Full Name Organisation Details Comment ID Question 1 - The draft SPD provides an approach to planning for the future of the seafront. Please let Key Points us know your views on this approach. Mrs J Prett 62 I have just discovered the council's seafront plan by chance & am surprised it has not been made more Not well publicised. readily available to the people of Poole nor has it made people aware of what is planned? How many more Appreciate the need to people do not know about this? Whilst I realise we have to 'move with the times' I think that much of our move with the times but beach and coastal areas are beautifully natural and by erecting ultra modern buildings in various places not all the beaches should mentioned in the draft - will detract from the character of the residential and quiet beach areas. Do they all be made busy and noisy have to be made busy and noisy with loads of activity areas? with activity areas. Professor John Committee Member 293 2013 July Discussion Paper from The Sandbanks Association for the Borough of Poole: following receipt of Essential to retain blue Newton Sandbanks the SPS document, June 2013 version. 'Maintain high quality of a blue flag family beach: Often one hears flag status. Support SPS Association from families of their experiences of Sandbanks One Grandfather recounted the following - ˜I was brought general aims, but not over- here to the beach as a child and my wife and I brought our children. Then, they in turn brought their children commercialisation of for the classic and unforgettable family beach holiday.' Long may it continue to provide that wonderful Sandbanks Beach which experience'' It is essential that we maintain the blue flag status of Sandbanks Beach and other associated is contrary to the beaches. 1. We support the general aims as set out in the SPS document: i. Conserve the natural provisions of Poole environment ii. Improve the range of facilities to encourage visitors all the year round iii. Invest in the ageing Borough Council Act infrastructure, such as electrical supply, drainage and new toilets, to ensure the preservation of core 1986, i.e. in terms of services. 2. We note and support, but with the reservations listed below, the 3 key themes of: i.To deliver position of development, high quality design and construction to any development ii.To maintain, respect and enhance the natural height, building type. Hotel environment iii.To improve connections between the seafront beaches, the town centre and the wider unnecessary and query surrounding conurbation. However we do not support the over commercialisation of the Sandbanks Beach over viability. Number/ area, which in the present SPS document (June 2013) does not develop this area in harmony with the Sand position of beach huts is Dune nature of this part of the overall beach seafront. This type of over commercialisation was discussed at questioned. Needs to be our Sandbanks Association meeting in February 2013, and was unanimously rejected. 3. THE 1986 POOLE more research on water BOROUGH COUNCIL ACT OF PARLIAMENT This is an important Act in relation to the Sandbanks Beach taxi service, and there area, as listed in the SPS. The restrictions imposed by this act severely limit any proposed development on should be no reduction in the Sandbanks Recreation Ground Site as set out in the current version of the SPS. It is unrealistic in our parking. SUGGESTIONS: opinion to continue with meaningless developments on this area with this Act in place. So much can be done More beach huts and without infringing this Act, that would develop in harmony with the Sand Dune character of this beach. It is overnight pods, double our opinion, and that of the 98 people who attended the Sandbanks Association Coffee Morning in February, storey huts beyond Shore that this current plan should be rejected in its entirety. It is a gross overdevelopment of the Sandbanks Road only, provide more Beach area. One of the key elements of any objection appears to be the Poole Borough Council Act 1986 showers, segregated bike (copies have been made of this Act, but the significant issues are listed below). We cannot understand why lane on prom and bike the head of the group presenting this plan to the Councillors and the Public should have been unaware of hire, safety in the sun this Act, until we reminded them in February 2013, and its restrictions on development, prior to spending all display boards and lotion this council money on this development exercise. Had the people on the Committee developing this proposal and hats for sale, solar used due diligence and investigation they would have found this and the related Acts that have influence on panel lighting, increase any proposed development. Summary of key Issues in the 1986 Poole Borough Council Act of Parliament, parking including for Surf as it relates to the Recreation Ground Car Park Sandbanks. These key issues are: 1. a restriction in height of Schools, support Banks any building on this site of no more than two storeys. Many of the proposed buildings are at least three Road echelon parking if storeys. 2. specific no build areas' at either end of the car park area and along its northern and southern safe, provide cultural area boundaries. 3. specific restrictions on the type of building: i.e. only beach huts and tents, not brick or e.g. bandstand, provide concrete buildings as proposed in the present plan. In detail these are set out in the act as follows [ s - traction water-ski area, section of the act; brackets are specific and refer to a section or subsection -e.g. 3(7)(a) ] This and further support dog facilities, notes relate to the powers in relation to the Sandbanks Recreation Ground Car Park (SRGCP). 3(7) page 3 more seating at Harbour Size of car park not to exceed in the whole 1.5 hectares' This is the present size of the car park. The frontage and behind proposed plan intends to remove the bund sand dune at the western end and the sand dune at the eastern Beach Cafe, entrance info end. This is illegal. 3(7)(a) page 3 limit to the power of the Council to erect beach and other huts shops tents and sculpture at Shore and booths conferred in subsection (4) but with exclusions listed below 3(7)(b) No erection whatsoever shall Road/Banks Road be placed by the Council upon the SRGCP within - (i) 22 metres of the western boundary thereof; or [this is junction, beach zoning, the present bund sand dune] (ii) 54 metres of the eastern boundary thereof; or [this is the present sand dune restore pavilion with glass to the east]. (iii) This section delineates the metre boundaries of the SRGCP. The eastern boundary is the roof, increase buses, marker (and we will need to look at this section with a map). 3(7) (d) no erection placed under the powers of create a PROW to west of Full Name Organisation Details Comment ID Question 1 - The draft SPD provides an approach to planning for the future of the seafront. Please let Key Points us know your views on this approach. this section ...... shall exceed in height 10 metres. Many of the proposed buildings of more than two storeys car park, maintain RNLI exceed the height maximum. Provided that subject to the provisions of paragraphs (a)(b) and (c) of this presence and Beach subsection the Council may build the following listed below, on any part of the SRCGCP (remembering the Office, fixed gym exercise excluded areas listed above - which they have not taken account of) (i) Beach and other huts not exceeding points along prom. two storeys in height; and (ii) A cafe the highest point of which is not more than 14.5 metres above ordnance datum 4. Areas of concern with the present version of the SPS, which is little different from the previous versions. 1. Sandbanks Beach - a dune landscape': As set out on pages 38 and 39 in the SPS this does not maintain this beach area as a dune landscape and a family friendly beach. The proposals are a deliberate attempt to over commercialise this area with no attempt to maintain and care for the very distinct nature of this area. The SPS says ...'any change must respect the historic origins and the landscape'... balance between buildings and open space must be carefully controlled'... The present SPS does not address this but seeks to change the area and its character doing away with the concepts suggested in the opening sections of the SPS and what the local Residents Association wish to see maintained. 2. Restrictions of the 1986 Act: The one paragraph on page 38 does not address all the issues surrounding this act which prohibits many of the proposed developments in their present location in the SPS document in addition to height. The Sandbanks Association supports this Act and rejects any proposal to build buildings, flats, additional shops etc on this area of the Beach. 3. Hotel: This is not necessary, it could not be built due to the height restrictions. There are adequate Hotels already provided at the Beach, we have two large Hotels in Sandbanks, and they are not always full. Recently two hotel applications have been found to be non viable, so we question the wisdom of persisting with this concept. 4. Beach Huts: The number and position of these will need careful further discussion, both due to the location, as set in the present SPS, and the effect that this will have if beach studios are introduced, and on the overall number of beach huts when they are in great demand and there is always a waiting list.