Useless Town Council Planning Committee being useless again

I would have thought that with the change in political control the Town Council Planning Committee would make itself useful. But useless continues to be the theme. In the refusal over the Cinema Planning application this useless committee has done it again.

The reasons put forward for recommending refusal of the cinema were:

• Emergency vehicle access in and out of the development from Huntingdon Street
• The extra volume of traffic passing through an already congested town centre
• Smells generated by the proposed four restaurants
• Failure by Turnstone Estates to provide a 3D model of the leisure complex

I'll take each "reason" for objection in turn.

Emergency vehicle access. There is no evidence to back up this objection. If the Emergency services have an issue with this they can always object. But they won't. So this is a useless objection.

Extra volume of traffic. Where is the evidence for this? The developer and Councils have done traffic surveys. So where is the evidence that this will cause traffic congestion. Unless the Town Council is willing to back up this objection with its own traffic data this is a useless objection.

Smell generated from restaurants. This could be a planning objection. Again needs to be evidenced. This will lead to a condition on any eventual planning permission. In itself it is not a reason for refusal.

Failure of Turnstone Estates to provide a 3D model. Not a valid planning objection.

Once again the Town Council Planning Committee rises to the challenge and is utterly useless. A good pantomime.

In voting to recommend refusal the Planning Committee is playing a part in a pantomime. The Town Council is leasing much of Shady walk Open Space to Turnstone Estates and the plans were fully known then. So why weren't these objections raised before the lease was agreed?

Most of the land is owned by HDC. Cllr Farrer is a District Councillor. Why haven't these objections been brought to District Council as the land owner. As the land owner HDC has control on what the land is used for than any committee or panel.

This is the Town Council having two policies. One is for the cinema project. The other is against.

The residents may think they have won a victory. But they haven't. These useless objections will be simply ignored by the District Council. Another pantomime for St Neots.

Why not get rid of this useless Planning Committee? The vast majority of the country gets on without one so why do we have this useless committee. Save money and save council tax by ridding St Neots Town Council of this useless committee which serves no real purpose.

Useless Town Council Planning Committee being useless again - Part 3

I take exception to the Town Council having a Planning Committee because it is utterly useless. Take the recent fiasco over the old Worx nightclub. Cllr Jennifer Bird says:

Doesn't Jennifer understand the way planning works? Obviously not. Just because the Town Council objects to a planning application doesn't mean the District Council has to follow those objections. What I find sinister is the reference to "not the kind we wanted".

I thought the Conservatives stood up for small businesses and the individual. Not when the wrong kind of people can enter the Town Centre. What next? A gated Town Centre where only the right kind of people are allowed to enter?

Jennifer Bird is Leader of the Conservative Town Council group and is Chair of the Planning Committee. I have to wonder what kind of St Neots we will end up with if the Conservatives gained control. The current Liberal Democrats aren't much better.

One last note. I see Doug Terry stood up for the Planning Application. Good for Doug!

Planning Appeal Allowed over homes in Eynesbury

I see the Planning Inspector has gone against the decision of HDC supported by SNTC to refuse the planning application behind Tesco. Another blow to SNTC Planning!

Planning Inspector's Decision
Original Planning Decision
Planning and the Town Council

Town Council Planning Committee is a JOKE!

I know Doug Terry, Liberal Democrat Councillor for Eynesbury, is trying his best. He seems to think the Town Council is somehow a planning authority. In a recent post on the St. Neots Community Forum he says:


"As you are awear Paul but others may not be any planning aplication for St Neots comes before the town council therfor we make the first recommdation. HDC planning dept then decide if they agree or disagee with us."

The way I decypher his statement is the Town Council makes the initial recommendation on a planning application and HDC either agrees with it or not.

That is wrong. The Town Council is an official consultee of the Planning Authority on all planning applications. There are many other official consultees and these are normally listed in the HDC Officer report into planning applications. So the Town Council is one amongst many.

So why do I feel Town Council planning is a joke?

• The first reason is they put so much effort into the consultations. The TC Planning Committee sits twice a month to review planning applications. HDC Development Control Committee only sits once a month!
• Secondly, the Town Council doesn't have the resources to employee a couple of planners to advise the Planning Committee on the planning applications. Indeed it would be a vast waste of money as they can only object to an application.
• Thirdly, the Town Council doesn't normally receive information from other consultees.
• Fourthly, it is obvious they don't know the planning policies, laws and regualtions and don't think ahead.

To illustrate what I'm saying I'll give some examples (SNTC / HDC or CCC):

The Super Surgery was opposed by the Town Council and allowed by HDC. (0900709FUL)

Outside the Super Surgery with all the traffic congestion???

The reasons the Town Council gave for refusal:

Lack of retail units within the town, and keep the town centre fit for purpose. HDC disagreed with this objection. - HDC Planning found the change of use acceptable.
The high increase in traffic into the town will increase congestion and difficulties in parking. How did the TC know this? No evidence was brought forward to support this objection. HDC quite rightly disagreed with the Town Council objection.
Additional windows in the shop frontage will change the street scene and not be an enhancement. HDC Planning disagreed with this even saying the change would be an enhancement.

Documents
http://www.stneots-tc.gov.uk/files/pdf/planningminutes010709.pdf  
http://applications.huntsdc.gov.uk/dc%20files/2009_PDF/Fileroom/0900709FUL/DOCUMENT_3.pdf
http://planning.huntsdc.gov.uk/associated_documents/Show_documents.asp?CASENO=0900709FUL

Housing development at 11-15 Church Street (0900305FUL)

The reasons the Town Council Planning objected:
Not in keeping with the street scene and choice materials within the C/A (Conservation Area) are not in keeping with the surrounding properties. HDC Planning disagreed and stated the the development would enhance the conservation area.
Overdevelopment of the site making traffic congested area in peak times would further be detrimental to the highway. HDC disagreed with overdevelopment. CCC Highways Authority disagreed.

Documents
http://www.stneots-tc.gov.uk/files/pdf/planningminutes100609.pdf
http://applications.huntsdc.gov.uk/dc%20files/2009_PDF/Fileroom/0900305FUL/DOCUMENT_13.pdf
http://planning.huntsdc.gov.uk/PublicAccess/tdc/dcapplication/application_detailview.aspx?KEYVAL=KGCM2SIK00S00&module=P3&hidereturn=true

The new application for building behind 22 Hight Street. (0900411FUL)

These are the reasons given by the Town Council for objecting to this planning application were:

Gross overdevelopment of the site, Town Centre site more suitable for retail. HDC disagreed with both objections.

Documents
http://domain2382351.sites.fasthosts.com/files/pdf/planningminutes02.12.09.pdf
http://applications.huntsdc.gov.uk/moderngov/Published/C00010105/M00003674/AI00029520/$0900411fuldec09.docA.ps.pdf

Land behind Tesco. (0900495REM)

Even when both HDC Planning and SNTC Planning agree to refuse, these aren't necessarily for the same reasons. SNTC (HDC).

Overdevelopment of the site with no privacy for neighbours. (Not given as a reason by HDC for refusal)
Lack of landscaping within the area. (Partial - landscaping around the parking courts was a reason for HDC refusal)
NO facilities for the children within the site. (Not given as a reason for refusal. Not following the 106 agreement on Play Areas is a reason given for HDC refusal)
The highways are narrow and can prove difficult for emergency access and delivery lorries or buses. (All the fire authority was worried about was the provision of hydrants. The highways narrowness was not a reason given by HDC for refusal)
Limited access to facilitate 220 houses. (Not a reason for HDC refusal)
More than one access point needed to enter and exit the development. (Not a reason for HDC refusal)

Documents
http://www.stneots-tc.gov.uk/files/pdf/planningminutes180609.pdf
http://planning.huntsdc.gov.uk/associated_documents/Show_documents.asp?CASENO=0900495REM


I do feel that Town Council Planning Committee is a waste of time and effort. There are many places in England that do not have Town and Parish Councils. Planning functions perfectly well without having Town Council interference. Time the Town Council thought about ditching this process unless SNTC members can actually up their game.

I went to the consultation at the library and said.....

"Where are the comment forms and the box you are supposed to post your comments in.". The nice library assistant indicated HDC had set this half and hour ago and their wasn't any! So no post box or comment forms. Does the Conservative run HDC want to know what the people actually think about this scheme? Obviously ignorance is bliss.
So I went round the corner any made a complaint to the nice lady at the HDC in the Town Council Offices.
I was told I could comment online. Except the information at the library is radically different to what was provided online at the HDC site. This is unacceptable! HDC have now changed consultation document to the correct version.

Now down to the nitty gritty of the planning consultation. The cinema is off. For all the cinema freaks out there this is not the site for a cinema.
Why?
There are going to be problems with plonking a cinema on this site. This is because this site has always been open land.
The first problem is this development will back onto a number of houses. Build it too high and you are blocking light. If you were living in those houses would you really want a three or four storey building backing onto you house? I wouldn't.
The second problem is the restrictions on Lidl over deliveries.  If HDC imposed the same sort of restrictions as on Lidl, the cinema would close at 9pm.
The third problem is over noise. Air-conditioning plant, vehicle movements and general disturbance are all things to be considered in the planning process.

I don't feel the cinema project has been thought out. Mainly because the way this cinema project has come about. The logic seems to be: We want a cinema. There is spare land. Build the cinema on the spare land.

Of course if you disagree with this simple logic then the supporters are up in arms. I still reckon the best place to put any cinema is next to the Eat n' Bowl. The land has been used for leisure purposes. Put these two buildings together and we have a mini Leisure Park.

The up side to this plan would be the Town Council would get money from this project and then will be able to build a new outdoor swimming pool.

What also concerns me is the tarmacing over of the public open space. This is a valuable urban open space. Time we stood up for this piece of land.