{"id":247,"date":"2016-10-05T23:55:12","date_gmt":"2016-10-05T22:55:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bcs.mypagepreview.com\/?p=247"},"modified":"2016-10-05T23:55:12","modified_gmt":"2016-10-05T22:55:12","slug":"committee-minutes-october-2016","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/committee-minutes\/committee-minutes-october-2016\/","title":{"rendered":"Committee Minutes October 2016"},"content":{"rendered":"
BOURNEMOUTH CIVIC SOCIETY<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Minutes of a Meeting of the Committee held at 18 Sandbourne Road<\/strong><\/p>\n at 2pm on Monday 24th<\/sup> October 2016<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Secretary), John Soane (Built Environment Officer), and Paul Newsome (Minutes Secretary).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Local Government Reorganisation.<\/strong><\/p>\n Before the formal meeting, Tony Williams, CEO of Bournemouth Borough Council, explained the reasons why a reorganisation of local government in Dorset was essential.\u00a0 All councils had seen a significant cut in government funding, this had hit the County particularly hard, with the Districts suffering less than the unitary authorities.\u00a0 A single council for the whole County was not considered to be practical, but two unitary authorities, one in the east and one in the west was considered to be the best way forward.\u00a0 In the East, an authority including Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch was not only workable but would include all the facilities desirable for a large authority \u2013 port, airport, university, heritage and a vibrant tourist culture.\u00a0 The inclusion of East Dorset would strengthen this authority, but would leave West Dorset struggling in a rural area with a sparse population.\u00a0 Tony explained that the options were listed as 2A \u2013 Bournemouth, Christchurch, Poole and East Dorset or 2B \u2013 the authority without East Dorset.\u00a0 Following questions from the Committee, Tony confirmed that matters such as planning would be dealt with by local sub-committees.\u00a0 In a vote, after Tony had left, 4 members of the committee<\/p>\n voted for 2A, three for 2B and 1 absented from the vote.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>The minutes for the meeting on 22nd<\/sup> September were agreed.<\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0 Matters Arising from the Minutes:\u00a0 <\/strong>There were no matters arising<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Ken reported that there was a meeting on 10th<\/sup> October at<\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>which the latest local development scheme was discussed and the evolution of the LDF to a Borough<\/p>\n Plan explained.\u00a0 It was agreed that once the proposals were publicised the Society set up a working<\/p>\n party to comment on\u00a0 current \u2018saved\u2019 policies and any necessary new ones so that conservation,<\/p>\n heritage and development control policies were not weakened..<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n offered to James<\/p>\n John B, Ken and James had seen Toby and Duncan of BDC and Jean and David and Elaine had attended the presentation at the Hilton Hotel on 20th<\/sup> October where there was a 3D model backed by knowledgeable staff from the Bournemouth Development Company.\u00a0 The proposal was for 400 units (1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments) in 3 buildings with underground car parking.\u00a0 Most of the currently treed area would be retained.\u00a0 Overall the design was considered appropriate for the site and much better than previous schemes. \u00a0John S would check the plans for comment.<\/p>\n Plans for re-build\/upgrade would be on show at the Hallmark Hotel on 27th<\/sup> October at John S and Elaine would attend.<\/p>\n Plans for 14 flats was uninspiring and did not fit with the<\/p>\n surroundings.\u00a0 16 letters of complaint.\u00a0 Should be refused.<\/p>\n Current building should be preserved, plans were inappropriate<\/p>\n Ken, James and Elaine had met the architect and viewed the plans which they generally welcomed and thought worthy of support. John S thought the plans included an impressive tower but architectural divisions were needed to break up the horizontal dominance of the main block.\u00a0 The architect had invited suggestions. JS would follow up.<\/p>\n There were many objections to the plan to replace the substantial Arts & Crafts house.\u00a0 Should be refused<\/p>\n The proposed 6 houses were an awful design<\/p>\n An acceptable design<\/p>\n The suggested overblown Victorian mansion block was<\/p>\n In-appropriate for a site which should be the entrance to the historic West Cliff<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Sally attended the October meeting and reported as follows:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n the main topic.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n the Gold award for a large city in the South East.\u00a0 Beryl won an award for the best back garden<\/p>\n <\/p>\n still places available for the Christmas lunch (\u00a326)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00a015.1\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Current Account.\u00a0 <\/strong>The current account had a credit of \u00a31,995.57; CAF balance \u00a37,403.31.<\/p>\n 15.2\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Signatories.\u00a0 <\/strong>Signatories for the current account should be any two of the President, Chairman, Jean and Beryl and for the CAF account should be the President and Jean<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 16.1\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0Andrew England.\u00a0 <\/strong>The next meeting would be on Friday 11th<\/sup> November<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n There being no more business the meeting was closed at 16.10<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Click to read more<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=247"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=247"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=247"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bournemouthcivicsociety.org.uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=247"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n