Open Letter relating to the sale of the Pier Fields site in - TopicsExpress



          

Open Letter relating to the sale of the Pier Fields site in Skegness, A/0 ELDC Executive Committee and council officers, Dear Sir / Madam, A) I would like you to consider the following points relating to ELDC selling off the site of prime foreshore frontage identified as the Pier Fields . B) There is an existing site in Skegness with an extant consent for an hotel development and where there is evidence of market interest. Have the applicants evidenced that there is demand for an additional area of land to be permitted for an hotel use? C) Have the applicants for the Foreshore site adequately addressed flood risk issues? This should be given extra consideration as this is the only point on the foreshore that floods on every occasion the sea breeches its defences. D) Have ELDC and the applicants adequately addressed access issues and the issues of increased town centre traffic, relating to this site ? E) Clearly there is an aspiration for ELDC to deliver the Skegness Vision document, which You appear to be giving some weight to as a planning document given that you appear to be intending to show this to the inspector who will look at the local plan. – How does the Foreshore hotel application accord with this vision and where is the link to delivering the proposed relief road which is at the heart of this Vision? F) What kind of community benefits package are the Foreshore applicants offering? G) Is the Foreshore development likely to have an impact on any conservation areas in Skegness and have these impacts been fully addressed? H) I have grave concerns that the client that is in negotiations for this parcel of land with ELDC, was already at an advanced stage of purchasing land for the same usage from the private sector. In fact I believe that a full flood risk assessment had been carried out on the David Scotts land by the EA at a considerable expense, so this puts the intervention of ELDC into question. I personally believe that a council should only intervene if the private sector is failing and it is obvious in this case it was not. The depriving of one of the towns local business of this opportunity of this sale is totally wrong, especially as this plot was far more suitable for this particular development. Please note that I have been informed that ELDC contacted directly the developer/agent for Premier Inns, stating that the The Pier Field site was a supposedly better site for the hotel! I) The original restrictive covenants imposed on the Land during the 1920’s by the Earl of Scarborough, were lifted on 6th December 2006, the Deed of release was not registered at the Land Registry until 25th June this year, some 8 years later. I do not consider to be open practice that I consider councillors and their officers should be undertaking and it has left a minimal opportunity for objections from the public. One would think that the council knowing the vast public outcry over these actions was the purpose of this restrictive window of opportunity or am I being cynical ? J) The whole scenario of this proposed project was kept under wraps from the businesses and public who should have been openly consulted about proposals for this piece of land, never mind the potential objections to the councils proposals. There was a total denial by ELDC, its Exec, its councillors and its officers over this issue, this stance was maintained at the open public meeting on the 1st of July 2014. That is until one of the public actually presented ELDCs own plans for the proposed hotel, which had been internally circulated.. How can local people have faith in ELDC, its Exec and its officers handling of this issue, if they are undertaking such dubious acts of skullduggery ! K) I think that it needs to be noted that the Skegness public and businesses are not against the Premier Inn coming to Skegness, but the consensus is that this plot of land is unsuitable for this purpose. L) I feel that you need to study your own policy points listed below; 14.For your Council to dispose of the Land as above will be a wholesale departure from its published statements of objectives as set out in and evidenced by both its Foreshore Development Principles of 2012, and of its general Local Plan of 1999 as confirmed in 2007 (“Local Plan”). Particular inconsistencies with your Council’s local Plan and Foreshore Development Principles are as follows:- a. Of the 7 objectives in your Foreshore Development Principles, the intended sale and hotel building would involve a complete removal of the open space which the Land now constitutes, and would thus breach – indeed fly in the face of – principles number 3,5,6 and 7 (enhanced public realm, provision of open space, improved access and movement, and realising the potential of the foreshores natural assets). In short, the majority of those principles would be breached. b. Similarly, many of your Council’s policies in its Local Plan would be departed from completely in the event of a sale and development as intended and described above. To name but a few of the policies in your Council’s Local Plan which would be breached by the intended sale and development, we have noted inter-alia:- i. Chapter 3- Policy ENV24, you are pledged to protect open spaces and frontages including visual outlooks. ii. Chapter 2- Outline policy to create and improve amenity and quality of life for present and future residents. iii. In particular we refer you to paragraph number 3.85 and 3.86 of your Local Plan referring to open spaces. Paragraph 3.86 provides “in exceptional circumstances... an open space or frontage may be so significant as to prevent development of a site”. iiii. Under the heading in chapter 7 “main costal holiday areas, policy T4 at paragraphs 7.15-7.19 provides as follows: 7.15 The Council feels they should be recognised as such and should not continue to grow in an unstructured way. Policy T3 identifies the opportunity to improve their individual attractiveness and thereby broaden the appeal of the coastal resorts generally. They have a valuable role to play in consolidating and supporting the more established resort centres. It is also important that off street parking is maintained and new development here will generally not be permitted where it involves the loss of available car parking spaces. Policy T4 Mablethorpe and Skegness Foreshore Within the defined foreshores at Mablethorpe and Skegness, development will be permitted which adds to, widens the scope of, or raises the quality of, holiday facilities and attractions. Development (which may range from quiet dune walks or formal gardens to fairs or themed attractions), should reflect the traditional seaside holiday character in its design and appearance whilst at the same time protecting, improving or enhancing the foreshore environment. Other uses will only be permitted where they are essential for or directly relate to tourist amenities. 7.16 The Council considers that the future of Mablethorpe and Skegness as the principal holiday resorts lies in continuing to attract holidaymakers and day trippers. The respective foreshore areas provide the major attractions and are most important in creating and improving the traditional seaside holiday resort image. 7.17 In essence, the foreshores are free-to-enter leisure parks which should be capable of accommodating the widest and most contemporary style of design and decoration. Their character is epitomised by a lively sense of movement, bright colours, noise, contemporary style of design and decoration and informality. Development should respect the character of the locality to maintain the range of activities within the foreshore. Uses, which detract from, or dilute, this character will generally not be permitted. 7.18 At the same time these areas act both as an effective buffer and a link between the towns shops, restaurants and accommodation areas and the beach - the resorts main attraction. The Council feels it important to separate and differentiate between the identities and character of these zones; In this way, holidaymakers can better organise their time between different activities which adds to their enjoyment and appreciation of the resort. 7.19 The concentration of brash entertainment and leisure into a segregated area also helps to protect the sensitivities and amenities of other residential, commercial or quieter leisure areas. A management strategy is necessary to take account of season to season changes in entertainment trends. For each area the Council will prepare a foreshore development brief and management strategy. Policy T5 Coastal Amusement Centres In Mablethorpe (including Trusthorpe and Sutton on Sea), Skegness, Chapel St. Leonards and Ingoldmells, the development of amusement centres will be permitted only within the areas allocated for such use or in the local holiday service centres identified in Policy T3.” M) My objection lies in the text above, as the paragraphs make it abundantly clear that Skegnesss main attraction and its economic viability, is its day visits by tourists, whose points of interest are : the beach, the pier, the Foreshore including the Pier Field piece of land. N) The fact that this piece of land is under utilised as an area for attractions / displays / shows etc by the council beggars belief. There can be no justification for this proposed sale by the council. I have identified two alternative sites in this letter that are far more suitable places for the Premier Inn. In fact if you look around the country, virtually all Premiers Inns are on the edge of resorts and not near the front and never on the foreshore. So I feel that the council have let the residents and all of the hotels / guest houses on the sea front down, who depend on the tourist trade and the council has been proved to be derelict in its duties by its actions. O) The area of land known as the the Pier Field has been used as a public park, an open spaced area leading on to Skegnesss great beach, for nearly 100 years ! This was the original concept of the Earl of Scarborough, for an uncramped frontage without buildings over a certain height being permitted. This use of the Land has been completely in tune with the covenants which the Earl of Scarborough imposed on the Foreshore and nearby areas in the 1920’s and 1930’s in the interests of the public amenity for visitors and residents of Skegness. P) The most worrying factor is that the council are offering the Premier Inn prime frontage which will considerably effect other local hotels because it will blight their views, but also put it at an advantage because of it views of the coastline. This is at a time when hotels are struggling along the coast and this could be the final straw that breaks the camels back, as many will not be able to compete as the Premier Inn will hold the best views of the coastline. R) Cllr Steve O Dare, ELDC Portfolio Holder stated at the Skegness Area meeting that he would be supporting the Premier Inn if it was a case of it coming or not coming to Skegness. After the evidence that I have viewed, it is obvious that it would have been coming to Skegness regardless of the councils actions. In fact it appears that the council has just jumped at an opportunity to fill its coffers at the expense of local businesses and the tourist trade. If he maintains this stance after viewing all of the evidence relating to the previous purchase negotiations with David Scott and Roy Sanderson by the Premier Inn, perhaps he should exclude himself from the exec meeting as he will have shown that he has already pre decided wrongly his course of action. S) This does not take into consideration the loss in parking revenue at an estimated £85,000 + per year from the Pier Field site and the proposed cost of laying Tarmac on the old kiddies play and crazy golf area. T) The fact that the proposed hotel if it was allocated on the outskirts of Skegness, at the new Skegness Country Business Park, where there are already plans for a hotel to be built, it would not conflict the interests of Skegness, its businesses and residents, it could actually help the development of the proposed outer relief road between the A52 and the A158 , leading onto Ingoldmells. This would help Skegness develop and become more attractive as a tourist centre ! U) I feel that the council, its officers and Exec need to wake up and smell the coffee. This proposed sell off, of the Pier Field is counter productive for Skegness and should be withdrawn forthwith. If the council want to develop this area, they should develop it as an attraction area of Skegness, not a blot on the landscape! I look forward to a full response on the above points by ELDC, its officers, its Exec and Councillors. Regards, Cllr Chris Pain
Posted on: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:57:39 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015