Residents urged to have their say on controversial proposals for transit traveller site in Poole

Bournemouth Echo: CONTROVERSIAL: Residents look over plans for a traveller site at Oakdale Library CONTROVERSIAL: Residents look over plans for a traveller site at Oakdale Library

RESIDENTS are being urged to give their views on contro-versial proposals to site a mini summer traveller site in Oakdale, Poole.

As well as a 12-plot site at Marshes End, Creekmoor, Borough of Poole is also proposing a four-plot site off Broadstone Way, north of the B&Q car park.

An exhibition at Oakdale Library, which was open yesterday and this morning, is seeking views from residents, who can view the application – APP/14/0171 – on boroughofpoole.com and comment.

Ian Sutherland, who lives at Darby’s Corner, mid-way between the two applications said: “I’m not in favour of any site whatsoever. I believe the vast majority of people feel the same way as me.”

He added: “It’s not a democracy. The council takes no notice of the vast majority of people. Creekmoor residents in their dozens are saying they don’t want a site at Marshes End.”

Wife Jean Sutherland said: “I don’t think any site is a good site. Wherever you put them, nobody wants them on their doorstep.”

The Oakdale ward councillors have pointed out concerns including the smallness of the site, capital cost of £75,000, an “ugly fenced site” on the gateway to Poole, annual running costs of around £9,000 and child and road safety issues.

Oakdale ward councillors Peter Adams and Janet Walton have called on residents to let them know their concerns.

“Your three local councillors voted against the proposal on the basis that it was not value for money and insufficient consultation has taken place,” they said.

“We however understand the argument that the distance between the site and the nearest residents is quite large which should minimise any possible problems.”

Jeff Morley, team manager environmental and consumer protection, Borough of Poole said concerns had been raised about the access being on a 50mph road.

“Ninety per cent of travellers come to Poole and the conurbation because they work,” he said. “When they have exhausted the work they will be moving on along the coast.”

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:29pm Sat 22 Feb 14

apm1954 says...

elections next may no doubt we will have our say then.
elections next may no doubt we will have our say then. apm1954
  • Score: 17

1:16pm Sat 22 Feb 14

BIGTONE says...

I thought they have had their say.....the majority don't want it.
The Council obviously don't apply majority wants, like they do in elections here.
I thought they have had their say.....the majority don't want it. The Council obviously don't apply majority wants, like they do in elections here. BIGTONE
  • Score: 20

1:19pm Sat 22 Feb 14

caravan1 says...

Admiral behaviour from the Oakdale portfolio holders. Especially knowing they will be sacked by cllr Atkinson on Monday for not showing " collective responsibility" towards the incumbent cabinet.
What's good for Creekmoor porfolio holders must hold for Oakdale members one would think.
What say you cllr Atkinson?
Admiral behaviour from the Oakdale portfolio holders. Especially knowing they will be sacked by cllr Atkinson on Monday for not showing " collective responsibility" towards the incumbent cabinet. What's good for Creekmoor porfolio holders must hold for Oakdale members one would think. What say you cllr Atkinson? caravan1
  • Score: 12

1:19pm Sat 22 Feb 14

ADST_2008 says...

I note that the Oakdale Councillors are cabinet members all still in their portfolio positions and at the same time supporting there ward residents in their campaign against the Oakdale TSP.
I note that the Oakdale Councillors are cabinet members all still in their portfolio positions and at the same time supporting there ward residents in their campaign against the Oakdale TSP. ADST_2008
  • Score: 12

1:29pm Sat 22 Feb 14

caravan1 says...

Further, cllr Butt abstained from the vote and was sacked, cllr's Walton and Adams vote against and are still in position?
Perhaps cllr Atkinson should tell the real reasons for cllr Butt's dismissal.
It is becoming fairly obvious the "glorious leader" is struggling to be honest.
Further, cllr Butt abstained from the vote and was sacked, cllr's Walton and Adams vote against and are still in position? Perhaps cllr Atkinson should tell the real reasons for cllr Butt's dismissal. It is becoming fairly obvious the "glorious leader" is struggling to be honest. caravan1
  • Score: 14

1:40pm Sat 22 Feb 14

ADST_2008 says...

See Councillor Mike White for site suitability.....
See Councillor Mike White for site suitability..... ADST_2008
  • Score: 6

1:57pm Sat 22 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Kill two birds with one stone. put a temporary site on the Derbys corner pub car park it may gee up the owners to do something with it .then do the same next year on another eyesore
Kill two birds with one stone. put a temporary site on the Derbys corner pub car park it may gee up the owners to do something with it .then do the same next year on another eyesore kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 6

2:01pm Sat 22 Feb 14

ADST_2008 says...

Spot on Caravan1 who ever you are, double standards here I fear....
Spot on Caravan1 who ever you are, double standards here I fear.... ADST_2008
  • Score: 3

2:10pm Sat 22 Feb 14

muscliffman says...

Unless they are deaf, blind, corrupt or plain daft the Council already well know the popular public view about having any of these 'traveller' sites anywhere in Poole - yet they clearly intend to defy it.

The LibLabCons seem to share an undemocratic common purpose in this and so many other matters, perhaps time for a change - UKIP.
Unless they are deaf, blind, corrupt or plain daft the Council already well know the popular public view about having any of these 'traveller' sites anywhere in Poole - yet they clearly intend to defy it. The LibLabCons seem to share an undemocratic common purpose in this and so many other matters, perhaps time for a change - UKIP. muscliffman
  • Score: 19

2:22pm Sat 22 Feb 14

caravan1 says...

ADST_2008 wrote:
Spot on Caravan1 who ever you are, double standards here I fear....
Simply outrageous behaviour from cllr Atkinson. Showing her true standards. Duplicity in trying to con the electorate as to cllr Butt's record regarding her supposed involvement in the siting decision and then implying she jumped ship because she is a nimby. Not being a poltician I can say this is not an untruth but a LIE!
Incorrigible double standards as to who she sacks and who she keeps.
If the face fits I suppose. Which is surprising considering the considerable help cllr Butt has given Atkinson, et tu Brute!
[quote][p][bold]ADST_2008[/bold] wrote: Spot on Caravan1 who ever you are, double standards here I fear....[/p][/quote]Simply outrageous behaviour from cllr Atkinson. Showing her true standards. Duplicity in trying to con the electorate as to cllr Butt's record regarding her supposed involvement in the siting decision and then implying she jumped ship because she is a nimby. Not being a poltician I can say this is not an untruth but a LIE! Incorrigible double standards as to who she sacks and who she keeps. If the face fits I suppose. Which is surprising considering the considerable help cllr Butt has given Atkinson, et tu Brute! caravan1
  • Score: 9

4:00pm Sat 22 Feb 14

60plus says...

How many more sites must we have? Let's find out where councillor Atkinson lives and put one there and see how she likes it.
How many more sites must we have? Let's find out where councillor Atkinson lives and put one there and see how she likes it. 60plus
  • Score: 13

8:11pm Sat 22 Feb 14

fireflier says...

When are the Councillors and the MP's going to get the message?

NO ONE WANTS THESE 'TRAVELLERS' IN OUR AREA UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES !!!!!!

We are residents...WE pay our way ....We do not see why we should be funding anyone's lifestyle when all the do is choose not to contribute to our community.

GO AWAY is what they should do ....or choose a word to go with OFF ...then follow it!
When are the Councillors and the MP's going to get the message? NO ONE WANTS THESE 'TRAVELLERS' IN OUR AREA UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES !!!!!! We are residents...WE pay our way ....We do not see why we should be funding anyone's lifestyle when all the do is choose not to contribute to our community. GO AWAY is what they should do ....or choose a word to go with OFF ...then follow it! fireflier
  • Score: 10

8:51pm Sat 22 Feb 14

Chris the plumber says...

if this site will cost £75,000 to set up and a running cost of £9000 per anum
wouldn't this be a perfect candidate for one of the councils privitisation projects?? someone like G4S I am sure would love the contract.
if this site will cost £75,000 to set up and a running cost of £9000 per anum wouldn't this be a perfect candidate for one of the councils privitisation projects?? someone like G4S I am sure would love the contract. Chris the plumber
  • Score: 5

7:24am Sun 23 Feb 14

RM says...

To make a comment on either of the proposed TSPs you need to be able to look at the documents about the proposal on the Council website. I've tried twice to look at the Oakdale application, last Monday & Friday. The website is running like a dog - it takes ages to actually display a document and sometimes it just hangs there or comes up with a comment that the document is not currently accessible. Website is down this weekend for maintenance - hopefully improved access will be part of that maintenance.
To make a comment on either of the proposed TSPs you need to be able to look at the documents about the proposal on the Council website. I've tried twice to look at the Oakdale application, last Monday & Friday. The website is running like a dog - it takes ages to actually display a document and sometimes it just hangs there or comes up with a comment that the document is not currently accessible. Website is down this weekend for maintenance - hopefully improved access will be part of that maintenance. RM
  • Score: 0

8:39am Sun 23 Feb 14

TheDistrict says...

This site matter, is masked by the words, IT STINKS. The Poole Council under the leadership of Cllr Elaine Atkinson is up to something. Firstly to accuse one cabinet member of going against the grain, when she actually abstained on the vote, but showed support for her electorate, at the same time of allowing two others who actually voted against, to remain in the cabinet. The same happened over the Branksome Park matter for Poole Town FC, and other controversial planning. It is time that Poole Council had a reshuffle, including the dismissal of the Council Leader.
This site matter, is masked by the words, IT STINKS. The Poole Council under the leadership of Cllr Elaine Atkinson is up to something. Firstly to accuse one cabinet member of going against the grain, when she actually abstained on the vote, but showed support for her electorate, at the same time of allowing two others who actually voted against, to remain in the cabinet. The same happened over the Branksome Park matter for Poole Town FC, and other controversial planning. It is time that Poole Council had a reshuffle, including the dismissal of the Council Leader. TheDistrict
  • Score: 4

9:13am Sun 23 Feb 14

Carolyn43 says...

RM wrote:
To make a comment on either of the proposed TSPs you need to be able to look at the documents about the proposal on the Council website. I've tried twice to look at the Oakdale application, last Monday & Friday. The website is running like a dog - it takes ages to actually display a document and sometimes it just hangs there or comes up with a comment that the document is not currently accessible. Website is down this weekend for maintenance - hopefully improved access will be part of that maintenance.
That's probably deliberate. The council have done everything they can to be underhanded about this whole affair after Judy Butt did what she was asked to do and got various agencies involved in trying to solve the problem.
......
Having done what she'd been asked to do, she didn't know that Creekmoor had been chosen until three days before the Council meeting which announced it. Having previously been ruled out for very good reasons, suddenly it's the site of choice. Who knows who made the decision? Judy Butt wasn't involved in it.
......
The planning application mentions nothing about travellers, transit site, Creekmoor or Marshes End in its title, so you have to know that, in order to find it to view and/or comment, it's under "Land at Safety Drive, Poole, Dorset, BH17 7FR". Some of those who have made comments have had to chase up the planning department because their comment hadn't appeared on the web site, but had "been mislaid".
....
Whether it's the case or not, the whole thing appears to be to keep everyone in the dark and push it through regardless of any valid reasons why it's a bad proposal. Dictatorship in action.
[quote][p][bold]RM[/bold] wrote: To make a comment on either of the proposed TSPs you need to be able to look at the documents about the proposal on the Council website. I've tried twice to look at the Oakdale application, last Monday & Friday. The website is running like a dog - it takes ages to actually display a document and sometimes it just hangs there or comes up with a comment that the document is not currently accessible. Website is down this weekend for maintenance - hopefully improved access will be part of that maintenance.[/p][/quote]That's probably deliberate. The council have done everything they can to be underhanded about this whole affair after Judy Butt did what she was asked to do and got various agencies involved in trying to solve the problem. ...... Having done what she'd been asked to do, she didn't know that Creekmoor had been chosen until three days before the Council meeting which announced it. Having previously been ruled out for very good reasons, suddenly it's the site of choice. Who knows who made the decision? Judy Butt wasn't involved in it. ...... The planning application mentions nothing about travellers, transit site, Creekmoor or Marshes End in its title, so you have to know that, in order to find it to view and/or comment, it's under "Land at Safety Drive, Poole, Dorset, BH17 7FR". Some of those who have made comments have had to chase up the planning department because their comment hadn't appeared on the web site, but had "been mislaid". .... Whether it's the case or not, the whole thing appears to be to keep everyone in the dark and push it through regardless of any valid reasons why it's a bad proposal. Dictatorship in action. Carolyn43
  • Score: 2

9:25am Sun 23 Feb 14

Carolyn43 says...

Having looked at the comments on the Broadstone Way proposal, firstly I'm sue the residents of Creekmoor would like to thank those who don't want a site but suggest that Creekmoor gets it on the Park and Ride. Very public spirited of you and definite NIMBYism.
......
One thing that caught my eye was that Wessex Water say the site is immediately above an 18 inch trunk water main and that "no development should occur within the statutory easement associated with this water main and a clearance of 6 metres each side of the main should be provided." Did the planning department not know this?
.......
So you're probably safe in Oakdale. Now carry on gloating over Creekmoor.
Having looked at the comments on the Broadstone Way proposal, firstly I'm sue the residents of Creekmoor would like to thank those who don't want a site but suggest that Creekmoor gets it on the Park and Ride. Very public spirited of you and definite NIMBYism. ...... One thing that caught my eye was that Wessex Water say the site is immediately above an 18 inch trunk water main and that "no development should occur within the statutory easement associated with this water main and a clearance of 6 metres each side of the main should be provided." Did the planning department not know this? ....... So you're probably safe in Oakdale. Now carry on gloating over Creekmoor. Carolyn43
  • Score: 1

10:15am Sun 23 Feb 14

susi.m says...

If NO ONE gives any work to the travellers/gypsies or whatever you call them, then they WILL NOT want to come to this area.
Suggest this is what should happen.
I was told by a senior council employee that the main reason that they come to this area is because they gets lots of work from members of the public, who then pay them in cash.
SO DONT LET THEM DO ANY WORK FOR YOU and ensure you tell all your friends and neighbours this fact.
If NO ONE gives any work to the travellers/gypsies or whatever you call them, then they WILL NOT want to come to this area. Suggest this is what should happen. I was told by a senior council employee that the main reason that they come to this area is because they gets lots of work from members of the public, who then pay them in cash. SO DONT LET THEM DO ANY WORK FOR YOU and ensure you tell all your friends and neighbours this fact. susi.m
  • Score: 4

11:47am Sun 23 Feb 14

portia6 says...

Whatever happens the council are supposed to and obliged to provide a
site but the arguments continue as to where and this also applies to social
housing as homeowners will oppose that as well. Its the haves and have nots
It always has been always will. Jerrymandering and political games are
afoot!
Whatever happens the council are supposed to and obliged to provide a site but the arguments continue as to where and this also applies to social housing as homeowners will oppose that as well. Its the haves and have nots It always has been always will. Jerrymandering and political games are afoot! portia6
  • Score: 2

1:11pm Sun 23 Feb 14

muscliffman says...

susi.m wrote:
If NO ONE gives any work to the travellers/gypsies or whatever you call them, then they WILL NOT want to come to this area.
Suggest this is what should happen.
I was told by a senior council employee that the main reason that they come to this area is because they gets lots of work from members of the public, who then pay them in cash.
SO DONT LET THEM DO ANY WORK FOR YOU and ensure you tell all your friends and neighbours this fact.
Oh, if it were that easy!

A favoured scam - they do some token and useless 'work' on a briefly empty private property which the (often vulnerable) owner/resident has NOT asked them to do. Then they come back later and demand cash with menaces, the 'victim' is left in no doubt what will happen if the money is not paid and the Police will do absolutely nothing to assist except advise that it's best if you pay up.

What you suggest simply won't achieve anything as long as our authorities appear to place their sympathies with these 'travellers' - if only for their own easier lives. If next summer local residents find new tarmac unexpectedly scattered over their driveway at least now they know what comes next........
[quote][p][bold]susi.m[/bold] wrote: If NO ONE gives any work to the travellers/gypsies or whatever you call them, then they WILL NOT want to come to this area. Suggest this is what should happen. I was told by a senior council employee that the main reason that they come to this area is because they gets lots of work from members of the public, who then pay them in cash. SO DONT LET THEM DO ANY WORK FOR YOU and ensure you tell all your friends and neighbours this fact.[/p][/quote]Oh, if it were that easy! A favoured scam - they do some token and useless 'work' on a briefly empty private property which the (often vulnerable) owner/resident has NOT asked them to do. Then they come back later and demand cash with menaces, the 'victim' is left in no doubt what will happen if the money is not paid and the Police will do absolutely nothing to assist except advise that it's best if you pay up. What you suggest simply won't achieve anything as long as our authorities appear to place their sympathies with these 'travellers' - if only for their own easier lives. If next summer local residents find new tarmac unexpectedly scattered over their driveway at least now they know what comes next........ muscliffman
  • Score: 3

7:22pm Sun 23 Feb 14

asj says...

how is Darby's corner mid way between the sites??
how is Darby's corner mid way between the sites?? asj
  • Score: 0

8:44pm Sun 23 Feb 14

nickynoodah says...

Its impolite to tell them to **** off
say to them ' please please go away'
and they might
**** off on their own .
Its impolite to tell them to **** off say to them ' please please go away' and they might **** off on their own . nickynoodah
  • Score: 0

8:58am Mon 24 Feb 14

moleman says...

How come the Council has suddenly found £364,000 to provide the travellers sites for people who don't pay anything towards the council tax, when the residents are told the is no money for local issues that affect Poole people. I really can't understand why the Council leader believes that residents will accept this. If either the Liberals or the Conservatives vote for these sites to go ahead, then I believe there will be a backlash at election time. You are wasting our money.
How come the Council has suddenly found £364,000 to provide the travellers sites for people who don't pay anything towards the council tax, when the residents are told the is no money for local issues that affect Poole people. I really can't understand why the Council leader believes that residents will accept this. If either the Liberals or the Conservatives vote for these sites to go ahead, then I believe there will be a backlash at election time. You are wasting our money. moleman
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree