A very brief post (more later) to let you know what happened at tonight's Planning Committee meeting at which the latest amendment was discussed.
The upshot is that the owners cannot demolish the pub until another bat survey has been undertaken at a time when those delightful creatures are likely to be active. As and when they do knock down the building, the owners will be required to remove all rubble and other mess and erect fencing to prevent illegal use of the site.
Hopefully, this will go some way to alleviating some of the concerns expressed by residents in the various letters sent in to SBC.
We'll post again later (it's been a long evening) when we see the precise wording of the Committee's decision.
Wednesday, 14 December 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Having just been briefed by a committee attender the message shared was that the developer got exactly what he wanted (apart from the bat trivia) and that the protections asked for by the community were again ignored by the council.
ReplyDeleteResult ? Only for the developer surely.
Expecting anything of consequence from this council in the interests of the community does seem like flogging the proverbial dead horse.
It is a result sort of? Great news that a bat survey must be done. At least the committee have stipulated further conditions to be met by the owners.It's some consolation that they will have to clear away any rubble and fence it off too. Thanks to you John and Peter Roycroft for putting the community's concerns to the committee.
ReplyDeleteRe the first comment, we don't know who you've been talking to or what the "message shared" was all about but what we can tell you is that it was the "shared" opinion of those from Rough Close who were actually present at the meeting that we got as much as we could have hoped for. The owners have to fork out for two more surveys. The pub is still standing for the time being. The owners can't demolish it, not yet at any rate, and they have to secure the site as and when it does come down. This was not a condition of the original planning permission but now it is. Your comment suggests that you were not aware of these points.
ReplyDeleteAs for the bat "trivia", don't knock it friend! The wild life card has formed the basis of our most solid legal argument ever since this whole saga began.
Bats are a legally protected species it being a crime so much as to damage a roosting place even if bats aren't actually present. The more evidence there is of bats in the pub, the greater the chance of it remaining in situ. As I said, don't knock it! We need all the help we can get.
Finally, many thanks to the small number of Rough Close residents who turned out to support the cause on Wednesday evening. Special thanks to Councillor Roycroft whose efforts have been nothing short of magnificent.
If this is a result it seems to be 4-1 to the developer.How this can be considered a Rough Close win is beyond me.It is nothing more than a minor inconvenience to the site owner who has (TPO excepted) won every round with the councils`s support.
ReplyDelete