15 Members/Wardens

Welcomes JS welcomed Cllrs Neil Sorton, Mrs Carole Deas & Peter Adams and all those present.

1. APOLOGIES AND ACCURACY OF MINUTES (11 JUNE & 09 JULY 2008)

Apologies: Cllr Mrs May Haines (Due to a prior engagement) & John Defty (Currently in Poole Hospital but if all goes well he should be out at the weekend.)

Accuracy: JS said that he would sign the Minutes as a true and accurate record of the meetings held on 11^th June and 09^th July 2008.

2. MATTERS ARISING

Poole Beaches and Coastal Defences: JS introduced Cllr Adams & Peter Jackson and invited them to speak before the other items on the Agenda, as PJ had leave the meeting for another engagement.

PJ stated that rock groynes were first proposed six years ago, this proposal was shelved after objections to proposals for rock groynes all the way along the beach from Sandbanks to Branksome Dene Chine and the sand was replenished instead.

In summary, PJ’s grounds for objection are as follows…

1. There is no proven need for additional structures on the beach.

1. Even if there were, rock groynes are not appropriate to heavily used holiday beaches. They pose a serious threat to public amenity and public safety. The RNLI in Poole are on record as saying “the important issue of safety has not been adequately researched”.

1. If consultants have proposed rock groynes then inadequate consideration has been given to amenity and safety issues.

1. A study by Bournemouth University in 2003 concluded “rock groynes are not appropriate for the present protection and use of the Branksome and Canford Cliffs frontage”.

1. There has been no consultation with us or the general public on the proposals – despite Poole Council being well aware of past objections of residents to rock groynes.

1. The proposed groynes would have a significant impact on the whole of Poole Bay and particularly Bournemouth beaches. It seems premature to proceed when the Shoreline Management Plan for the Bay is currently under review.

To expand: No proven need:

1. The beach is substantially the same width as when replenished three years ago. Sand has covered the promenade in Winter to a depth impeding cyclists and pedestrians and is currently at or close to promenade level. Some loss of sand would actually improve amenity.

1. Prior to replenishment,there was no evidence of significant expenditure being necessary to maintain the integrity of the promenade and defence structures. This lack of historical data justifying such a large increase in future expenditure was a weakness in studies commissioned by Poole Council and pointed out by this Association in the past. As far as we are aware data is still lacking.

1. Defences have suffered little damage in the past because waves on these beaches are relatively benign–average wave energy is 1/6th of that at Bournemouth Pier. If DEFRA have funds available we believe they should be spent in areas where there is a proven history of damage/erosion or high cost of maintenance.

Rock groynes are inappropriate:

1. Amenity The beaches at Branksome are heavily used holiday beaches and rock groynes would seriously reduce amenity.They are visually intrusive, pose a barrier to beach walkers or are difficult to cross and destroy the current unbroken sweep of Poole Bay towards Bournemouth.

1. Safety Rock groynes are unsafe. After a number of near drowning incidents and injury around the Sandbanks rock groynes the issue of safety was raised with Poole Council in 2003/4. The RNLI data at the time showed that rock groynes accounted for 97% of rescue incidents despite forming only 14% of the total number of groynes.

1. The research on the safety of rock groynes held by the RNLI to be necessary has still not to our knowledge been carried out.

1. Consultation—-When proposals to install rock groynes were first raised by Poole Council in 2003 we and the public were consulted on a very different scheme to which there was strong public objection. Since then there has been no consultation at all on the current revised scheme. There are also no notices at the beach advising of the proposed work; this did happen in 2003.

PJ referred to a letter in the Daily Echo in 2004 from a Simon Marcos, a holidaymaker from London voicing his concerns about the safety of the groynes at Sandbanks following an incident with his two children which involved a trip to Poole Hospital.

PJ also quoted from two other items of correspondence he had received…

• “…Many thanks for your inquiry and good wishes following my granddaughters’ accident on the beach at Sandbanks, Upon slipping on the stone groyne, it was thought that she had broken her ankle but fortunately, after a long wait at Poole General Hospital, it turned out to be badly sprained and grazed. Of course to a teenage girl, the thought of a scarred leg is terrifying. After treatment, painkillers and crutches supplied, because of her discomfort, they had to cut short’ their holiday in Poole after only one night”

• “…As a person who likes to keep fit I regularly run along the beach. The rock groynes at Sandbanks are a direct hindrance and hazard to those who would use this facility – so perfect in every other way for such healthy pursuits. The stretch beyond Sandbanks to Bournemouth has none of these significant trip hazards. To add more rock groynes, at a time where the public are being encouraged to take more exercise seems a jarring contradiction. Further I would like to draw attention to an incident a couple of years ago when on seeing a teenage boy in distress and calling for help beyond one of the rock groynes I entered the water and attempted to swim to reach him. I am a strong swimmer but it was impossible to make any progress against the tide swirling around the groyne. Thankfully another beach user set out in a rubber dinghy and approached from the seaward side He was able to bring the boy to shore – scratched from hanging on to the stake and very shaken. Has this danger been fully taken into account/tidal flows in comparison to wooden groynes been undertaken?…”

KA pointed out that the timber groynes are still there buried in the sand.

In reply to the question of comparison of costs between rock groynes and future beach replenishment, which cost approx £2.5m in Bournemouth, NS pointed out that the £2.5m was assisted by material being bought from the Poole Harbour Commissioners at a low cost due to the need to deepen the channel, and that costs of future replenishments would be much higher.

PA gave a presentation informing the meeting that the beach had been eroding at about 1 metre per annum for the past 8000 years. There are records of sea defences being constructed in the 1890s. The deeper/wider existing beach now provides 100 years protection from erosion for the promenade and cliffs, whereas the narrower beach at Branksome Chine affords only 10 years protection. 25% of the replenished sand has already been lost by tidal action carrying it along and depositing it on Bournemouth beaches where there are timber groynes.

PA offered to make the reports by Wallingford, experts with a world wide reputation, available for any members who would like to see them. These reports make a strong recommendation for groynes.

The current proposal is for 5 rock groynes sited between Branksome Chine and the boundary with Bournemouth. These groynes are wider under the water than on the beach, they will be of a similar construction to those at Sandbanks, but with modifications for better access for emergency vehicles, etc. This work will be funded entirely by DEFRA, who have also paid for all the research. Rock has been chosen for its sustainability, it will last much longer than wood and cost less, and for its appearance, following the success of the groynes at Sandbanks, which now look much more ‘natural’ than when new.

Both wood and rock groynes create dangers, with wooden groynes creating deeper scour holes and submerged rocks being potential hazards. PA had discussed the safety issue with the RNLI who have no preference for either rock or wood, both are suitable, although rock groynes are safer as they can be clambered onto if swimmers are in difficulty. The best precaution is proper surveillance and the safe swimming zones which have been introduced by the council are approved by the RNLI.

In response to PJ’s point that there had been no consultation, PA pointed out that there was a public consultation in 2003, open council meetings in 2006 and 2008, a Cabinet Meeting, advertisements in local media and an application for planning permission. Written complaints will be considered before the application goes to the Planning Committee on 23 September.

PA provided copies of a series of photographs showing the groynes, sand, etc. Solutions to the problem of the wind blown sand on the promenade are being investigated, this problem is not connected with the groynes.

The amount of the pole at the end of the old buried groynes which is now showing is a clear indication of the loss of sand from the beach, this loss will be more rapid without protection. The entire project is being fully funded by DEFRA. The cost of wood groynes is £200,000 higher than for rock groynes, for which the total cost is £1.2 / £1.3 millions.

PA offered to put reports to Wallingford if PJ provides references for his allegations.

SA asked if going to the Planning Committee for consent was effectively a decision to go ahead without further consultation?

PA replied that if Planning Consent is received then the work would proceed without much delay as it needs to be completed during the winter.

PA agreed to try, if possible, to arrange a public meeting before the date of the Planning Committee.

Chairman’s Note: The full text of Cllr Adams presentation is being distributed with these Minutes.

Poole Pottery/Quay Thistle Hotel sites update: JS reported that…

1. Quayside (former) Dolphin Quays development – yet another Premises
2. Licence application for Caffe Mio, Unit D15 Quayside appeared in the Legal and Public Notices section of the last Saurday’s Daily Echo bringing the current number of restaurants/cafés to five (assuming that Marston’s Inns and Taverns have abandoned their plans for Unit D24, Part D15 and D16 Quayside)
3. Poole Pottery factory buildings in Sopers Lane – no further developments.

1. Former Poole Pottery & Swan Inn site – ditto
2. Quay Thistle Hotel site – the current application for the Quay Thistle Hotel site includes 910 sq m of office/retaill, despite the empty units at the adjacent building, Quayside.
3. Old Orchard House. 39-61. High Street – No further developments

Planning Enforcement, TPOs/Tree replacements – update:

JS said that he had heard nothing further regarding the S210(1) unlawful felling summons re 19 Mornish Road.

Andy Dearing, Team Leader of Poole’s Planning Enforcement Unit has reported to JS on the successful prosecution of Mr Paul Kenrick trading as Urban Tree and Landscaping Ltd, for illegally cutting down a pine tree at a property in Haven Road, Sandbanks, on 06/06/07.

Mr Kenrick fined £500 plus 5000 costs. J said that what really is galling is that this was a deliberate attempt to gain a view over the harbour and the paltry fine that the offender gets for felling a tree.

The case was brought to the council’s attention following information from the Assn that an illegal felling was due to take place in or around the area in June last year

Fitzmor Homes Ltd sites at 49 & 49a Haven Road & 7 Balcombe Road -a letter was sent to Fitzmor Homes Ltd last month requesting the removal of the illegal advertisement board and flagpoles at this site.within 14 days.

21 Wilderton Road – It is alleged that this bungalow is in multiple occupation. NS said that he had received some correspondence about this and would forward this to JS.

Council Tax 2008/09 & Financial Monitoring report: JS said that there had been no Cabinet meeting since the Assn’s last meeting and, consequently, there was no Financial Monitoring Report to comment on.

Poole Partnership: JS reported that in his capacity as Poole Partnership Steering Group representative for Residents’ & Tenants’ Assns and Community Groups, he had been invited to a meeting on 03/09/08 which provides an opportunity for members of the LSP partnerships to hear about progress in delivering the current Local Transport Plan and to share ideas which could influence future plans.

Lindsay Road to Station Road Corridor/Speeding: JS reported that at the Transportation Advisory Group meeting on 31/07/08, the go-ahead was given to put in cycle lanes on the southern side of the Penn Hill Ave and ban parking on the northern side of Penn Hill Avenue.

Canford Cliffs Village: JS said that he had received a complaint about the glass surround (to the decking) at ‘Bella Rosa’ (formerly BH13) 37 Haven Road which has been re-instated in a brown smoked glass making even more difficult for drivers to exit from Cliff Drive. JS has been advised that Transportation Services are presently understaffed in their Development Control Section at the moment but have promised to get back to JS as soon as they can.

Skywalk Tower, Sandbanks (Application No. 06/12765/016/F): No further developments.

Local Bus Services: Chris Harris, Public Relations Manager has advised JS that with effect from 22 September 2008 it is intended to re-route the 50 buses travelling inwards towards Westbourne and Bournemouth so that they will run via Tower Road, The Avenue and Western Road between Pinewood Road and Robert Louis Stevenson Avenue.

This will restore an inward service to Westbourne and Bournemouth for people living in Tower Road and in the Ashton Court area

Public Rights of Way:

Update re ‘Branksome Park Conservation Area is at RISK’

Branksome Park Conservation Area –

31 Western Avenue (Demolish existing house (retain pool complex) and erect 1 no. detached house with integral garage) and Conservation Area application to demolish existing dwelling) JS reported that the Appeal Hearing (APP/Q1255/E/08/2067926) is due to be held on 23/09/08 at 10:00 at the Guildhall, Market Street, Poole and encouraged as many members as possible to attend. He said that it would also be an opportunity to see the refurbished Guildhall.

Haig Ave & Lawrence Drive – No further developments.

Possible Charitable Status for Assn: JS said that he had in mind setting up a small Sub-Committee to look at this issue as, if the Assn is to apply for Charitable Status, there is a need for at least two members to agree to become Trustees.

Action to prevent Travellers accessing Beach Road car park: Cllr Mrs Haines promised to investigate but, as far as JS is aware, there have been no further developments.

3. NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

KA reported that…

7A Bury Road (Demolish bungalow and build a 3 storey dwelling with basement and parking) – A letter of objection has been lodged on behalf of the Assn on 07/08/08 but the neighbours affected by this developmen would welcome support from members.

21 Bury Road (Demolish existing dwelling and garage and erect a replacement house with integral garage) – Application withdrawn on 25/07/08.

10 Wilderton Road (Demolish existing dwelling and erect replacement dwelling) – Appeal dismissed on 05/08/08.

140 Canford Cliffs Road (Erect 8 no.3 bed and 1 no.2 bed flats with  underground parking and cycle store) – Application registered on 24/07/08. NB Application for 6 x 3-bed and 1 x 4bed flats was granted with conditions on 24/07/08

146-148 Canford Cliffs Road (Demolish existing and erect three storey block of 9 flats with basement parking) – Letter of objection lodged on behalf of Assn on 06/08/08.

JS reported that…

1, 2 & 3 Alington Close & 2a & 2b Shore Road (Demolish existing and erect 6 x two/ three storey blocks comprising 32 flats with basement car parking, accessed off Alington Close and associated works and landscaping) (Amended scheme) granted by Planning Committee on 01/04/08. Awaiting response from Poole Council’s Chief Executive to pre-action protocol letter from Solicitors.

75 Canford Cliffs Road (Demolition of part of existing garage and erect new garage with pitched roof and rooms in roof space. Form new vehicular access and drive) registered on 16/07/08. Team Leader, Development Control (Transportation Services) wrote on 23/07/08 “All I can say at this stage is that on Classified Roads we try to limit access to residential properties to 1 per plot. However we must consider the individual merits of each application before we make our recommendation.

Other current planning issues

16-18 Durrant Road (Demolish existing and erect 2 blocks of 6 flats (12 total) with single linked basement garage ) & 1 – 3 Compton Avenue (Demolish existing and erect a block of 11 flats & 1 maisonette with basement parking Revised Scheme) – both applications were granted by Planning Committee on 17/04/08 and are currently subject to review by the Local Government Ombudsman.

Land rear of 2 Mornish Road (Erect 3-storey house with detached garage to be accessed from Mornish Road) – Application registered on 25/06/08. Local concerns. The application has been ‘Red-carded’.

19 Sandbourne Road (Demolish existing and erect 5 apartments over 3 storeys with basement parking and associated cycle and bin store) – Letter of objection lodged on behalf of Assn on 24/06/08. Last document posted on the website is from Transportation Services who recommend “Defer for amended plans and information address parking, etc…”

12 St Clair Road (Construct 2 detached dwellings with associated parking as amended by plans received 14.07.08 (Revised Scheme) granted by Planning Committee on 24/07/08. Earlier application subject to Planning Inquiry (APP/Q1255/A/08/2076118) The date for Final comments was 11/08/08

5 Shore Road (Demolish existing dwelling and erect detached house with integral garage) – Application withdrawn on 22/07/08. Revised plans expected.

5A Shore Road (Demolish existing dwelling and erect detached house with integral garage) – Application withdrawn on 22/07/08. Revised plans expected.

1 Over Links Drive (Sever land and erect a detached house with integral garage) – application withdrawn on 27/03/08. Awaiting revised application.

1 Shore Road (Demolish existing and erect 7 apartments on 4 floors with basement parking) – Application registered on 10/06/08

1A-3 Chaddesley Glen (Demolish existing dwellings and erect 2 No blocks of 6 x 2 bed apartments (12 in total) on three floors with new vehicular access) – refused on 07/08/08.

Canford Cliffs, Promenade 2

(a) Construction of 18 new beach huts) – application registered on 22/01/08 but this is still a ‘Current’ application.

(b) Conservation Area application to demolish 8 beach huts (nos 99-106) adjacent to Canford Cliffs Chine. – application registered on 13/02/08 but this is still a ‘Current’ application.

8 Shore Road – BPCCRA will continue to monitor possible tree work application. An entrance has been created on the Haven Road side of this property.

60A Kings Avenue (Tree Replacement Notices to replant 3 Scots Pines) – subject to Written Representation appeal (GOSW Ref SW/THM/8147/1038)

1. ACCOUNTS TO DATE In the absence of JD, JS reported that the funds at end of July amounted to £35,142.12
2. ANY OTHER BUSINESS

Footpath 82 (Panorama Road to the foreshore) – JS reported that the Sandbanks Assn is in the process of distributing Evidence forms re this access path. Defra are allowing the Assn to Appeal and forms need to be in a.s.a.p.

JS said that he’d agreed to fill a form but if any other member might be willing to do so, could they please let JS know. The odd photo might be helpful as one the Sandbanks Association members, John Newton, is putting together a comprehensive dossier as he did for the Sandbanks car park footpath & Bund.

The Sandbanks Assn has been informed by Sophia Thompson (Poole Council’s Rights of Way Officer) that evidence prior to 2003 (before the notices went up) is required and only leisure pursuits should be mentioned i.e walking, swimming, children etc.

Tesco Store, Poole Road (Extensions to existing store at front and rear Installation of ATM Unit. Alterations to vehicular access and car park & Installation of enclosed entrance lobby) – applications registered on 04/08/08. JS said that it had been suggest that

1) for the safety of pedestrians along Lindsay Road that the Tesco car park entrance/exit should be widened marginally to allow for a central refuge for pedestrians, wheelchair users, pushchairs etc. The crossing here is currently difficult as visibility is poor for pedestrians and drivers do rush to exit the site.

2) for the vehicles exiting the car park onto Lindsay Road that a speed bump is put in the car park just as the cars reach the ‘bend’ immediately before the exit.

3) along Lindsay road there is no longer a right hand lane from which to turn into the car park coming from Westbourne direction thereby slowing the traffic on the main route when cars badly position themselves. This right hand turn lane should be reintroduced if there is room given the cycle lanes now on Lindsay Road.

Football Tournament at Branksome Chine – JS reminder members about this event on 16^th & 17^th August

Chairman’s note: This event has been cancelled as I understand that the Sponsers have withdrawn their sponsorship.

Canford Cliffs Chine: KA said that he had been asked by a member to raise the issue of the state of this Chine, brambles, pampas grass, etc.. KA had spoken to Cllr Adams about this prior to the meeting and PA had agreed to meet KA to look at this.

In answer to a question from Andy Reed, NS stated that proposals for a playground for young children at the top of Canford Cliffs Chine had received favourable consideration at the most recent Canford Cliffs & Penn Hill Area Committee meeting.

8 St Osmunds Road – Rose Rogers expressed the concern of Torbay Road residents about the proposed demolition of this house by railway bridge to be replaced with large ‘glass type’ home of the sort seen at Sandbanks. Letters of objection have been lodged by local residents. JS suggested that a local resident should ask for the application to be ‘Red-carded’.

JS closed the meeting at 8.30pm.

Date of next Meeting: The next meeting is on Wednesday 10^th September 2008 in the Main Hall at Branksome St Aldhelm’s Parish Centre (Entrance via Lindsay Road)