A bid by Ramsgate charity Kent Film Foundation to take on the Granville Cinema building in Ramsgate has been unsuccessful.
The foundation had hoped to create a new centre with workshop space, cinema, theatre, a bee-friendly roof terrace, the town’s first organic restaurant – and a new name.
The foundation, led by director Jan Dunn, had been in active pursuit of the building since registering interest in it as a Community Asset Transfer in spring 2017 after losing their bid for the old Ice House.
The foundation’s plans included workshop space to continue with youth film clubs and to create a new youth theatre and youth orchestra in partnership with Pie Factory music.
There would also have been two cinema screens and new theatre space with a view to bringing West End theatre to the town through a residency for Les Enfants Terribles company.
The plans for construction of the building were for a “Green Build” design, with a bee-friendly roof terrace opened up to the public and a small cinema kiosk/café.
An open letter in support of the proposal was signed by actors Brenda Blethyn and Pauline McLynn; producer Julie Forsythe; musicians Lunatraktors and a host of local residents including Ramsgate mayor Raushan Ara, Oasis Domestic Abuse Service CEO Deb Cartwright and Zoe and Peter Hammond from Inspiration Creative.
In October Thanet council invited expressions of interest from eligible community groups to become the new owners of Ramsgate’s Granville Theatre.
The council owns the freehold of the Granville but the site has been closed since the COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020.
The property is an Asset of Community Value, which means any disposal of the building must be carried out in accordance with rules set out in the Localism Act 2011.
But the submission from Kent Film Foundation, understood to have been the only first stage bid, has been rejected and the site will be put on the open market.
A Thanet District Council spokesperson said: “We issued a Notice of Intention to Dispose of an Asset of Community Value for the Granville Theatre, Victoria Parade, Ramsgate, on 20 October 2021, as well as an invitation to submit a request for a Community Asset Transfer (CAT).
“We have now completed the Community Asset Transfer evaluation process of the business plan proposal and evidence submitted by the Kent Film Foundation and have confirmed that their current offer was not successful.
“Further offers can be made under the Community Right to Bid until the expiration of the full moratorium period on Wednesday 20 April 2022. We will now commence marketing the premises on the open market and any offers received will be assessed at the end of the moratorium period.
“We would like to thank the Kent Film Foundation for expressing their interest in the site and for submitting their application.”
Kent Film Foundation members say they were informed with an ‘abrupt email’ that their submission had failed.
Trustees, and the management team who have worked tirelessly to prepare an outline plan that takes into account requirements, aims and objectives of Ramsgate’s strategic town plan and future plans, say they are surprised at the conclusions drawn by the council and await a response to their query as to how the criteria was assessed.
A statement from the foundation says: “With a team that includes those who have successfully run cinemas, raised high stake funding and with filmmaker Jan Dunn at the helm whose own films according the Kent County Council generated over £500,000 each into the local Thanet economy it beggars belief as to how such a decision could have been reached. The Foundation has built not only local support but garnered an open letter signed by professional local creatives as well as Oscar winning professionals from the world of film and high-end theatre and music too.”
Jan Dunn said the outcome is confusing, adding: “We, along with a representative from the Ramsgate Festival of Sound were the only attendees at a public online awareness event outlining what the council were looking for in the new custodians of the building where our many questions were answered for clarity prior to submitting our proposal. We understand that at the first deadline at least, we were the only applicants.
“The result is very confusing considering we catered to the expectations of what was expressed to us by the estate’s department (and more) at that meeting.”
Ramsgate singer Sabina Desir, who was among those backing the bid, said: “This is a building of huge value both to the community and future generations. If we want homegrown talent to succeed, we need to provide a resource that keeps Ramsgate’s talent and creativity in Ramsgate.
“The Sandcastle project has the potential to do that and so much more! As a resident and creative practitioner, it would be fantastic to be able to present new work in the community instead of going to Canterbury venues and taking the income our work generates out of the area.”
Disappointment has also been expressed by Andre Dack of Ramsgate Music Hall. He said: “We deplore this appalling decision made by TDC. Unfortunately, it comes as no real surprise. The council continues to show a complete lack of regard and respect towards the arts, and the multiple communities within the sector.
“This building has enormous value, and Kent Film Foundation has put together plans that involve the enormous amount of talent in Ramsgate. For a number of years, we at RMH have been on the lookout for an appropriate space to put on bigger capacity shows in our beloved town. The short-sightedness shown by TDC once again prolongs our search.”
Emlyn Gregory, Chair of the Kent Film Foundation, added: “ My feeling throughout the whole process was TDC was going through their legal obligations reluctantly, I felt the whole time they had an agenda and were looking at bids with their minds already made up, it’s felt like obstacles and delays were the order of the day.
“The sadness is the people of Ramsgate have had a golden opportunity to enhance the area effectively lost, I think it will add to the local feeling that Ramsgate is the poor relation to Margate in terms of investment.”
Ramsgate county councillor Karen Constantine said she was surprised at the rejection, adding: “I am both saddened and surprised that this application has been rejected by TDC as I think it represents a wonderful and timely idea, backed by a sound business plan with a highly motivated and competent team already in place to take the concept to reality. TDC have been very short-sighted.
“It is also slap in the teeth for this inspirational and dedicated team who have over several years, put so much effort into the project, bringing many years of expertise and experience to bear, for the benefit of the community. Ramsgate desperately needs facilities like this, we all miss our local cinema. Now it would seem we have no chance of having one.
“Thanet District Council have also missed a trick with regard to the creation of a locally owned business that would have done much to boost our local economy, by keeping important community assets owned by Ramsgate residents, creating jobs and improving our tourism offer.”
Cllr Constantine said proposals to put the site on the open market would mean denying residents much needed cultural and leisure facilities.
Central Harbour ward councillor Becky Wing is urging Thanet’s council leader to look again at the decision to reject the Kent Film Foundation proposal.
She said: “This is an extremely disappointing decision and I am hoping there will be a full review of the decision and process, in light of the Government Policy Statement on Assets of Community Value, which the Granville is.
“I have been aware of the activities of Kent Film Foundation (KFF) and its work with young people since 2015 when they were operating out of their Cliff Street base and supported their previous plans for the Ice House, which had included restoration of Jacob’s Ladder. “These plans attracted an initial development grant and KFF were encouraged to apply for further funding as the project plans progressed and funders recognised the high community value. To have a further attempt to progress well evidenced plans in partnership with a number of other important and well-established organisation must be devasting for KFF.
“I also believe the plans presented and supported by many would have created the much needed cultural, community, educational, training, event and theatrical centre our town; Ramsgate presently lacks. I despair that another Ramsgate asset will now be sold to the highest bidder, with little regard or concern for the needs of Ramsgate, its residents and especially its young people.
“The selling of assets to the highest bidder has so far left us with a derelict Western Undercliff site and old Motor Museum none of which now benefit our community. In fact, they blight our communities. It is frustrating because government policy states the ultimate aim of Community Asset Transfer is community empowerment – that is, to ensure that land and buildings are retained or transformed then operated for public benefit through community asset ownership and management.
“It further adds that once assets are put up for sale, a six-week window of opportunity is triggered, during which any local community group may express an interest to purchase the asset. If they do express an interest, a further four and a half months window of opportunity is given so that the group may have time to find funding and put together a bid to purchase the asset on the open market.
“I also believe given the community benefit a local government asset can be sold at well below market value, as I believe happened with the Ice House. I therefore urge all decision makers and the Leader of the Council Ash Ashbee to have another serious look at the potential benefits KFF proposals would offer not just Ramsgate but Thanet.”
i wonder how long it will be before the windows get broken , then graffiti appears , probably followed by a fire , thats the usual progression of buildings around thanet.
too true suppose the council wants to sell the land as a building plot
Sadly i agree with u. Like what happened to pleasurama building.I remember the great things Ramsgate had to offer,model village,mini golf course,the motor museaum,the cinemas in the town.
It has already been broken into. All the lead has been stolen ripped out of toilets etc and as the mains water was not off it’s lead to the entire theatre being flooded
Do the council know about it??
If they do then they should make it more secure!
This is a very surprising decision, the reasons for which the Council made it, should be published in detail. We should be told who advised the Council on this
I am a son of Ramsgate and my career was spent in the arts field, including serving on a committee of the Scottish Arts Council
Good. I wouldn’t support anything with such a stupid name.
So just because of the name you would rather it be lost as a community asset!
Yes. On principal. People shouldn’t be allowed to airbrush history.
What? History is airbrushed routinely, by the victors. I think you’re just trolling, as usual. Not funny though, you need to up your game.
Not trolling at all, I’ve opposed this from day one. As someone who visited it numerous times, I found the theatre/cinema (and name) fine as they were. It just needed a little TLC (as opposed to TDC!).
How can you consider an applicant who wants the property for next to nothing a victor? As part of their bid they want to erase the history attached to the Granville name as some sort of social justice crusade and yet are more than happy to benefit from the supposed horrors attached to the name and the bequest to ramsgate that actions/horrors resulted in. Hypocritical in the extreme.
These CIC’s created in order to gain control of ex municipal assets to my mind are just companies that can’t function in a real commercial environment, margate is bursting at the seams with creative folk , who earn next to nothing and probably never will, more power to their elbows if thats the life they want but its not a sound basis for an areas economy and future.
The Granville should be sold on a commercial basis , ideally with outline planning in place to gain maximum value ,and the revenues raised ringfenced and borrowed against to rejuvenate other dilapidated assetts or aquisitions.
The old peggysues/5th ave part of the pavillion would make a good community theatre / cinema, small enough to be sustainable on revenues it raises. There’s the old mototr museum but its unlikely the current owners would relinquish it.
Whilst ideally the money should stay in ramsgate , consideration needs to be given to the future of the royal theatre and wintergardens.
Both of which to my mind are being allowed to fade away as part of some sort of cosy deal with the owners of Dreamland largely due to a councils desperate attempts to make dreamland look a success.
The voice of reason.
Lc:
1. Because the applicant only wants the property which currently belongs to the community in order to preserve it for the benefit of the community when the local authority is failing to do so rather than seeing it sold at a bargain basement price for somebody’s personal profit.
2. The theatre was named after the hotel (which was named after the person), not after the person, so who cares irrespective of your politics.
3. What bequest? The hotel was privately and commercially built and run and it’s owners happened to choose to name it after Lord Granville. The Theatre was built by the council. Granville did not own or donate either of these things to the town.
4. That’s correct, CICs provide services for community benefit which would not be sustainable / accessible on a commercial basis. For the most part they are services that councils have traditionally provided, also not on a commercial basis. Mostly CICs are established to preserve things that members of the community value when its local authority because of either politics or funding cuts will / can no longer provide them.
5. Pre-pandemic the creative industries were worth £111bn to the UK economy and were the fastest growing sector of the economy. The Sandcastle proposal is not only an opportunity to get Ramsgate’s thumb in that pie, but also as an additional driver to its traditional visitor economy.
6. The motor museum is generally considered unsaveable in its current form as it is too far gone. If you are passionate about preserving Ramsgate’s history and heritage, arguments about naming aside it makes no logical sense to be in favour of the Granville being sold off to private developers who will only exploit it commercially and very likely flatten it, and also rename it, when it could be preserved and redeveloped in its current form, for broadly its original intended purpose, while creating both creative and employment opportunities for the benefit of the community.
What a ridiculous and immature thing to say.
Agree
This decision by TDC, who made it? It is an awful decision and a complete waste of a potentially valuable resource for everyone in Ramsgate, Thanet in general and further afield.
I just can’t get my head round the reasoning, except that it’s to do with corruption.
The Kent Film Foundation had a great plan,it had external investment, it would bring the site back into use but add enormously to the facilities, it would be a centre for all kinds of events and all TDC had to do was say Yes!
It’s a outrage and a slap in the face.
We have to be told who took the decision and why. Anyone interested in challenging this offence to our community with direct action?
I was unaware they had external investment & presumed the taxpayers would be funding this-who are the backers as this would change people’s minds
Twit
Lc:
1. Because the applicant only wants the property which currently belongs to the community in order to preserve it for the benefit of the community when the local authority is failing to do so rather than seeing it sold at a bargain basement price for somebody’s personal profit.
2. The theatre was named after the hotel which was named after the person, not after the person, so who cares irrespective of your politics.
3. What bequest? The hotel was privately and commercially built and run and it’s owners happened to choose to name it after Lord Granville. The Theatre was built by the council. Granville did not own or donate either of these things to the town.
4. That’s correct, CICs provide services for community benefit which would not be sustainable / accessible on a commercial basis. For the most part they are services that councils have traditionally provided, also not on a commercial basis.
5. Pre-pandemic the creative industries were worth £111bn to the UK economy and were the fastest growing sector of the economy. The Sandcastle proposal is not only an opportunity to get Ramsgate’s thumb in that pie, but also as an additional driver to its traditional visitor economy.
6. The motor museum is generally considered unsaveable in its current form as it is too far gone. If you are passionate about preserving Ramsgate’s history and heritage, arguments about naming aside it makes no logical sense to be in favour of the Granville being sold off to private developers who will only exploit it commercially and very likely flatten it, and also rename it, when it could be preserved and redeveloped in its current form, for broadly its original intended purpose, while creating both creative and employment opportunities for the benefit of the community.
Very well said
I was really excited about this proposal, I thought it was excellently put together and the concept was so refresingly inclusive. Kent Film Foundation and Ramsgate deserve a point by point criteria of why this bid failed.
Elaine I too thought the whole plan was wonderful
What Karen Constantine says is RIGHT The application should be reconsidered!
This is a shocking decision. How can TDC ignore a bid that would be so good for Ramsgate? They need to be accountable and we need to know the reason for this decision.
If the Granville is to be sold on the open market perhaps the money made from the sale will go towards saving the Winter Gardens which, without investment, is likely to close permanently.
We are a holiday destination and need entertainment venues of all kinds to flourish and by so doing attract holidaymakers and boost our economy. People on holiday need evening entertainment of all kinds but it is all slowly disappearing and so, therefore, will holidaymakers.
I agree Joan.
Margate gets a huge amount of funding from TDC and others. Ramsgate is the poor relation. Why should community assets in Ramsgate be sold to pay for community assets in Margate?
Because without additional funding Thanet will be losing THREE theatres, not one.
Margate already has 3 theatres (more if you count Dreamland). Ramsgate has only the Granville. And if we’re talking about funding, explain why TDC has thrown away £22 million and counting on the port, failed to bid for funding that it could have won, and spends enormous sums on HR issues due to failing management.
I can’t explain TDC’s ludicrous decisions. All I know is that the Winter Gardens and Theatre Royal are due to close later this year.
For what it’s worth, I agree that Ramsgate should get more funding… surely the old Motor Museum building isn’t totally beyond repair?
Can we raise a petition demanding the bid be reconsidered. And be told just why was this rejected. From these comments many many local residents would support such action. We cannot allow this valuable asset to be lost
Why was the bid rejected.
Agree totally seems like the town with the council offices is being prioritised over all others sadly. I think the Granville an ugly building but the plan of the rejected bid was a positive improvement and I tor one would love to have a local venue of the sry described to use
Bit it won’t, tdc will simply allow the building to go into private speculators hands and then it will rot, like so many others around the isle. Shortsighted, mean and pointless decision. Nothing for the community, no forward thinking, no investment and no improvement of an area.
Very well said Joan. I agree with you completely.
It should be sold off and dead against the name change!! We cannot change what has happened in the past just for the sake of afew luvvies!
Appalling
The people of Ramsgate at least should be given vote on this
We need full transparency on why this application failed, and the criteria by which it was judged.
I agree with you Gavin but transparency is not something TDC cares about. This decision is so wrong
Yet another appalling decision by TDC that flies in the face of Councillor and local wishes and the future prosperity of Ramsgate. This is a continuation of the perverse view of TDC officers that Ramsgate is an industrial centre and has no place for tourism. Time for regime change at TDC, the Senior Management Committee are a complete disgrace.
Once again TDC shows contempt for Ramsgate and local assets. This reeks of offloading assets to plug holes in budgets at the expense of the local peoples amenities. That is not sustainable. What will the council do when they have no more assets to sell? How will local people replace these assets once the land is sold off? So short-sighted of TDC and not in the interests of the local community.
Everything TDC do is done to keep the area poor. There is so much that could have been done with the funding available from Government but it is all wasted on rubbish projects and disappears up into the ether. Our towns remain desperate for a new area council to replace the inept lot under the CEO running it into the ground. It has never been this bad until the last decade.
This is a TDC total lack of care for Ramsgate residents and some idiots on here think money they get will be used wisely. Fools Would you rather have a few more flats built there as I’m sure that’s what the council will allow. We could have a cinema but no it seems there is to many idiots blinded in this community
Are there grounds here for a Judicial Review of this surprising decision? I’d like to see TDC’s criteria for assessment and rejection.
Someone, local builders perhaps, must have other ideas.
TDC are already facing one JR for poor decision making which fails to put people first. The problem with this legal process is that it is costly, do we have deep enough pockets to challenge TDC in the Courts? I think we should. I hope the decision can be called in for scrutiny so we can how and why this decision was reached. We deserve transparency and we shouldn’t settle for less.
Is there no right of appeal with decisions like this?
What can us residents do to make tdc reconsider? They surely must be a way of showing pure support for the plans?
I’m not from Ramsgate, but I had many trips to the beach when I was little and now live here. I love Ramsgate, doesn’t matter where you live you are near open spaces or the beach. But sadly let down by TDC who seem hellbent on ruining it’s history and the community. Whomever is making these decisions should be ashamed of themselves. But the theatre should still be called Granville, that’s a part of history good or bad that doesn’t need to be erased.
TDC sort your house out and look at what you have and stop letting it full into ruin just because it’s not Margate.
Another idiotic decision by TDC led by the minorities again who are living in the past. It will now get rundown and damaged so many failures by tdc
As we pay these people can’t we demand a reason and a re-think? What we’ll get is more overpriced sea-view “apartments”. Start a campaign from residents.
It would so obviously be a huge asset to the town, bringing foot-fall and business to the local area, and provide jobs, investment and wide interest from outside Thanet. TDC seems hell bent of stamping out any flicker of initiative, and just sees the town’s assets as cash cow to be milked (run it down, dispose & sell to speculators). Hopefully pressure from residents, our councillors and others can make TDC explain the reason for denial, and then an amended bid could be presented – that is if Kent Film Foundation still have the will to pursue it.
Council wants to transfer asset. Community group puts excellent bid in. Council says bugger off. But hey, you can park your eyesore rusty barge in prime position in our harbour for 2 years.
TDC is letting Ramsgate go to the dogs.
Let’s ask Madeline why.
Oh yes that unloved barge is an eyesore, seems to be an oil slick surrounding it and dead pigeons.
Tdc need to let the theatre go and the persons who rejected the sale to the one and only interested buyer.
Alice, the ‘rusty barge’ is already bringing revenue to TDC – it pays mooring fees and also paid for the pontoon extension. Once it’s been renovated it will look marvellous and be a real community asset as well as a tourist draw. These things don’t happen overnight though.
James, neither the oil slick or the dead pigeons come from the barge, I’m afraid they come standard with any marina! And it’s TDC’s responsibility to clean up. That corner of the harbour always collects the rubbish because of the wind and tide flows.
If you want to have a moan about the state of the harbour then ask TDC what they are doing with all the rusting pontoons lying around that are costing ratepayers dear. Two of these were earmarked for Bretts but the council shouldn’t be funding a commercial business.
This has to be reconsidered please don’t let the council sell it of for another block of flats,,this is a historical building and should be supported by the arts and community which have mad such a good and creative plan for the arts and to see this is a huge disappointment yet again from the council it seems that TDC will never allow Ramsgate to move ahead with arts and projects just look at the Town a disaster vape and barber shops graffiti,this is a chance for the Granville to be on the map and a place of interest for visitors and the community . Reconsider please.
No, they wanted to wipe the Granville OFF the map as they were “offended” by the name.
Changing the name is a distraction, stop muddying the water.
Would you really wish the whole project to fail, Ramsgate lose the only dedicated cinema and entertainment space, and the site to be lost to speculators, all for the sake of a name?
How very, very selfish.
Would you really want people who would otherwise support a project being alienated because a few people are “offended” by the name? How very, very selfish of them.
What is so wrong with a plan to simply renovate rather than reinvent the existing theatre/cinema? In my experience, it was absolutely fine.
What are you talking about? Who was offended and why? Please state your sources. The theatre was named Granville simply because it’s opposite the Granville Hotel (and even that building didn’t start off being called the Granville). Any new owner can call it what they like. If the name change is your only objection you must be a very sad individual.
I didn’t like the whole plan. Once again, the building was great as it was.
As for WHO was offended by the Granville name, it was Kent Film Foundation. Read the comments here:
https://theisleofthanetnews.com/2021/05/27/kent-film-foundation-reveals-ambitious-green-proposals-for-granville-theatre-building/
Thanks for the link. Having read the comments I’m in full agreement with the name change decision. Changing views on the sources of individual wealth are not ‘airbrushing history’ but actually improving it. In any case as I said before, new owners can call a building whatever they like, and for whatever reason.
It was a damp dump and poorly run, I went fairly often and rarely busy.
I am offended ramsgate has a placed called liverpool lawns obviously named after liverpool a city that built its weather on the slave trade.
It is a part of the heritage of Ramsgate! Do we wipe out the role the town played in WW2 just because some arty farty type is offended!!!
Have reasons for the rejection been given? If not, why not? Surely they have to justify the decision and the process by which they reached it?
A typically mean-spirited and suspiciously opaque decision from what has to be one of the worst councils in the country – no vision, no accountability and seemingly no desire to make Ramsgate a better place to live. There needs to be far more transparency around decisions like this – who made it and why?
what a shame. the proposal would have been great for the whole community. why on earth would it be rejected? why do TDC keep making such terrible decisions? ramsgate deserves better.
This is something Ramsgate could be proud of! Unlike the new ugly massive development below.
I love that new development personally and I can’t wait for it to be completed
I think the Granville is ugly. Ugly but small.
…and that help this discussion how?
If the Kent Film Foundation get the plans approved, it will be redeveloped and then might just look a bit better.
See the petition at change.org https://www.change.org/p/save-ramsgate-s-only-cinema-by-supporting-kent-film-foundation-s-proposal
Signed and 700 have done the same!