Stafford Sleaze and Scandal

M

markpa12003

Well-Known Forumite
PPPPPP said:
Rugby Club planning application time again next Monday. This is the sort of solid gold sleaze that makes Stafford great. Loads more on the Borough C website.


Process:

There was no pre-application consultation
The application is a moving target because of continual amendments
The application was advertised with a misleading site address; there was a lack of publicity
The applicant was advised that no more amendments would be accepted then more information was submitted
There has not been sufficient time for late amendments to be viewed by consultees
The process has not been transparent
Supporting comments from people outside of Stafford should be disregarded
References to the previous approval are irrelevant and should be ignored
External influences such as the Newsletter stating new courses from this site suggest the decision has already been made
The height of the clubhouse is not clear
Network Rail were not informed but there is an impact on rail users
Senior SBC officer who is also a SRC Director is party to information on the application
The club have links with Adam Hill and Mike Heenan
Council officers have been lodging support online
Land charge searches on the housing estate did not reveal previous applications on this site
If approved, the case will need to be judicially reviewed

Also (a classic, this one)

The club have no legal right to build over protected green space
Click to expand...


No statutory requirement to have pre-application discussions. Notwithstanding this, pre-application discussions do not need to be disclosed.
I assume your referring to the determination date - Determination dates can be extended. National Planning Policy encourages developers / Councils to work together to find solutions etc
The planning application was published in the local press. A site notice was also erected near to the site. I also suspect letters were sent to nearby residents.
In respect to bullet point 4 - so?
Any material amendments should have been reconsulted for additional 21 days. Did this happen?
Not transparent? All documents / responses (I assume) have been uploaded onto the Council's website. Meeting notes etc are not uploaded onto the council's website
Objection / supporting comments from anywhere is taken on board. However, more regard should be taken to those comments received from local residents.
Why is references to previous approvals irrelevant? It provides a background to the application.
Local press always get things wrong. Local Council cannot be held accountable for lazy / ill informed reporters.
Is it not possible to ascertain the height of the club house from the scaled plans? Has the application been approved in outline or detail? if it's an outline application detailed matters, such as roof height will be determined at a later date.
How will railway users be impacted? Network Rail will only be consulted if they are directly affected by the proposal. Will the floodlights impact the train drivers etc?
The club can have links to SBC. However, any interests should be declared. Adam Hill / Mick Heenan do not sit on the planning committee and, therefore, were not involved in the decision making process (they may have exerted pressure on members however how do you prove it?)
Council can lodge support online, as well as objections.
Land searches should have picked up nearby applications. However, this is an issue that home owners should direct towards their conveyancing solicitor not the council.
A JR claim can be made, however all but one of the points raised above will not result in a successful JR claim.
 
P

PPPPPP

Well-Known Forumite
You seem to have a lot of free time to write such a detailed defence for the council. Can I point out that I just pasted what was in the agenda. All opinions expressed were those of others, because I think the planners do a fantastic job. Especially the ones who made the traffic system a national joke.

Adam Hill may not be on the committee but as a Team Riverslide inmate he must be in a good position accidentally to overhear things. Is there anyone who wouldn't think this is a potential conflict of interest? Be interested to know what Mick Heenan has to do with this application?? Spill the beans!
 
M

markpa12003

Well-Known Forumite
PPPPPP said:
You seem to have a lot of free time to write such a detailed defence for the council. Can I point out that I just pasted what was in the agenda. All opinions expressed were those of others, because I think the planners do a fantastic job. Especially the ones who made the traffic system a national joke.

Adam Hill may not be on the committee but as a Team Riverslide inmate he must be in a good position accidentally to overhear things. Is there anyone who wouldn't think this is a potential conflict of interest? Be interested to know what Mick Heenan has to do with this application?? Spill the beans!
Click to expand...

I have not provided a detailed response, I have merely provided one line responses to each of the points you posted.

The Council does not need a defence if that's the only points being raised in respect of a potential JR.

If you read my posts correctly you will see that I am trying to provide you with some assistance / guidance. However, quite frankly, given your responses I'm not sure why I bother!

I agree there is a conflict of interest and that's one of the avenues I would progress as part of the JR. I have no idea what Mike Heenans involvement is, I was merely quoting your post. May be you could ask the person that you quoted?

Oh...the planners don't have any remit for the roads. This falls under the remit of the county councils highways department who are a statutory consultee on all major planning applications but why let details & facts get in the way of another one of your rants.
 
Last edited:
P

PPPPPP

Well-Known Forumite
markpa12003 said:
I have not provided a detailed response, I have merely provided one line responses to each of the points you posted.

The Council does not need a defence if that's the only points being raised in respect of a potential JR.

If you read my posts correctly you will see that I am trying to provide you with some assistance / guidance. However, quite frankly, given your responses I'm not sure why I bother!

I agree there is a conflict of interest and that's one of the avenues I would progress as part of the JR. I have no idea what Mike Heenans involvement is, I was merely quoting your post. May be you could ask the person that you quoted?

Oh...the planners don't have any remit for the roads. This falls under the remit of the county councils highways department who are a statutory consultee on all major planning applications but why let details & facts get in the way of another one of your rants.
Click to expand...


First, who mentioned the county co highways dept, and are you saying that the roads aren't planned? That would explain a lot.

Second, as I said, the post simply quoted part of the published agenda. We can assume it was an accurate summary, carefully written and checked by council planning execs, so apparently they are the people we would have to ask about Hill and Heenan's involvement. I'm sure you'll agree that should be public information in a totally transparent local authority.

Third, can you offer any guidance into whether a council has a right to build over protected green space?

Fourth, are you by any chance an employee of Stafford Borough Council?
 
proactive

proactive

Enjoying a drop of red.
PPPPPP said:
First, who mentioned the county co highways dept, and are you saying that the roads aren't planned? That would explain a lot.

Second, as I said, the post simply quoted part of the published agenda. We can assume it was an accurate summary, carefully written and checked by council planning execs, so apparently they are the people we would have to ask about Hill and Heenan's involvement. I'm sure you'll agree that should be public information in a totally transparent local authority.

Third, can you offer any guidance into whether a council has a right to build over protected green space?

Fourth, are you by any chance an employee of Stafford Borough Council?
Click to expand...
Don't take this the wrong way and you know how I feel about corruption in town, but you're barking up the wrong tree having a bit of a go at @markpa12003 :)
 
M

markpa12003

Well-Known Forumite
PPPPPP said:
First, who mentioned the county co highways dept, and are you saying that the roads aren't planned? That would explain a lot.

Second, as I said, the post simply quoted part of the published agenda. We can assume it was an accurate summary, carefully written and checked by council planning execs, so apparently they are the people we would have to ask about Hill and Heenan's involvement. I'm sure you'll agree that should be public information in a totally transparent local authority.

Third, can you offer any guidance into whether a council has a right to build over protected green space?

Fourth, are you by any chance an employee of Stafford Borough Council?
Click to expand...

Not again...as previously stated I do not work for Stafford Borough Council, nor have I ever done so.

Roads are planned and they are first set out in Local Transport Plans and then included in Local Plans. LTPs are produced by County Highways. A Local Plan is produced by SBC planning officers. Please note what comes first; County Highways.

SBC planning officers do not propose new roads without it first being included in a LTP or requested by the County Council highways dept. As such, your wrong to blame the planning dept for the roads.

Roads will only be included within a Local Plan if an independent inspector is convinced that there is a compelling case for the new road and it's likely to come forward.

You have not previously stated that the list you quoted was included on the agenda. Notwithstanding this, as I have previously stated, most of the points are irrelevant for a JR. I agree there should be transparency and I believe there has been a conflict of interest. Hence why I would pursue this avenue for the JR.

Lastly, councils can approve developments on protected green spaces, green belts etc etc as long as the developments can be justified in policy, environmental and technical terms. Do I agree that they should have approved the scheme on Doxey Marshes, no. However, a JR can not challenge the decision only how the decision was made.
 
Withnail

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
markpa12003 said:
... a JR can not challenge the decision only how the decision was made.
Click to expand...
Aye, there's the rub.

Point of Order -

- the list quoted above re 'Process' actually comes from the Planning Officer's summary of the reasons for objection cited in the Public Comments section of the planning portal.

It is quite clear that @markpa12003 has addressed these within the context of a potential review to demonstrate that they are all answerable in that context. It is irrelevant whether he/she agrees or disagrees with them, all that matters is whether a review of the process of this decision would be likely to find it questionable.

The question is therefore not whether this stinks, it is whether, and/or whence, the stench can be demonstrably sniffed out..

So let's get a farking grip, eh?
 
Withnail

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
markpa12003 said:
Adam Hill do(es) not sit on the planning committee and, therefore, w(as) not involved in the decision making process ((he) may have exerted pressure on members however how do you prove it?)
Click to expand...
That's it, isn't it - the burden of proof lies with the accuser.

Without proof, which is unlikely to be forthcoming, this line of enquiry is entirely defunct.
 
J

james w

Well-Known Forumite
Was there an outcome? This was a couple of years ago so even though the wheels of justice turn very slowly I'd imagine there should be a conclusion.
 
P

PPPPPP

Well-Known Forumite
Seems oddly familiar to the way the case against another prominent cllr was suddenly dropped. Alleged wife beating is just another misunderstanding, obviously.
 
Last edited:
P

PPPPPP

Well-Known Forumite
captainpish said:
Masons perchance?
Click to expand...

No chance.

What Sort Of Men Become Freemasons?
  • Freemasons believe that a man has a responsibility to act with honour in everything that he does.
  • Freemasons believe in God - a Supreme Being.
  • Freemasons allow others the same right to their beliefs that they expect themselves.
  • Freemasons have a responsibility to leave the world a better place than they found it.
  • Freemasons believe not only that it is not only more blessed to give than to receive, but that it is also more fun.
  • Freemasons help their Brothers when they need it, and are willing to accept their help when they need it themselves.
  • Freemasons believe that there is more to life than financial success.
  • Freemasons strive to be good citizens, with a moral duty to be true to the country in which they live?.
  • Freemasons show compassion to others, believing that goodness of heart is among the most important of human values.
  • Freemasons strive to live a brotherly life.
If these ideals strike a chord with you, you would find like-minded brothers in a Lodge. Freemasons are men like you.
 
John Marwood

John Marwood

I ♥ cryptic crosswords
PPPPPP said:
No chance.

What Sort Of Men Become Freemasons?
  • Freemasons believe that a man has a responsibility to act with honour in everything that he does.
  • Freemasons believe in God - a Supreme Being.
  • Freemasons allow others the same right to their beliefs that they expect themselves.
  • Freemasons have a responsibility to leave the world a better place than they found it.
  • Freemasons believe not only that it is not only more blessed to give than to receive, but that it is also more fun.
  • Freemasons help their Brothers when they need it, and are willing to accept their help when they need it themselves.
  • Freemasons believe that there is more to life than financial success.
  • Freemasons strive to be good citizens, with a moral duty to be true to the country in which they live?.
  • Freemasons show compassion to others, believing that goodness of heart is among the most important of human values.
  • Freemasons strive to live a brotherly life.
If these ideals strike a chord with you, you would find like-minded brothers in a Lodge. Freemasons are men like you.
Click to expand...


http://search.ancestry.co.uk/search....0&o_iid=41013&o_lid=41013&o_sch=Web+Property
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top