PDA

View Full Version : All is laid bare in beach battle.


NakedGary
04-28-2008, 09:06 PM
All is laid bare in beach battle

Naturists hope to keep their beach

http://www.bartsystems.com/URLImageArchive/NUDEBEACHFORKEEPS.JPG

Published Date: 26 April 2008
By Alex Forsyth
Political editor
A LEGAL fight has begun which could finally decide whether or not nudists have the right to bare all on Eastney beach.
Portsmouth City Council and the private firm Qinetiq will go head-to-head in the courts as their long-running feud is ratcheted up.
The row centres on Qinetiq's bid to build flats behind a stretch of beach that it owns.
Council leaders and naturists fear the firm would ban public nudity on its stretch of Eastney beach, pictured above, to keep the owners of the new 131 properties happy.
Because of these fears – and concerns about whether general public access would still be guaranteed by the firm – the city council has consistently refused to allow Qinetic to use a stretch of land behind the beach which, the company says, is vital to provide adequate access to the proposed development.
Qinetiq claims the city council is acting unlawfully by granting planning permission for the homes but then refusing to provide land vital to allow it to meet the access requirements demanded by the council.
Qinetiq offered the council £75,000 in return for the 33ft-wide stretch of land between Fort Cumberland Road and Lumsden Road and offered a pledge not to fence off the stretch of beach they own.
But councillors threw out the motion at a meeting of the executive in January.
Lib Dem council leader Gerald Vernon-Jackson said: 'The council made the decision not to sell because we were not sure that long-term public access to the beach would be guaranteed.'
Cllr Vernon-Jackson added: 'We cannot be forced to sell the land just because there are planning conditions on it. These are two separate functions of the council – as a planning authority and as land owners.
'The council has made a decision not to sell. Qinetiq always said they would go for a judicial review and now they have. We will see what happens.'
Qinetiq, which has owned the land since 2001, insists it always intended to allow access to the beach, although not necessarily to keep it for nudists. A spokesman said: 'That stretch of beach has never been designated as a nudist beach. We offered to guarantee public access.
'If the council wants to designate another area of the beach as a nudist beach that is their responsibility.
'We want a judicial review because the executive committee are preventing us from fulfilling planning conditions set out by the development control committee.'
The full article contains 421 words and appears in nudist related articles, newsletters.

Last Updated: 25 April 2008 3:51 PM

Source: n/a
Location: Portsmouth

Pete Knight
04-28-2008, 10:22 PM
All you wanted to know (But were afraid to ask) about Eastney Beach can be found on the Beach User Groups (BUG) web site HERE (http://www.eastneybeach.org.uk/)

The organisers are friends of mine, and an inspiration to all nudist beach users, they got up off their *** and did something about the threat to their beach.

I'm in one of the pictures on the gallery page, this one below, I'm the one on the left.


http://www.eastneybeach.org/cms/uploads/images/Pages/BeachDay2006/067%20small.jpg


Pete Knight

simonsebs
06-12-2009, 12:51 PM
Nudists dismayed as road given go-ahead (http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Nudists-dismayed-as-road-given.5361122.jp)

Here's an update to the story.

Naturist Mark
06-12-2009, 04:32 PM
It would be helpful if these posts would identify the city, state or province, and country these stories come from. The local stories linked or pasted seldom use anything other than the local name, leading to the befuddlement of readers half a world away.

<strike>Portsmouth, Ohio, USA
Portsmouth, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Portsmouth, Dominica
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, USA
Portsmouth, Virginia, USA</strike>
Portsmouth, Hampshire, England, UK

atalanta
06-12-2009, 08:19 PM
The development company does NOT own the beach. In fact no-one owns a beach in the UK, though they may control the land access to it.

In this case, the developer does not even own the land immediately behind the beach so the report which opens this thread is quite misleading. The argument was about their wishing to acquire a narrow strip of Council-owned land between their site and the beach in order to make an access road to the planned new residences. That would both change the relatively private, non-overlooked nature of the beach and, since it would be a private road, limit beach access from the land side in such a way as to, perhaps, make it impractical or impossible. Hence the upset of the naturist users. It sounds as though the Council planning department might still make things difficult for the developers however.