Email from Ed Webster 3rd February 2014

As you may know this site does not accord to the adopted core strategy and thus far I see no reference to it being a departure from policy that went through examination in public presided over by the Planning Inspectorate. I expect they forgot this important fact

I have had a look at the planning application and my initial observations are as follows and in no particular order.

1.         Soil survey. The statement included within the application refers to the soil sampling in 2002. By the Council's own admission the risings from the foundations of the new fire station were spread over the remaining land. Other than being poor practice by spreading contaminated soil the way it was described you in effect spread whatever contamination that comes out of the ground. I have 30 plus years in the construction industry and we would never rely on a soil report dating from 2002. It maybe ok for indicative purposes but nothing else. The best thing they could do with the report is chuck it away and do the job properly. I pity the officer who has put his name to the report in the application and I hope he is suitably qualified to make such judgments. 

2.         The plans lack any detail and are little more than a location plan so it is hard to pass comment other than the detail is inadequate

3.         Access from such a major highway for a quasi residential use would not have been considered when the Highway Safety Audit was undertaken for the fire station therefore this needs to be done so the councillors have the correct information

4.         Flooding has a PPS25 exception site survey been undertaken which is required for site in a flood zone 3

5.         How will flood water be mitigated as raising the site still further puts pressure on an already burdened system. Survey Poole Council please

6.         What happens to the balance of the site as this looks the target for extensions.

7          If you go on the net you will find a Government Guide on how to develop such sites. It is called Developing Gypsy & Traveller Sites a Good Practice guide. This takes you through what is required for camps including transit / temporary sites. Needless to say Poole has not published any health and safety statement the scheme does not provide any form of play area on site etc. Government also advise on how a consultation process should take place somehow it does not adhere to Poole policy

8. The council advise there will be no disabled access / facility. I think this is actually discrimination under the 2005 Disability Descrimination Act

9. Highway noise no report provided. This a noisy location as is the park and ride and I doubt that they are considered suited to development on this issue alone

It is all very well designing to the minimum but there are standards that have to be followed and Poole seem to fall well short

The Council are not offering any form of legal agreement regarding the period of use. I would expect this to be secured by a Section 106 planning agreement, or similar for local government. The reason this needs to be there is if the site is approved we need guarantees that it will not be extended physically or in terms of time. What they are proposing would be able to be referred back to committee later to extend the time period the site was open with little or no consultation 

By the way there does not appear to be an application for the land adjoining B & Q yet.

I also have issues regarding cost. the reports supporting the application claim there are no significant issues to the development in that case why is it costing so much for a bit of fence and gravel. 

The scheme proposed resembles a cage so I can see this causing more problems than it resolves