Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
wahl

Talks in progress for Peel Hall

Recommended Posts

WHY ARE TALKS "PROCEEDING" . THIS MATTER WAS DEALT WITH YEARS AGO AND mr pETER tAYLOR OR ANY COUNCIL EMPLOYEE HAVE NO RIGHT TO EVEN TALK WITH DEVELOPERS. SACK TAYLOR TO SHOW WHO IS BOSS THE COUNCIL OR THE EMPLOYEE

 

Keep Warrington Green areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talks have been held between senior planning officers and developers apparently re building on Peel Hall grounds again and from what Ms Jones says they appear to be highly advanced....... residents and councillors won appeals against previous development plans on there and allegidely no councillors know of these latest discussions as they have just been between planning officers and the developer.

 

Isn't that normal with private planning applications before submission though !?!?

 

I bet some councillors were aware of it though as I heard the rumours ages ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Diz.

 

WBC shot themselves in the foot when they didn't jump through the proper hoops in getting this land designated as green belt.

 

This particular developer seems to specialise in (successfully) challenging councils, so WBC may just roll over.

 

Hope not though, I live in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The council haven't just shot themselves in the foot they've made a complete balls up again !!!

 

Why on earth don't they ever bother safeguarding land (or buildings for that matter) and why don't they think before palming off responsibility of our assets to third parties.

 

The developers will just keep pecking away at it in the knowledge that sooner or later they will and get their own way and the council wont be able to do a bloody thing about it... the residents and certain councillors will all be outraged again when the plans are submitted... and the bloody planning officers have been bending over backwards offering advice and helping the developer with the new plans all along :evil:

 

Anyway... maybe it's all wrong and just a political point scoring exercise as it is the Jones woman who has brought it all to light :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just trying to do a bit of homework on this, from this page:

 

http://www.warrington.gov.uk/home/transport_planning_and_environment/Planning/planning_policy_homepage/supplementary_planning_documents_planning_advice_notes/

 

..can anyone open this link?

 

http://www.warrington.gov.uk/content_documents/Documents/Planning/Managing_the_housing_supply_supplementary_planning_document.pdf

 

I get a message that says something like "file is broken and cannot be repaired", which I thought was wonderfully ironic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Opens fine for me Fugs.

 

Second link opens a council PDF document called 'Supplementary Planning Document

Managing The Housing Supply -

Approved by Executive Board

16th July 2007

 

I've saved a copy of the pdf document and can email it to you if you still can't access it. PM me your email address if you want me to :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will do but don't forget to pm me your email address as I'll have to send it via my personal email to your personal one cos I can't do it through here as it doesn't allow attachments .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, s'ok Diz, I've been able to open it at w*rk.

 

I think it probably is normal for developers to consult with planning departments before submitting any plans, but some of the policies outlined in that document should render this pointless.

 

I fear the worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fugtifino is correct ... the document seems to indicate that developers have no chance... so why have any talks or secret meetings?

 

Is this another example of council officers doing their own thing or even accepting backhanders?

 

perhaps there should be a public inquiry into the behaviour of the council officials?u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I very much doubt they are allowed to take backhanders wahl <_<

 

At the end of the day the planning officers don't actually make any decisions as such... the decisions are made by the the Exec Board and final decision is made by the Developemnt Control Committee (or whatever they call themselves these days)... and I presume other councillors, the leaders and even the council's solicitors must be involved on some of these grander issues.

 

The PROBLEM though is that the Exec and DC comittee take the advice of the lead planning officers and their reports, findings and recomendations as after all they are the ones who are supposed to know what they are doing and what is allowed, what is right and what is wrong !

 

The planning department is clearly failing in it's duties and seemingly overstepping the mark somewhat in some cases though and with every new thing that comes to light public confidence in them lessens even further and suspicions continue to grow.

 

Time for one heck or a sort out, a change of working practices and maybe some new faces before they have no credibility left at all :unsure:

 

And no more secret talks.. We've seen it all with Stockton Heath School, Greenalls, Walton Locks, ALL OF THESE PLANS WERE REFUSED THEN CAME BACK AGAIN AND WERE PASSED ! Then there's Bewsey Old Hall, Urban Splash REFUSED... Sankey Park and Gullivers Plans not submitted as yet but apparenly a no go for now and now we are back to Peel Hall again.

 

Round and round until permission is finally given it seems :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dizzy when you say "I very much doubt they are allowed to take backhanders " is probably true in a decent world.

However we are in a world where backhanders, bribes, holidays, false expences, in fact anything appears to be coming the norm.

 

There is no adequate monitoring of anything from financial deals through water charges andf energy rip-offs to land deals. the organisations who are supposed to monitor these are weak and ineffective. The moral standards set years ago seem to have disappeared.

 

if, as you say,"The planning department is clearly failing in it's duties and seemingly overstepping the mark somewhat in some cases though and with every new thing that comes to light public confidence in them lessens even further and suspicions continue to grow " then who is auditing them? Where age the "guardians"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Diz.

 

WBC shot themselves in the foot when they didn't jump through the proper hoops in getting this land designated as green belt.

 

This particular developer seems to specialise in (successfully) challenging councils, so WBC may just roll over.

 

Hope not though, I live in this area.

 

Fugtifino, I think the Peel Hall site did have Green Belt status, but this was removed supposedly so that affordable housing targets could be met. Plans were/are I believe for 2,000 housing units(not sure how many affordable in this figure)

The housing supply documents you are looking at are dated 2007, since then Marks & Co applied for AND GOT

Govt approval to increase housing supply by a further 20%. You need to check out the Mid-Mersey Growth Point documents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dizzy said...."I very much doubt they are allowed to take backhanders wahl :wink:"

 

 

'are allowed to :wink:' :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

cleverly worded allegedly :wink::lol::lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

........ if, as you say,"The planning department is clearly failing in it's duties and seemingly overstepping the mark somewhat in some cases though and with every new thing that comes to light public confidence in them lessens even further and suspicions continue to grow " then who is auditing them?...

 

Us ? :lol::lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed !!

 

Where are you McBain... :unsure: please come back !

 

Seconded!

 

Diz, as a moderator, can't you make contact and tell him that his return is requested?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Sha.

 

...the Peel Hall site did have Green Belt status, but this was removed supposedly so that affordable housing targets could be met.

 

Would that the motives were so noble, but I think it was removed from the green belt by Mr Justice Cocklecarrot at the behest of Satnam Millennium:

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2007/2648.html

 

I'll have a look for that Mersey Growth thingie, ta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good !! Not that petitions do much though as the are only classed as ONE objection if it comes to planning (or they were anyway, maybe the rules have changed now) !

 

They do shows there is opposition though which is good.

 

PS Sha... I wish I could but I can't I'm afraid :?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO formal applications have been made to build on parkland at Peel Hall.

Apparently, there have so far been no formal enquiries, and no planning applications have been made

 

 

lets hope it stays like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's good to hear.... but who are Satman then ?

 

Guess it's all just political scaremongering by the Clr Jones woman as after all it was election day yesterday. They shouldn't start these sort of rumours which make it sound like something 'is' going on in secret as it's not fair on local residents !

 

from yesterdays news page.....

http://www.warrington-worldwide.co.uk/articles/11133/1/Planners-out-of-control-says-MP/Page1.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who is running Warrington Borough Council? Elected Councillors or unelected officers so asks Helen Jones mp.

 

Why?because it is claimed thet council officials are carrying on taking and meeting with the "developer"

Apparently messrs Farrel and Taylor of the planning department believe they can do so.

It is time this labour council stood up and sacked them as it is apparent that neither have the interests of Warrington at heart.

 

Cllr Mather should propose their removal and show he will not allow such underhand behavoiur by paid servants of this town

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...