Not really – if a developer knows he will get away with it
A landlady returned to her pub after she was told to close for an “inventory” to find builders had demolish the historic building. Developers ripped through Carlton Tavern the day before it was to become a listed building, according to councillors, after they had been denied planning permission. Read more:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/11525262/Bulldozers-level-historic-pub-the-day-before-it-is-due-to-be-listed.html
Below is a clarification of a complaint against the council (at stage 3).
Subject: Inappropriate Development on River Drive. STC [PROTECT]
From: “Customer Advocates”
Date: Mon, November 24, 2014 10:12 am
To: “mick.dawson@theharbourview.co.uk”
Dear Mr Dawson
Thank you for your email dated 21 November 2014 which was forwarded to me for consideration.
I can confirm that as previously advised, the Council accepts that the structure in question does not have planning permission. My Stage 3 response to you dated 25 September 2014 also explained the reasons for the Council’s Head of Development Services’ decision that it was not expedient to take planning enforcement action with respect to the development. I am sorry that I am unable to make these points any more clearly than I already have.
I note your intention to approach the Local Government Ombudsman and this is the correct route for you to now follow if you remain dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of this matter.
Yours sincerely
Performance and Information Officer
Just history now, removed from the menu but there is copy of it in ‘Evidence’ if anyone is interested. South Tyneside Council ignored it but 300 people added their names including 38 from this website so it was important . Thank you everyone.
As the building work appeared to be completed on Monday(1st September) I emailed Head of Development Services to ask if the building had been signed off and read on for the interesting responses I have received.
THE Shields Ferry remains shipshape for passenger service – after sailing through a key inspection carried out by a remote control mini submarine.
A remotely operated vehicle (ROV) was sent underwater to check out the hull of the Spirit of the Tyne – after fears the vessel could have been left high and dry.
The Spirit of the Tyne, the newer of two ferries used by operators Nexus, was due to enter dry dock for the mandatory hull inspection.
But doubts over the availability of the dry dock facility on the Tyne left the ferry operators seeking an alternative. Continue reading Shields Ferry sails through her underwater MoT→
Unfortunately the main drawing is unavailable due to technical difficulties in the planning office. Please use the drawing above which is a detail from north gable end of a planned boat shed and estimate the height and width of the gable end at the southern end.
You are given that:-
The roof is flat.
The slope rises by 2.7 meters over the length of the shed.
686mm x 254mm RSJ is being used to construct the frame.
You are also requested to give some indication of the accuracy of your estimate as important decisions have to be made before the full plan is likely to be available.
Please take 10 minutes to read this and take action by 24th July (three days time)
Your objection does not need to be long or complicated, if you only have 5 minutes to spare simply write a line stating your objection.
Firstly the status of our petition oversized shed being built on River Drive South Shields by UK Docks is that ST Council have admitted that the ’shed’ has not been built to plan, and the only course of action available to the Council to consider is to ask the developer to take the shed down, but they have decided not to enforce that action. That fight goes on. Continue reading UK Docks new Planning Application for River Drive→
Senior officers of STC do not accept the proposition that the shed is built 3m too high and that quite detailed drawings are not drawn to scale. At the same time they do accept that it is built 1 m too wide. Read more.
More interestingly the plans for the expansion of UK Docks business at River Drive where it is surrounded on two sides by residential properties have caught the attention of the Press outside South Shields.
From: George Mansbridge
To: mick.dawson@theharbourview.co.uk
Cc: Leanne Bootes
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 8:21 PM
Subject: UK Docks [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
This email has been classified as: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Dear Michael
I know that Gordon has already responded to you following his further review of the file and in particular the report by TWDC to their Board. I did however want to drop you a line just to thank you for your time yesterday. I fully understand that there are issues associated with the UK Docks development that you remain unhappy with however I did appreciate the manner by which to conducted yourself when we met; so thank you for that.
We did not get an opportunity to talk about the letter you sent to my Chief Executive. My assumption is that you would still like his office to review this matter as a stage 3 complaint [in accord with our complaints process]. If that is not the case then please let me know and I will pass that information on.
Kind regards
George Mansbridge
Head of Development Services
South Tyneside Council
Economic Regeneration
Town Hall and Civic Offices
From: Gordon Atkinson
To: mick.dawson@theharbourview.co.uk
Cc: George Mansbridge ; Ian Rutherford
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 12:34 PM
Subject: UK Docks [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
This email has been classified as: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED
Dear Mr Dawson
Further to our meeting yesterday, I have gone through the disc and found the TWDC report from 1996, and now attach a copy. The only reference to the dimensions are in the paragraph I have highlighted on page 1. The height is said to be ‘approximately 15.5 m high’-I accept that there is no reference to whether this is the inland end, or the riverside end, but when read in conjunction with the drawing (8296/1A) it must refer to the inland end. There is no reference in the report to the height (or indeed any other dimension) of the proposal having been amended in the period between submission and approval by the TWDC. There is a reference (highlighted) on p2 which refers to amended plans but I believe this can only be to 8296/4 which introduced the windows as it is in the context of photomontages illustrating a solid structure. I have also spoken to Jonathon Wilson who confirms that the dimensions of the proposal were not altered during the assessment of the proposal.
“inventory” to find builders had demolish the historic building. Developers ripped through Carlton Tavern the day before it was to become a listed building, according to councillors, after they had been denied planning permission. Read more:-