Minutes of the Public Meeting of  Sovereign Harbour Residents Association

13 February  2003

 

Committee members present: Clare Donovan, Reg Ludford, Chris Peppiatt & Brenda Hilliam. Apologies from Dave Hitchcock.

 

Clare Donovan welcomed everyone present and said that as we only had 6 members on the committee she more volunteers to help spread the load. She had already had a volunteer, Angela Knight of Dukes Quay who couldn't be present. The following people then agreed to be on the committee:

 

Mollie Burton: Phoenix Drive

Linus Gunning: Daytona Quay

Lindsay Street: Daytona Quay

Mike Quinn: Columbus Point

The committee was formally voted in by the residents at the meeting. Linus Gunning agreed to act as Treasurer until someone better qualified could be found.

It was agreed that the next meeting would formalize the Association with votes for Committee members etc and that an annual fee (probably £10.00) would be collected at that meeting.

 

SOVEREIGN HARBOUR TRUST

As several residents had raised questions about the Sovereign Harbour Trust and how it raised and spent monies; Reg Ludford proceeded to explain.

 

The attached document explains the facts in detail[CED1].

SHT is seeking charity status- there would be tax benefits from this, plus potential benefits to the community.

 

There have been and continue to be calls from the residents for SHRA to be represented on the Trust; at present there are two ex-Tarmac employees on the Trust, the CEO and the Finance Officer. and one person from Carillion who has technical/engineering expertise to monitor maintenance etc.. The EVA have been invited to provide three Trustees,  residents will not be able to nominate a representative until these are in place. It was pointed out that Trustees will carry a heavy responsibility, it is not   something everyone would wish to do.  It was suggested that a Member of the Trust be invited to speak at a SHRA  general meeting.

 

PUBLIC ENQUIRY B&Q

Clare Donovan had attended 3 days of the Public Enquiry and reviewed the evidence[CED2]:

With the final stages of the Enquiry yet to take place there would be an opportunity for residents views to aired.  Clare asked for  an indication of how those residents present felt about the B&Q proposal. Many felt that the B&Q proposal was a case of the "devil you know", one large company with an already stated commitment to the local community as opposed to possibly several small firms doing a variety of probably noisy/anti-social activities. It was also the opportunity get rid of a blighted site,  sooner rather than later.  In the vote that followed 36 voted for the B&Q project and 16 were against it.  There were some abstentions.

In the meeting that Clare had already had with B&Q it was evident that they hoped the  landscaping and reshaping of the mound would obscure all but a small part of the top of the building.  Access on Pacific Drive would be for timed deliveries only;  all general public and trade would be from the Asda Roundabout.

There may be future public access to the mound for walkers etc but not for ball games.

 

HEALTH CENTRE

The PCT is close to finalising an extra GP at Dr Stocktons Partnership at Princes Drive. The Carillion suite of offices will be the site of a proper Health Centre possibly in two years time.  It was pointed out that residents had been asked by the PCT what services they would like in the new Health Centre and there had been little response so far.

 

A.O.B.

Residents of the Westbury Homes had had problems with the noise associated with the fishermen/generators and storage. There was a possibility of Grants to help buy new quieter equipment and in the meantime the fishermen had tried to reduce the noise levels.  It was stated by one resident that EBC officers had done a good job so far as they could.

 

Some of the Developers in Pacific Drive have been using loud machinery at times when the residents had been assured they would not be working. If possible people should speak to the site foreman AT THE TIME OF THE DISTURBANCE and also check the working times agreed on the sites-they are not all the same. The Enforcement Officer did not appear to work over the weekend when most of the problems arose. SHRA had been told previously that Developers who break agreements are liable to be ordered to stop all work by EBC until the situation is sorted out.

 

Residents from Barrier Reef Way said that covenants that protected their environment are being ignored; caravans and commercial vehicles are being parked on driveways. While Persimmon were still on site they would speak to people parking such vehicles and they would be removed. In a letter to one of the residents they now claim they can do nothing about this problem and suggested that the residents contact a solicitor themselves.  Persimmon will get their solicitors to act but only if residents come up with £1000 beforehand.    It was suggested that residents seek publicity in light of Persimmon's new development in Pacific Drive.

 

 

NEXT MEETING: APRIL?

No date was set for the next meeting.

 

[CED1]  I suggest that a separate document is used as an appendix.  (see attached)

[CED2]   Again I suggest a separate document (see attached)