Example 2

The Principal Planning Officer had instructed Planning Enquiries to divert any complaint about UK Docks so that he could maintain the lie that the shed (still an unclad structure) had approval. On receit of the email below I wrote: If you are unable to supply me with answers to my questions could you please pass the issue to someone who can.

From: Peter.Cunningham
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 10:19:18
Subject: Slipway Development – Work Continues [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
Mr Dawson,
I responded to you this morning as follows:
The queries that you raise are not new, indeed I have been repeating my response to them for some time now, and you will recall that I explained the planning aspect of the Council’s position to you regarding this development during our meeting. This meeting included the chair and representatives of your residents group, and Councillors Anglin and McMillan. This meeting was requested by the residents and it was arranged by the Councillors.
My understanding is that the responses that I had provided to you at this meeting enabled the matter to be closed.
May I therefore suggest that you speak with the Chair of the residents group in respect of the points that you have raised below, as these have already been discussed and explained. If you are still not satisfied with the Council’s response then you should use the Council’s complaints procedure which has 3 stages.
Peter Cunningham
Principal Planning Officer

Example 3

After the meeting between the Council and residents in November where I was told by the Case Officer that the cover was ‘legal’ I became concerned that the height issue was significant. I knew (see page 1 ) that he had already avoided the issue by deferral and it seemed to me that he was in denial when he said that the cover had neither been built too high nor too wide at this meeting. The list of avoidance  goes on:

Email 13th January 2014 by the Principal Planning Officer in response to my email to Planning Enquiries 10th Jan.

“May I therefore suggest that you speak with the Chair of the residents group in respect of the points that you have raised below, as these have already been discussed and explained. If you are still not satisfied with the Council’s response then you should use the Council’s complaints procedure which has 3 stages.”

Email 28th January 2014 by the Planning Manager in response to my email to Planning Enquiries 10th Jan.

“I can only suggest that if you do wish to pursue this matter further you ask that my Head of Service, George Mansbridge, responds to any remaining points you may have formally under stage 2 of the Council’s complaints procedure. You will have to write to him and say specifically what you remain unhappy about.”
This email is rather long but it does give the dimensions of the cover measured by the Council in September:

Length 22.254m
Width 13.1m
Height at end facing River Drive 15.5m
Height at end facing river 18m