Coastal Park - draft response

Here is the draft response from the Friends of theDowns to Canterbury City Council's management proposalsfor the newly created QE2 Coastal Park.

We would like all the Friends of the Downs to take the time to read it and let us know what they think - the final version has to get to CCC by the end of November.

You can download the document by clicking HERE.

The Executive Summary:

• The Vision for the Coastal Park does not provide any clarity about what the Park is for and what it is intended to become. We suggest:

“To develop a Coastal Park that appeals to a wide range of residents and visitors by offering a variety of high quality seaside experiences – traditional; sporting; unspoilt and natural – in one beautifully integrated seven kilometre stretch of coast.”

• We should emphasise that the Park offers “something for everyone” by integrating the entire Park without detracting from the distinctly different experiences and mood that the three distinct sections of the Park has to offer - developed coast with beach huts in West Bay; retail coast in the central area; natural coast in the Downs and in Reculver Country Park.
• This is a great opportunity to remove or re-site some of the “visual clutter” - signs, bins, benches - on the Downs and replace it with low-key, consistent signage and well-placed amenities.
• We are concerned by the suggestion to “provide car parking near the King’s Hall” - we would like to see more information about where and how this would be achieved.
• The maintenance of the Downs should not involve pesticides or herbicides.
• We present on page 10 of this response a detailed SWOT analysis for the Downs as part of the Park.
• Much of the draft Plan is already work in progress or work that is planned by the Council. There is surprisingly little scope for community contributions.
• The special scientific and ecological importance of the Downs has been under-stated, when its natural richness should be emphasised.
• The idea of grass cutting on the lower slopes between Beltinge and Hillborough is not a recommendation from KWT, it is merely a suggestion - the Friends will examine it more closely to see if it is worth progressing. Action L14 should be replaced with:

“Research the wildlife implications of a change to the cutting regime at the rear of the promenade at Beltinge and Hillborough and decide whether there would be any benefit in making such a change

• Similarly L15 should be replaced with:

“Research the wildlife implications of managing the scrub on the lower slope and decide what the best management approach would be”.

---

QEII Management Plan - FotD Draft Response

QE2 Coastal Park in Herne Bay

Question asked at HBAMP on 3 January 2012

Phil Rose:

I am very concerned that Members are mistakenly believing that the ongoing village green application requires that a number of activities on and around the Downs at Herne Bay must be deferred until the outcome of the application is known. None of the Items in the QE2 Coastal Park Action Plan that are being deferred pending the outcome of the village green application actually need to be deferred for that reason.

A couple of examples:

• Why should Community Cleanups on the application land over the coming months (Item 2.3) be affected in any way by the outcome of the application?
• Why should the outcome of the application have any effect on the clearance of the channel at Bishopstone Glen (Item 3.8)? The Glen is entirely outside the application area - the bridge across the Glen is ¼ kilometre west of the application land.

Response

The Queen Elizabeth ll Diamond Jubilee Field — Herne Bay Coastal Park puts the Downs into a legal trust that Fields in Trust states "protects forever the land for leisure and recreation". As this is a consultation report we are seeking feedback on the proposal.

As the Downs Village Green application is still ongoing it is not appropriate to discuss the legal issues relating to it. It is worthy of note that the implications of a successful village green application are not part of the decision making process.

One result of a successful Village Green application is that enhancements that take place between the date of the application and the final decision may be at risk of being removed once the application is decided, particularly if they breach the Victorian statutes that govern village green land.

Fields in Trust will not consider any external funding application until the village green application is resolved.

This means that many potential projects on the Downs are on hold due to the application for village green status. With regards to the two examples given:

• The existing community clean ups can continue, but we cannot access the funding to obtain extra equipment specifically for the community group.
• The clearance of the channel at Bishopstone Glen can proceed because it is outside the Downs Village Green application area, thank you for the feedback.

Meeting with CCC at the King's Hall

[Rosemary Selling was taking proper minutes - this is the condensed version...]

FotD: Cllr Gillian Reuby, Phil Rose, Ros McIntryre, Phil Cheeseman
CCC Outdoor Leisure: Richard Griffiths, Rosemary Selling
CCC Street Scene: Richard Davidson
Kent Wildlife Trust: Fred Booth

1. Richard Griffiths (RG) told us that the Downs Management Plan would now be part of a wider Management Plan for the QE2 Coastal Park. This is unlikely to speed things up.

2. RG said the Plan would be "survey-led", with the Plan being produced when we know what we've got.

3. Fred Booth (FB) pointed out that in parallel with the fieldwork, desk research would also be useful, particularly in well-documented areas like ornithology (check Kent Ornithological Society).

4. FB's Survey will run from April-August, the results are expected in September.

5. The Kent Mammal Group (KMG) would help with a survey from September onwards. The necessary training would be provided at Wildwood.

6. RG expects the Plan to be drafted in late Autumn/Winter 2011, issued for consultation Spring 2012, and signed off Summer 2012.

7. Serco's contract up for renewal in 2013, but is being reviewed currently.

8. In October 2009, there was a pot of £14k of S106 developers' contributions ear-marked for the Downs. The cost of the KWT survey and "signage" leaves us with £10k.

9. Community Payback "volunteers" widely praised for their work weeding the paths and clearing shingle.

10. Litter picking - we now have the necessary sheaf of paperwork to complete before litter-picking. Now we just need to find out what dates our volunteers are available on.

11. The number, location and style of litter bins and dog bins will be discussed at the next PACT/Panel meeting, as will grass cutting and trimming.

12. Shelter. Although the Victorian shelter was covered by CCC's insurance, it was under-insured. There is a suggestion that the shortfall can be absorbed by rolling it into the QE2 proposal... the Queen's Shelter, perhaps.

---

My thoughts:

QE2 status is not a foregone conclusion - the process is ill-defined and involves bidding and public voting. CCC display great confidence that it will be awarded, to the point of making progress on the Downs management plan dependent on it. RG emphasised the the management plan should be "survey-led", and this seems to him to be reason enough to put practically everything on hold until the Plan is complete.

The S106 Budget: We knew £2k was allocated to the KWT survey, having agreed to it at the FotD launch meeting in Autumn 2010. RG says £2k has been spent on "signs" - presumably the three new information panels, which were a Herne Bay in Bloom initiative. I'm surprised any of "our" S106 went towards these boards. The fact is that we have no control over the S106 Budget, although we are allowed to bid for funding from it on a project by project basis.

Richard Davidson (of CCC Street Scene) said there wouldn't be any more gang-mowing on the rough Downs this year, as the contract for that area stipulates one cut a year. We would welcome a statement (in writing) to that effect, and a clear understanding that the trimming around the steps (4 times a year) won't be done with tractors that leave wide swathes scalped. Similarly, we would welcome a written assurance that no grubbing, cutting, pruning or trimming of the blackthorn will happen before the Management Plan is complete.

If you have any thoughts on this, or any suggestions for the agenda of our next meeting with CCC, please add a comment below.