on the Three Cups Hotel.
This incredibly totally omits mentions of features of special historical interest such as Jane Austen staying in the building, scenes from the film ‘The French Lieutenant’s Woman’ - seen by millions (billions?) internationally, etc.
With omissions like this, how weightily can the ‘independent’ report actually be treated?