Why is the Boscombe surf reef failing, part two... (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Why is the Boscombe surf reef failing, part two...
8:30am Tuesday 6th July 2010 in
A SECOND inquiry into Bournemouth’s controversial surf reef will try to find out why expectations of its performance were downgraded.
The Boscombe reef is currently failing to meet four out of its 11 official criteria, prompting the council to withhold a £150,000 performance-based payment.
But councillors are concerned that these performance benchmarks have been significantly lowered since they first approved the idea of creating a reef at Boscombe.
At a special scrutiny meeting on Tuesday, July 13, councillors will quiz officers as to why and when this happened and who authorised it.
Council reports prepared for the meeting show the council agreed to pursue the creation of a double-sided surf reef wrapped around Boscombe Pier back in 2000.
A report by ASR said at the time: “With the reef in place at Bournemouth, a 2.0 to 2.2 times wave height enhancement is expected. This enhancement will increase the number of surfable days by a factor of 2 to 3.”
Five years later, an initial design report by ASR said the company aimed to design a reef with a surfing difficulty ranking of four to five. The ideal ride length would be between 75 and 100m and last between 12 and 15 seconds.
“The surfing reef is a low risk but technically innovative scheme,” ASR’s report concluded.
It was not until May this year that the council released the results of the reef’s first monitoring exercise, which showed the reef was under-performing.
The reef was measured against 11 performance targets, including an increase in wave height of 20 per cent, providing for rides of more than three seconds and matching the beach in terms of the number of surfable days.
Comments(28)
zagzig
says...
8:53am Tue 6 Jul 10
Mediclogan5
says...
9:03am Tue 6 Jul 10
winton50
says...
9:16am Tue 6 Jul 10
Azphreal
says...
10:02am Tue 6 Jul 10
Bob49
says...
10:15am Tue 6 Jul 10
Maybe the Echo might care to check how mnay jobs were originally claimed to be created. Check the shops and cafe on the pier head. Check the original height of the Moneycombe development. How the pods were to be tented NOT sold.
This sham was pushed through on far different expectations than are now being talked of. I think there was also claimed to be a surplus - not a £3m plus deficit [- something that local taxpayers will ave to pay for.
So lets hope the council will name and shame those who were responsible for this sleight of hand.
marjorie01
says...
10:42am Tue 6 Jul 10
Mediclogan5
says...
10:46am Tue 6 Jul 10
jinglebell
says...
11:35am Tue 6 Jul 10
P***-up and brewery.
Bad Rabbit
says...
11:36am Tue 6 Jul 10
You ask:
"Why does the council think that the local electorates are niave and mindless."
Maybe it's because you and the rest of the naive and mindless electorate keep voting them back in?
I mean could be wrong, but it seems to cover all the bases doesn't it.
As the Jam once sang, the public wants what the public gets...
FOSF
says...
11:46am Tue 6 Jul 10
contric
says...
11:53am Tue 6 Jul 10
McVICAR
says...
11:57am Tue 6 Jul 10
contric wrote:It was also said that it would never work in the first place, but no body listened. and yes, it is crap
the headline is why is the boscombe surf reef not working the answer is because it is crap
time nor Tide
says...
12:21pm Tue 6 Jul 10
Umm .....i thought that it only met 4 out of 11 of its performance criteria ?
Mediclogan5
says...
12:42pm Tue 6 Jul 10
reefwatching
says...
1:13pm Tue 6 Jul 10
The key question that the covering report does not answer is - why did the council employ a company all the way from NZ, to build something they had never built before, indeed a company that had never built anything before? Despite their inexperience, they were employed both to estimate the cost of building it, and directly adwarded the contract, in clear breach of EU procurement law.
When is the council going to get externally investigated, an auditor would have a field day with some of these documents (and of course the ones still out of public view).
time nor Tide
says...
2:17pm Tue 6 Jul 10
Adrian Fudge
says...
5:14pm Tue 6 Jul 10
What happened to that or was that yet more spin
Perhaps the Echo might like to reprint who said it
chris100
says...
5:28pm Tue 6 Jul 10
bournemouth council is or must be one of the most corrupt in england
lol @ security word -- tiny-bill
EGHH
says...
5:48pm Tue 6 Jul 10
Gastines
says...
6:00pm Tue 6 Jul 10
snake hips
says...
6:02pm Tue 6 Jul 10
Bob49
says...
6:48pm Tue 6 Jul 10
" The biggest mistake was trying to save money and time by not carrying out a full structural survey of the Overstrand building. They made drawings of the outside and surveyed the balconies but never actually looked inside. Head of leisure services Roger Brown admitted to Wednesday’s special scrutiny panel meeting: “It was much worse than we had estimated. On reflection we should have done a more total survey.” Feb 2009
Mr Brown also apologised to councillors because the £1.05m cost of fitting out of the 60 “Surf Pods” had never previously been revealed. Feb 2009.
So it cost on average £16,000 plus to paint and to put in a couple or so deckchairs into these wretched things !
Still, never one for being tied to realistic projections we further had -
Mr Brown said sales of the ....... previous "super-huts" were “selling well off-plan despite the recession”. Feb 2009
Finally the true picture is beginning to emerge - sadly it will mean quite a large and growing debt being passed onto local taxpayers
Corrupto
says...
7:23pm Tue 6 Jul 10
Bob49 wrote:and hopefully Brown's resignation.
“All elements, excluding the surf reef, are being delivered at or below the original budget projections,” stated head of leisure Roger Brown. June 2008
" The biggest mistake was trying to save money and time by not carrying out a full structural survey of the Overstrand building. They made drawings of the outside and surveyed the balconies but never actually looked inside. Head of leisure services Roger Brown admitted to Wednesday’s special scrutiny panel meeting: “It was much worse than we had estimated. On reflection we should have done a more total survey.” Feb 2009
Mr Brown also apologised to councillors because the £1.05m cost of fitting out of the 60 “Surf Pods” had never previously been revealed. Feb 2009.
So it cost on average £16,000 plus to paint and to put in a couple or so deckchairs into these wretched things !
Still, never one for being tied to realistic projections we further had -
Mr Brown said sales of the ....... previous "super-huts" were “selling well off-plan despite the recession”. Feb 2009
Finally the true picture is beginning to emerge - sadly it will mean quite a large and growing debt being passed onto local taxpayers
or will the whole sorry bunch hang in until they are jailed?
time nor Tide
says...
11:49pm Tue 6 Jul 10
Adrian Fudge wrote:There's a fine line between spin and "doublespeak" . the leader and big brother from George Orwells 1984 defined War as Peace. Doubling the cost of something is actually a saving money.
I remember when the cost doubled and we were told that it was because the Council had got a better deal ensuring that the money invested was protected What happened to that or was that yet more spin Perhaps the Echo might like to reprint who said it
.
The following also applys for the "sanitising" of the 7 failures.
.
""Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to have been correct; nor was any item of news, or any expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to remain on record. All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary."
- George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 3"
.
I feel that Melanie is now part of that process? Only 4 things wrong, not 7?
Was Charlie
says...
8:28am Wed 7 Jul 10
time nor Tide
says...
9:26am Wed 7 Jul 10
.
Although not on topic ( climate change) i think its interesting to obsrve human nature seems pervasive amongst all sorts of people? Storch seems to think so anyway?
simonhumby
says...
10:21am Thu 8 Jul 10
But now I think that it should remain for all time to remind current councillors of the mistakes they've made in the past and as a warning for future councillors
More Surf Reef stories
- Researchers look into value of £3m Boscombe surf reef
- Boscombe surf reef: Marine firms claim ASR owes them £60,000
- Sub-contractor wins county court judgement against ASR
- Boat strike at surf reef is no longer ‘clear cut’
- £150,000 in reserve cash being spent on surf reef
- ASR to come back in 2012 to improve surf reef
- Handling of surf reef not been our 'finest hour'
- Future of Boscombe surf reef hangs in balance
- Weather delays surf reef repairs
- Work begins on Boscombe Surf Reef
Why is the Boscombe surf reef failing, part two...
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
ben111 says...
8:38am Tue 6 Jul 10