BOROUGH OF POOLE
CANFORD HEATH EAST AND WEST, CREEKMOOR AND OAKDALE AREA COMMITTEE
11JUNE 2008
The Meeting commenced at 7pm and concluded at 840pm.
Present:
Councillor Adams (Chairman)
Councillors Matthews, Mrs Moore Rampton and Mrs Walton.
Also present:
Steve Cattle, Legal and Democratic Services
Graham Spicer; Transportation Services
Members of the public present: approximately 30
CHE1.08 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Allen, Burden
Mrs Butt, Curtis and Gillard.
CHE2.08 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
CHE3.08 MINUTES
Councillor Rampton drew attention to M.CHE39.08 – paragraph 4 – and asked for the reference to ‘Creekmoor Link Magazine’ to be deleted and substituted with ‘bi-monthly Police meeting’.
RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Meeting held on 12 March 2008 having been previously circulated, be approved as a correct record with the deletion in CHE39.08 of ‘Creekmoor Link Magazine’ and substituted with
‘bi-monthly Police meeting’ and signed by the Chairman.
CHE4.08 PROPOSAL TO CREATE A BY-LAW TO CONTROL BAIT DIGGING WITHIN HOLES BAY AND TO DESIGNATED PART OF HOLES BAY AS A LOCAL NATURE RESERVE
Jez Martin Leisure Services, presented a report on behalf of the Head of Leisure Services, advising the Committee on the level of bait digging that was occurring in parts of Poole Harbour, its effects and possible means of controlling the activity in future.
He stated that during the last few years the level of bait digging in Holes Bay had increased causing disruption and concern to residents of Hamworthy and disturbance to wildfowl and waders in this area. In 2005 Natural England agreed a Code of Practice with Solent Area Bait Digging Association, to which many of the bait diggers belonged, in order to control the situation. This approach worked to a small degree but did not cover non-members and the bait digging continued causing disturbance to residents and wildlife alike.
Having tried the informal approach to the situation, and not achieving the desired results, the next option was formal control through a Byelaw to control bait digging activity in this part of the Harbour and designate a part of Holes Bay as a local Nature Reserve.
The proposed Byelaw was;
“No bait digging in Holes Bay north of the Railway line at all times, and no bait digging during January and February south of the Railway line within Holes Bay”.
This statement reflected the fact that some parts of Holes Bay were more sensitive than others and a less restrictive approach south of the Railway would ensure the most sensitive areas to the north were protected. The proposal for a ban below the Railway line during January and February was based on the most sensitive times of the year for the over-wintering bird population. The area proposed to be designated as a local Nature Reserve was the area north of the Railway line.
Formal consultation would take place shortly to include displays in Libraries and information on the Council’s website etc.
The Chairman suggested that as a display could be put up in the Oakdale Library and Jez Martin agreed to take this on board.
Councillor Rampton hoped that there would be suitable signage showing which areas were effected by the Byelaw and supported the designation of the area as a local Nature Reserve.
In response to a question Jez Martin stated that the Police and Council Staff would be empowered to enforce the Byelaw.
Those present at the Meeting supported the proposal.
RESOLVED that this Area Committee;
(i) notes the actions that had taken place already to try and manage the bait digging situation;
(ii) supports the public consultation on the proposed Byelaw; and
(iii) supports the designation of part of Holes Bay as a local Nature Reserve.
For: Unanimous
CHE5.08 STINSFORD ROAD – PROPOSED WIDTH RESTRICTION
Graham Spicer, Transportation Services, presented a report on possible alterations to the existing traffic arrangements in Stinsford Road.
The last Meeting the Area Committee had received a report from Ward Councillors on their recent consultation on traffic conditions in Stinsford Road. Residents had been asked to consider three options and “do nothing”. The favoured option was to introduce a width restriction. Outline designs for width restrictions with alternative methods of accommodating emergency access had been prepared.
The Meeting was advised that both alternatives would cost over £50,000, which was beyond the scope of the Area Committee. Funding would not be available from the Council’s Capital Programme as this was directed at Local Transport Plan priorities. It would be appropriate, though, to accept contributions from the Developers in the Industrial Estate to fund these measures as a way of preventing lorries from using the residential section of the road. In the meantime, the existing signage could be enhanced by placing additional signs at the northern end of Stinsford Road, to complement the existing advance direction signs which warned drivers that there was a weight limit ahead. The costs of the signs would be approximately £950. The Area Committees budget was already fully committed for this year, but these signs could be a candidate for funding in future years.
In response to a question, Graham Spicer stated that option 2 was the Officers preferred option.
Councillor Matthews stated that he welcomed the report and the residents had endorsed this way forward.
Councillor Mrs Moore asked if the funding for signage could come from Developers funding.
Graham Spicer stated that this could be considered as part of the scheme.
Mr Ulden asked if speed-humps could be included in view of the number of children playing in the area.
Graham Spicer stated that this could be considered but that a lot of residents did not favour this idea and he drew attention to the fact that one of the chicanes would still be in place if the width restriction was provided.
Mr Ulden stated that even with the chicanes vehicles still sped along Stinsford Road.
Mr Cameron was concerned at the costs and that it could be some years before the proposals were implemented.
Graham Spicer replied stating that the proposal was dependent upon development taking place on the Industrial Estate.
Members of the Area Committee welcomed the proposals and felt that the preferred option could be agreed at a later date with Ward Members.
RESOLVED that
(i) the Area Committee approves the principle of introducing a width restriction along the lines of the alternatives as set out in the report by the Head of Transportation Services;
(ii) development contributions be invited from any appropriate developments in the area; and
(iii) additional signs, warning of the weight limit ahead, be erected at the Canford Heath Road end of Stinsford Road, when funds allow.
For: Unanimous
CHE6.08 TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS- PALMER ROAD AND HARWELL ROAD
Graham Spicer, presented a report on objections which had been received to recently advertised Traffic Regulations Orders. The meeting was advised that the following Orders had been recently advertised:
(a) Harwell Road – parking restrictions
(b) Palmer Road/ Connell Road – parking restrictions
Representations had been received in respect of the Harwell Road Order and these were summarised in the report. There had only been one representation in relation to the Palmer Road/Connell Road Order; and this was a letter of support.
Graham Spicer stated that, in view of the objections received, he wished to amend the proposed restrictions on the southerly arm of Harwell Road making the proposals less restrictive. This would remove 3 of the 5 objections received.
Councillor Mrs Walton stated that the problems in Oakdale meant that there would be displaced traffic if more and more restrictions were implemented. The area as a whole was being looked at by Transportation Services to solve the problems of “fly” parking.
The Chairman in response to a question on the implementation of isolated restrictions stated that it was essential to look at the Oakdale area as a whole. Officers were looking at the “fly” parking in the area and drew attention to the number of people who parked their vehicles in Oakdale and then walked into the Town Centre to work.
Councillor Matthews was concerned that the proposals in Harwell Road would exacerbate problems in Learoyd Road and questioned what the reduction in waiting restrictions would actually acheive?
Graham Spicer responded by stating that the restrictions would protect parents walking along this section of road and primarily would be implemented for safety reasons.
The Chairman felt that the plan submitted with the report was not clear enough to make any proper assessment of the reduced restrictions in Harwell Road and felt that this matter should be deferred to the next Meeting when better plans could be made available.
A resident questioned whether it was worth spending the money on this restriction in Harwell Road.
A resident drew attention to the unsafe practices taking place on the Industrial Estate and on many occasions vehicles were parked on yellow lines at the junction in Harwell Road and that parents walking their children to and from school were being put at risk. These unsafe practices could be avoided by not having lorries in the section of road.
A resident stated that a lot of parents walked to and from school along this road but that the restrictions would just push traffic further along to a path which was used on a regular basis for school trips, making it more dangerous.
As regards the Palmer Road proposal, a resident of Palmer Road drew attention to the all day parking that took place causing problems for residents. A Petition had been submitted to the Council last year drawing attention to the problems but no response had been forthcoming. The proposal in respect of Palmer Road would merely displace parking further up the road and a 2 hour restriction was needed. Residents were concerned at the situation at the start and finish of the school day together with access for emergency vehicles, if this was needed. Graham Spicer said that following imposition of the restrictions a review could be carried out to ascertain whether parking displacement had occurred.
RESOLVED that,
(i) consideration of the objections to the Harwell Road Traffic Regulation Order in Harwell Road be deferred to the next Meeting and that clear plans be provided at that Meeting, and
(ii) the Palmer Road Order be made as advertised but that the possibility of displaced parking be reviewed following implementation.
For: Unanimous
CHE7.08 CABOT LANE CYCLE FACILITIES
Graham Spicer advised the Area Committee of decisions taken by the Transportation Advisory Group and Portfolio Holder regarding proposals for cycle facilities along Cabot Lane.
A report recently considered by the Transportation Advisory Group brought forward three sets of proposals designed to link up the existing cycle-lane provision in the area. The main features were:
· Conversion of the existing footway fronting Esporta to shared use (no widening required)
· The widening of the footway fronting the Grammar School by removing/re-levelling the existing embankment
· Widening the footway east of the Albany Park access within the existing highway boundary
· The use of the existing footway west of the Albany Park access (no widening possible)
· Upgrading of the existing pedestrian crossing signals, and additional provision, at the Waterloo Road junction to provide full Toucan facilities
The Meeting was advised that the Transportation Advisory Group had not recommended approval of the provision of a new Toucan crossing close to Albany Park/Esporta and in view of this the Area Committee was asked to approve the extension of the cycling facilities on the southern side of Cabot Lane as far as Broadstone Way.
Councillor Rampton welcomed the proposals and supported the links with other cycle-lanes in the area.
RESOLVED that the report on the provision of cycling facilities in Cabot Lane be noted and approval be given to extend the shared use pedestrian/ cycle path on the South side of Cabot Lane to Broadstone Way.
For: Unanimous
CHE8.08 OPEN FORUM
(i) Three Bears Nursery
The Chairman welcomed to the meeting from the Three Bears Nursery in Oakdale. He stated that the parents had attended the meeting to put forward their concerns regarding pre-school nursery provision in the area in view of the closure of the Nursery. He emphasised that the Council was concerned with regard to this issue and a meeting had been set up with Senior Officers of the Council and Councillors on Friday, 13th June 2008 on this matter.
Mrs Burn addressed the meeting and stated that her child attended the Three Bears Pre-School Nursery which was an excellent facility in the area and the staff were trusted and well liked. Additionally, the Nursery had flexible hours to suit her employment requirements as a Nurse. She stated that Three Bears Nursery was closing and this decision would affect her child both socially and from an environmental point of view. The decision would also dramatically affect over 50 children and their families who would now be displaced to other facilities in the area. Her family was affected due to the fact that she would now have to drive her child some distance adding to congestion and pollution. Undoubtedly this would be the situation with many other parents. Additionally, this would also affect her income. Whilst it was appreciated that the Nursery was a private concern the Council needed to fill this void.
The Chairman stated that the Council was conscious of this issue and had been working with the Three Bears Nursery to find a solution. Councillor Gillard had spent a considerable amount of time with the organisers to find an alternative location. Officers had also prepared up-to-date lists of available Pre-School places in the area. The Council had a duty to provide a certain number of Pre-School places and Poole was well provided and there were spaces available nearby. The situation was the private business had gone out of business due to the fact that the Church wanted to redevelop their premises meaning that there was no longer room for the Nursery. The Council was conscious of this and alternative accommodation had been sought.
Mrs Burn highlighted the fact that other Pre-Schools and Schools operated at different times which affected the community as a whole. She felt that having different drop off and pick up times and school timings was a real problem for her and other parents.