From: Melanie Todd
Subject: Re: Breach of Grant of Planning Permission and Conditions, UK Docks, River Drive
Date: 29 April 2014 20:18:31 BST
To: Head of Planning
Re: Breach of Grant of Planning Permission and Conditions, UK Docks, River Drive
Dear Head of Planning,
With regard to my last e-mail to you of the 7th April 2014, and your reply of the 9th April 2014, both of which are copied below, I am still awaiting answers to the questions I posed.
You stated you needed to talk to the Head of Development Services in order to reply. Have you had the opportunity to talk to the Head of Development Services yet, and are you able to give replies to any of the questions I raised? I believe your unwillingness to answer questions and the continuous lack of clarity over the situation, despite eight months of correspondence, to be unacceptable. I and other residents have a right to ask questions; voice concerns; be heard; and to receive comprehensive replies from local authority officers to reasonable questions and concerns.
In shared correspondence received by a neighbour in Harbour View from the Head of Development Services dated 04/04/14, the Head of Development Services states that the the planning permission requires that “the ends of the structure are fully enclosed when works are being undertaken”; “the approved plans require that mono-flex end panels are attached to the structure”; “The structure is however being used operationally by the applicant and these end panels have not been attached”; and, further, the Head of Development Services goes on to say that it is his intention “to write formally to the operator instructing them that all operational works within the shelter should cease with immediate effect until such a time that the end panels are installed”.
Today, 29th April 2014, we see another vessel being worked on inside the unfinished structure at the UK Docks, River Drive site. End panels to the structure have not been installed.
Strangely, you have stated that “The council in its role as planning authority cannot act to stop work which relates to the lawful use of the site for general industrial purposes. The status of the structure can have no bearing on the continuing use of the site”. I have asked you to explain this and you have not done so. Your statement appears to ignore your own admission that the structure is not built to plan and is in breach of a Grant of Planning Permission which you are charged with overseeing. Furthermore, your position of 18th March 2014 appears to be contradictory to the position of the Head of Development Services, as quoted above from 4/4/2014.
Could you please as a matter of urgency address this further breach of planning permission by UK Docks, and give some clarity to the position of STMBC with regard to the status of the development at UK Docks River Drive site and address the legitimate and serious concerns that have been raised by myself and fellow concerned residents over an 8 month period since the unannounced start of this development, and still not fully addressed.
Your sincerely,
Melanie Todd
With the slipping of the Ferry, UK Docks seem to be saying “We can do what we want and if you don’t like it, tough. Sort it out with Planning.” The trouble is that planning have dropped themselves in it by allowing UK Docks to progress this far with the development on River Drive.
The Port of Tyne (PoT) have been allowed to extend the quay for their Biomass Handling and Storage Facility which blocks off Tyne Dock and makes the UK Dock’s slipway into Tyne Dock and Readheads Landing redundant. This is not subject to the normal planning laws but the closure of the slipway and landing are, and if anyone objects, planning permission must be sought. People did object to the landing being closed and it required a Secretary of States Decision to get it closed. Strangely enough UK Docs never muttered a word, maybe because they have been promised carte blanche with the site on River Drive.
The Planning office are in a bind because the real decisions are being made by the top people in the STC, PoT and possibly the Government because at the end of the day it is anyone that supports the Biomass Project that counts. We in Harbour View and Greens Place are suffering collateral damage. If I’ve got this right I’d like to put a link to the work that Matthew is doing on biofuels onto the website.