Tesco abandon South Shields?

Monday 01 February 2016 – Vicki Newman in the Gazette

Plans for a new supermarket in South Shields town centre have been deferred. The original proposals for the 365 Masterplan for the town centre included plans for a high quality food store at the back of Fowler Street. However, a drop in the demand for big supermarkets has led to this phase, which was scheduled for 2018 to 2019, now being deferred to a later date.
Continue reading Tesco abandon South Shields?

The Unplanned Shed.

13-Feb Admission that the Shed is not built to plan
3-Feb

28-Jan

Dialogue leading to Admission
and
Planning Manager’s Response 2

and the rest

24-Jan Questions Unanswered
15-Jan Planning Manager’s Response 1
14-Jan Escalation to Planning ManagerRegistration of Complaint 248789
see email to planning 14/1/14.
Mr Dawson asking various questions relating to the ongoing development at the slipway, River Drive, South Shields.
13-Jan Interception by Case Officer
Work continues with Photograph
10-Jan Complaint Initiation, Photograph,
A8296_1A, B8296_1B and D8296_14

UK Docks – Noise(cont’d)

—————————- Original Message —————————-
Subject: Fwd: Noise pollution from UK Docks [RESTRICTED]
From: Resident, Greens Place
Date: Thu, February 4, 2016 4:33 pm
To: 8 other Residents of Greens Place and Harbour View
————————————————————————–

Dear all,

It would seem that Mr Burrell has taken to marking his emails to both myself and Julie as RESTRICTED so I guess I’m not allowed to share them with everybody.
His reply below is evidence that UK Docks can and will with STC endorsement do whatever they want with total disregard to us all. Can I ask that everybody emails their complaints regarding noise and working practise to STC so we build up a case.
Regards,
Continue reading UK Docks – Noise(cont’d)

UK Docks – Noise

From: Kevin Burrell
Date:03/02/2016 10:43 (GMT+00:00)
To: HV Resident
Subject: RE: Noise from UK Docks yard River Drive [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

Mrs R~~~~,
I can assure you that the staff at UK Docks are never informed in advance of any monitoring that we may decide to carry out or any visits to the locality.
I am unsure what you anticipate a 24/7 approach would consist of, but at this time we are keen to establish the nature and extent of significant noisy occurrences. This is why noise diary sheets are so vital, as they provide information which we can use in discussion with the Company to establish levels of mitigation or control that may be applied to their work practices to minimise noise levels.
Diary sheets were provided to Mr Routledge on the 25th November 2015,  and we were advised that he would pass them on to other residents. To date I have received no diary sheets back.

Regards
Kevin

In response to

From: HV Resident
Date:03/02/2016 09:43 (GMT+00:00)
To: Kevin Burrell
Subject: RE: Noise from UK Docks yard River Drive [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]

Mr Burrell.
The diary sheets were inappropriate to the timings of UK Docks Christmas ‘knocking off’ periods! As with everything connected with our complaints no one appears to want to apply common sense in dealing with our issues.
As you can appreciate, this is an emotive set of issues and I apologise for moments when the emotions involved may get in the way of the more than robust facts.
We/I believe that UK Docks may get ‘wind’ of potential visits? As suggested  a more covert and 24/7 approach to monitoring the site activity and noise and pollution assessment would seem to be a better option?
As you are probably more than aware, we were bitterly disappointed with the planning committees decisions. However, none of the residents are about to let our concerns and experience of the yards’ less than appropriate position to established residences go.
We all hope that the environmental dept will ensure that our rights as residents are applied at the same level (which appears to be quite high in the councils esteem!) as UK Docks’ ‘established sites’ rights?
The councillors are supposed to represent their constituents; you are expected to apply the law in a just and equitable manner as local government employees.  As a Civil Servant myself, I am more than aware of my duty to uphold the public servant codes of conduct…

Yours respectfully
J R
(It has been unusually quiet in the yard this morning. Were they made aware you would be visiting?).

Council Approve Second Shed

Hi Julie,
It looks like the ‘Council’, putting in the roadworks, stop notices etc. and laying the cable for the second shed have forced the Planning Committee into approving the second shed. I did not manage to get to the meeting to hear the objections made by you, Melanie and co. Did you get the feeling that they had already decided which way they were going to vote and you may have well just recited a selection of your favourite nursery rhymes.
I hope that you made your objections clear to the Committee Members especially where you corrected the misdirections/misinformation in Mr Simmonette’s recommendation to them to approve the proposal by the agent Mr G Craig.
The are in a similar bind over my complaint. Customer Advocacy have already broadcast that the LGO have not upheld my complaint about the first shed without asking me first if I was going to appeal. If they had actually read the supporting draft carefully the would have realised that the ‘Senior Planning’ so completely misdirected/misinformed the Inspector that she had no option but to find for the Council.
Cheers
Mick
—– Original Message —–
May I ask how you remain independent of the council as it appears you are part of the council?
There are a number of issues which have summarily ignored:
1) it was admitted the shed, breaching planning, has not been signed off;
2) it was put to us this was because it was not in ‘the public interest’ – but we are the public and believe it is;
3) we were more than aware that UK Docks have been more than confident they would get the planning permission: for example: my husband was told as much by those on site; by those laying an electricity cable ‘for the new shed’.
I hope this clarifies why it is believed there has been a bias towards the business rather than the residents.
Julie