Apologies to regular readers who have been logging on in search of an update. Monday's meeting was an odd experience which we've been mulling over and checking out a few facts. Anyway, here's what happened.
First of all, the owners made it quite clear that they do not want to chop down the trees. Let's repeat that one just so there's no mistake. The owners do not want to chop down the trees. Nor do we. Neither does the Tree Officer. Given that nobody wants to lose the trees, what, as one councillor put it, where we all there for?
The reason is this. The owners believe that a Tree Preservation Order is unnecessary because the trees are protected by planning permission. Putting it another way, the planning permission is contingent on the trees remaining and therefore a TPO is, according to them, not required. That's why they have appealed against the order. This is where it seemed (to us at any rate) somewhat surreal. What difference will it make if the TPO is not lifted? If they want the trees to remain, what's the problem with a TPO being in place?
However, we need to remember that the owners are trying to sell the property as a development site with planning permission. The owners agents are actively promoting the sale using information provided by SBC to the effect that planning permission might be extended to nine properties. If that happens, and there is no TPO in force, the trees will no longer be protected (our assumption). However, this point was not explored at any length during the meeting. The Tree Officer did, however, argue strongly in favour of retaining the order to ensure that the trees were protected in any eventuality.
One point that did emerge was that ownership of some of the trees on the northern boundary of the site is unclear. After considerable deliberation, the panel decided to postpone their decision until ownership has been established.
So there you have it. Or not, as the case might be. The saga is obviously going to go on for some time yet. As ever, we'll keep you up-to-date as and when we hear anything.
Wednesday, 20 July 2011
Saturday, 16 July 2011
IMPORTANT NEWS
Regular readers of The Blog will be aware that the owners of the pub are now trying to sell it as a development site with planning permission and have placed the sale with an estate agent.
We have now learnt that they are having difficulty in selling the property because, or so they claim, of the tree preservation order which was instigated by the Arborculturist at SBC. The owners have now appealed against the order and are trying to get it lifted. The appeal is to be heard on Monday. If it is allowed, it means they can cut down the trees.
It was bad enough losing the pub, focal point of Rough Close. Now these people are once again trying to spoil the appearance of our local area by chopping down the trees.
We understand that members of the public are allowed to write in to object to the appeal and we encourage you to do so.
Send in your objection to the appeal by email to Denise Hill, dhill@staffordbc.gov.uk. But you'll have to be quick. The appeal is to be heard on Monday, 18th July. Your objections will have to be there by first thing Monday morning.
We also understand that members of the public can attend the meeting which is to be held at the Civic Centre, Riverside, Stafford.
We have now learnt that they are having difficulty in selling the property because, or so they claim, of the tree preservation order which was instigated by the Arborculturist at SBC. The owners have now appealed against the order and are trying to get it lifted. The appeal is to be heard on Monday. If it is allowed, it means they can cut down the trees.
It was bad enough losing the pub, focal point of Rough Close. Now these people are once again trying to spoil the appearance of our local area by chopping down the trees.
We understand that members of the public are allowed to write in to object to the appeal and we encourage you to do so.
Send in your objection to the appeal by email to Denise Hill, dhill@staffordbc.gov.uk. But you'll have to be quick. The appeal is to be heard on Monday, 18th July. Your objections will have to be there by first thing Monday morning.
We also understand that members of the public can attend the meeting which is to be held at the Civic Centre, Riverside, Stafford.
Sunday, 12 June 2011
News from the Borough Council
We finally got an answer to our query about information the Borough Council is passing on to commercial organisations regarding an extension to the planning permission already granted. It doesn't tell us very much, however.
Development Control Manager, John Holmes, states that potential applicants must be allowed to speak freely and frankly with officers without being concerned about the details being made known to the public. As such, SBC contends that the information in question is exempt from disclosure under section 41 of the Act. We find this a little puzzling since it is the "potential applicants" themselves (Daniel & Hulme) who are making the disclosure known and using it in their advertising material!
Our other point, concerning why SBC is giving out signals that planning permission may be widened in the face of strong opposition from the local community, remains unanswered.
Maybe the time has come to involve our Borough Councillors again ...? What say you?
Development Control Manager, John Holmes, states that potential applicants must be allowed to speak freely and frankly with officers without being concerned about the details being made known to the public. As such, SBC contends that the information in question is exempt from disclosure under section 41 of the Act. We find this a little puzzling since it is the "potential applicants" themselves (Daniel & Hulme) who are making the disclosure known and using it in their advertising material!
Our other point, concerning why SBC is giving out signals that planning permission may be widened in the face of strong opposition from the local community, remains unanswered.
Maybe the time has come to involve our Borough Councillors again ...? What say you?
Friday, 27 May 2011
Arson In Rough Close
As you might have seen at the Voice of Rough Close, or with your very own eyes, arsonists have been at work in the area. Sometime during the late afternoon of Thursday, 26th May, person or persons unknown set the pub on fire. It was no doubt a very conscientious local resident who raised the alarm and the fire brigade were on the scene quickly enough to extinguish the blaze before it could cause any serious damage.
From what we could see, part of what used to be the restaurant area has been burnt but not a lot else. Certainly none of the building shell has been affected and the fire did not spread to local properties.
No doubt rumours will abound in the days to come as to who set the pub alight and no doubt the owners' names will be mentioned. However, would anyone wishing to cause serious harm commit arson in the middle of the afternoon with local residents out and about? We doubt it.
What we do find depressing is the abuse that this grand old pub has suffered over the past two years all of which has been brought about by property speculators (the owners) trying to make a fast buck. Apart from a few members of the Planning Committee, no one really believes that the owners ever had any intention of running the pub as a going concern.
A sign of the times maybe but what is just as disappointing is that Stafford Borough Council have seemingly ignored the fact that the owners never had sufficient funding to realise the plans approved by the Planning Committee way back in December. This is clearly evident from the advert on the Daniel Hulme website where the owners are trying to sell the pub as a development site or enter into a joint venture.
Whatever happened to caring about the community, about heritage and about the environment? Apart from local residents, is anyone really bothered?
From what we could see, part of what used to be the restaurant area has been burnt but not a lot else. Certainly none of the building shell has been affected and the fire did not spread to local properties.
No doubt rumours will abound in the days to come as to who set the pub alight and no doubt the owners' names will be mentioned. However, would anyone wishing to cause serious harm commit arson in the middle of the afternoon with local residents out and about? We doubt it.
What we do find depressing is the abuse that this grand old pub has suffered over the past two years all of which has been brought about by property speculators (the owners) trying to make a fast buck. Apart from a few members of the Planning Committee, no one really believes that the owners ever had any intention of running the pub as a going concern.
A sign of the times maybe but what is just as disappointing is that Stafford Borough Council have seemingly ignored the fact that the owners never had sufficient funding to realise the plans approved by the Planning Committee way back in December. This is clearly evident from the advert on the Daniel Hulme website where the owners are trying to sell the pub as a development site or enter into a joint venture.
Whatever happened to caring about the community, about heritage and about the environment? Apart from local residents, is anyone really bothered?
Sunday, 1 May 2011
All Quiet?
Not much sign of life over at the pub at the minute. Maybe it's got something to do with the Bank Holiday. Or the wedding. Or both. As previously indicated, we've been in touch with the Planning Dept. at SBC to ask what information they are giving out about potential changes to the planning permission already granted and why they are doing that given the local opposition.
They refused to tell us! So we wrote back requesting the same information under the Freedom of Information Act. That means they have to provide the information or explain why they are unable to do so. They have 20 working days in which to respond. As soon as we hear something you'll be the first to know.
They refused to tell us! So we wrote back requesting the same information under the Freedom of Information Act. That means they have to provide the information or explain why they are unable to do so. They have 20 working days in which to respond. As soon as we hear something you'll be the first to know.
Tuesday, 5 April 2011
Seconds out ...?
Well, we had thought that we had put an end to the Blog posts with the last entry and the emergence of the Voice of Rough Close web site. That, however, might not be the case. The owners of the pub have now put it up for sale, not, alas, as a going concern but as a development site with planning permission.
As we point out on the web site, we have no doubt that it is what the owners were planning all along ever since it became clear that they were not going to get the odious flats. Selling a block of flats to a housing association for social housing is one thing. Developing expensive houses to sell in a depressed property market is quite another. We did wonder whether this was indicative of the owners' lack of business sense or that they had some other plan in mind. We now know that it is the latter.
Unfortunately, it appears that the agents for the sale have been in touch with our old friends in the Planning Dept. at SBC who have given them to understand that they may approve up to nine (9) smaller properties. We've been in touch with SBC to find just what has been said but they have refused to tell us citing "confidentiality" as their reason for silence.
We think this is a terrible state of affairs. SBC have been well aware of local views for nearly two years now. Quite how they can justify giving out signals of this nature to a party which does not own the property (and probably never will), we find difficult to comprehend. But then to refuse to inform residents of just what they have said we think is beyond belief. Whatever happened to transparency in local government? What do you think about it?
This sounds to us like we may have another fight on our hands.
As this situation is clearly going to evolve over the next few weeks and months, we'll keep you informed of developments using this Blog (rather than the web site) as it is easier to keep track of events.
www.roughclose.org
As we point out on the web site, we have no doubt that it is what the owners were planning all along ever since it became clear that they were not going to get the odious flats. Selling a block of flats to a housing association for social housing is one thing. Developing expensive houses to sell in a depressed property market is quite another. We did wonder whether this was indicative of the owners' lack of business sense or that they had some other plan in mind. We now know that it is the latter.
Unfortunately, it appears that the agents for the sale have been in touch with our old friends in the Planning Dept. at SBC who have given them to understand that they may approve up to nine (9) smaller properties. We've been in touch with SBC to find just what has been said but they have refused to tell us citing "confidentiality" as their reason for silence.
We think this is a terrible state of affairs. SBC have been well aware of local views for nearly two years now. Quite how they can justify giving out signals of this nature to a party which does not own the property (and probably never will), we find difficult to comprehend. But then to refuse to inform residents of just what they have said we think is beyond belief. Whatever happened to transparency in local government? What do you think about it?
This sounds to us like we may have another fight on our hands.
As this situation is clearly going to evolve over the next few weeks and months, we'll keep you informed of developments using this Blog (rather than the web site) as it is easier to keep track of events.
www.roughclose.org
Saturday, 12 March 2011
Tuesday, 1 March 2011
Announcing a New Arrival
We are proud to announce the arrival of The Voice of Rough Close! A new web site dedicated to preserving what's left of our precious community.
Given the events of the past 18 months, it has become clear that our village needs to be cherished. If we residents don't, it is very clear that no one else will.
So here it is. You can click on the post title or simply go to www.roughclose.org. Kindly note that the site is still under construction. Not all the facilities are functional yet and you may encounter the odd glitch here and there but we didn't want to wait.
This does not mark the end of the road for The Blog. It will remain online for as long we are around. And there will be the occasional update. As we said earlier, The Blog is a testament to the hard work of a few dedicated souls and the support of the local and wider community in opposing the property speculators.
Sunday, 6 February 2011
Finis
Well, the time has come to pass on the sad news that our last throw of the dice has come to nothing and we must prepare ourselves for the inevitable.
Immediately after the planning committee meeting back in December, we got in touch with Bill Cash to explore any options we might have had. Bill then contacted Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and the chap responsible for the new(ish) Communities Act which will require more involvement of local communities in making planning decisions.
We optimistically thought that the Secretary of State might be able to help in some way. But he can't. At the end of the post is a copy of a letter received from one of his ministers, the Rt. Hon Greg Clark MP, no less. The only action left to us is to take up the matter through the Courts which would, of course, require the involvement of solicitors not to mention time and money. If anyone out there wants to do that then do let us know and we'll help out with the publicity.
This does not mean the end of the road for The Blog, however. We have another post in preparation about the lessons we have learned over the past eighteen months about democracy, local politics, common decency and a multitude of other points. Don't miss it!
Immediately after the planning committee meeting back in December, we got in touch with Bill Cash to explore any options we might have had. Bill then contacted Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and the chap responsible for the new(ish) Communities Act which will require more involvement of local communities in making planning decisions.
We optimistically thought that the Secretary of State might be able to help in some way. But he can't. At the end of the post is a copy of a letter received from one of his ministers, the Rt. Hon Greg Clark MP, no less. The only action left to us is to take up the matter through the Courts which would, of course, require the involvement of solicitors not to mention time and money. If anyone out there wants to do that then do let us know and we'll help out with the publicity.
This does not mean the end of the road for The Blog, however. We have another post in preparation about the lessons we have learned over the past eighteen months about democracy, local politics, common decency and a multitude of other points. Don't miss it!
Thursday, 6 January 2011
One Last Roll of the Dice
There's just one more line of enquiry we think we can take to halt this development and we are taking it! We aren't sure if it will come to anything. It might not. But it's worth a try. We'll keep you posted.
Monday, 20 December 2010
The Christmas Post
What did you get in the Christmas Post today? For us it was a few more Christmas cards as might be expected at this time of year, a somewhat belated communication from Bill Cash and a timely missive from Stafford Borough Council about the forthcoming Parish and Borough Council Elections in May 2011.
Which of our local politicians do you think will be re-elected? Of course, predictions are always tricky. And we don't know who'll be standing yet. But one thing is for sure. The Blog will always be here to remind you of the events of the past week. It might be that we take a different form. But we aren't going away just yet.
Friday, 17 December 2010
Win Some, Lose Some
The Planning Committee has spoken and although the result is not to our liking, we are more particularly concerned with the way the whole thing has been managed.
In case you are interested, the one member who voted against the application was our own Peter Roycroft. Well done Councillor!
We're not sure that it is the end of the game yet and are currently exploring any other avenues there might be.
We spoke for 3 minutes quoting extensively from national planning guidance (PPS) indicating how the application did not comply. These points were completely ignored by the Committee members who appeared to have made up their minds in advance.
Worse, we had been instructed to limit our points to planning issues only and not mention anything to do with the view that the owners had run the business down deliberately to develop the site. And yet the first councillor to speak expressed sympathy with the owners because residents had not used the pub suggesting that we had brought the situation upon ourselves.
He did not explain how we might have done that given that the pub was often closed after the applicants took over.
He did not explain how we might have done that given that the pub was often closed after the applicants took over.
Disappointingly one of our own Borough Councillors, Andrew Harp, spoke in favour of the application. As he was a member of the planning committee we had not been allowed to discuss any aspect of the application with him. Worryingly, he had let it be known when the consultation exercise started that he thought the application would go through this time. One can only wonder what his reasons were and why he was able to express such a view when the consultation exercise had barely started.
Several councillors also took the view that little else can be done with the site and that none of the letters of objection had come up with an alternative. This is untrue but more to the point, no one has asked the residents what they want. A meeting was suggested between residents and applicants (12 months ago) but this was declined by the owners.
Moreover, the Planning Dept. instructions are quite clear about the nature of the consultation exercise: it is for residents to make objections based on planning issues. To the best of our knowledge, there is no official mechanism for making counter proposals. Residents have been making alternative suggestions on their own initiative for some time including via the local press and directly to local councillors.
Moreover, the Planning Dept. instructions are quite clear about the nature of the consultation exercise: it is for residents to make objections based on planning issues. To the best of our knowledge, there is no official mechanism for making counter proposals. Residents have been making alternative suggestions on their own initiative for some time including via the local press and directly to local councillors.
The most appalling aspect must be the fact that the committee did a complete turn around from its position in May when the vast majority were against the proposal to a situation where the vast majority were in favour of essentially the same application. How does that happen? How do you go from a position where you are totally against something to one where you are totally in favour?
We're not sure that it is the end of the game yet and are currently exploring any other avenues there might be.
Thursday, 9 December 2010
Meeting Venue
Fed up with being pushed around by people muscling in on your community?
Want to have some say in what happens in your local area?
Incensed at a local authority that doesn't take any notice of your views?
Then get to the Planning Committee meeting on Wednesday, 15th December and support our objection to these outrageous plans. Please note that the meeting will NOT be held at the Borough Council offices. The venue is as follows:
County Buildings
Martin Street
Stafford
Starting time is 6.30pm
Here's a map. "A" marks the spot! Click the link below the map for a larger view.
View Larger Map
Want to have some say in what happens in your local area?
Incensed at a local authority that doesn't take any notice of your views?
Then get to the Planning Committee meeting on Wednesday, 15th December and support our objection to these outrageous plans. Please note that the meeting will NOT be held at the Borough Council offices. The venue is as follows:
County Buildings
Martin Street
Stafford
Starting time is 6.30pm
Here's a map. "A" marks the spot! Click the link below the map for a larger view.
View Larger Map
Saturday, 4 December 2010
Application Goes to Planning Committee
It's official. The planning application goes before the Planning Committee on Wednesday, 15th December. Let's do our utmost to get this most unwelcome proposal thrown out. We've done it before, we can do it again. Once last push folks! If you haven't written in to object, there is still time but you'd better be quick.
And don't forget the importance of a personal appearance. The more residents who turn up on the night to demonstrate the fierce opposition there is to this and other plans, the more notice the Committee is likely to take of our protest.
We'll publish further details nearer the time. For now, put a note in your diary:
And don't forget the importance of a personal appearance. The more residents who turn up on the night to demonstrate the fierce opposition there is to this and other plans, the more notice the Committee is likely to take of our protest.
We'll publish further details nearer the time. For now, put a note in your diary:
Wednesday, 15th December.
Sunday, 31 October 2010
Write In!
We now have a copy of the new plan but are still struggling to work out what's new about it. We are reliably informed, however, that the design features an amendment to the turning circle for vehicles. One thing for sure is that there is still the same number of houses and still the same unsightly mass of concrete.
If you are one of the many people having difficulties with the SBC website, we suggest that you simply write in to them voicing your concerns and objecting to the proposal. The address is:
Reference: 10/14268/ FUL
And of course, even if you have seen the plans write in anyway. There is still time!
If you are one of the many people having difficulties with the SBC website, we suggest that you simply write in to them voicing your concerns and objecting to the proposal. The address is:
Planning and Regeneration
Stafford Borough Council
Civic Centre
Riverside
Stafford
ST16 3AQ
Reference: 10/14268/ FUL
And of course, even if you have seen the plans write in anyway. There is still time!
Sunday, 24 October 2010
Still In The Dark?
The Borough Biodiversity Officer has now commented on the application and seems to find no problem with it apart from the absence of a suitable fence between the site and the badger setts. However, his remarks refer to a survey submitted by the applicants of which we can find no trace on the SBC website. Unless, of course, it is a reference to the survey we mentioned in the previous post which accompanied the application in August. Either that or there is something is amiss with the SBC website. We'll let you know.
There is also a new "plan" on the website. It is actually a drawing of the proposed development but there is nothing to explain what it is or in what way it differs from the previous version. Déjà vu anyone? This is par for the course. SBC has never provided any online information about new submissions or why they have been submitted.
Our guess is that it is the applicants' response to the Biodiversity Officer's comments about fencing. Unfortunately, we can't tell for sure because the zoom facility on the document web page doesn't work nor does the PDF download facility. The result is that you can't view the drawing in sufficient detail. What with this and other problems experienced by contributors to the Blog and residents alike, we think a note to our Borough Councillor is called for. You might wish to do the same.
There is also a new "plan" on the website. It is actually a drawing of the proposed development but there is nothing to explain what it is or in what way it differs from the previous version. Déjà vu anyone? This is par for the course. SBC has never provided any online information about new submissions or why they have been submitted.
Our guess is that it is the applicants' response to the Biodiversity Officer's comments about fencing. Unfortunately, we can't tell for sure because the zoom facility on the document web page doesn't work nor does the PDF download facility. The result is that you can't view the drawing in sufficient detail. What with this and other problems experienced by contributors to the Blog and residents alike, we think a note to our Borough Councillor is called for. You might wish to do the same.
Tuesday, 28 September 2010
Bats in the Belfry (Reprise [version 2.0])
We've been here before. You may have noticed the Biodiversity Officer's comments on the SBC website pointing out that there is inadequate ecological information with the new application particularly with regard to bats and badgers.
Given there were issues with the last application regarding the very same creatures, we are surprised that the applicants did not learn from this earlier experience and either provide the required information or submit a design that met everyone's requirements. Bats, badgers and residents alike.
There is a not-so-old saying: if you keep on doing what you've always done, you'll keep on getting what you've always got.
Given there were issues with the last application regarding the very same creatures, we are surprised that the applicants did not learn from this earlier experience and either provide the required information or submit a design that met everyone's requirements. Bats, badgers and residents alike.
There is a not-so-old saying: if you keep on doing what you've always done, you'll keep on getting what you've always got.
Thursday, 23 September 2010
More Support from Bill Cash MP
Member of Parliament Bill Cash has written to assure residents of his continued support in our opposition to the planning application. He has written to Stafford Borough Council on our behalf to voice his concerns.
Friday, 17 September 2010
Planning Application Called-in
The public consultation period has now finished. Past experience shows, however, that late submissions are sometimes accepted. If you haven't got your objection letter in yet, there may still be time.
Borough Councillor Richard Oldfield has called-in the application. That means that, whatever the outcome of the Planning Department's deliberations, it has to go before the Planning Committee.
More when we get it.
Borough Councillor Richard Oldfield has called-in the application. That means that, whatever the outcome of the Planning Department's deliberations, it has to go before the Planning Committee.
More when we get it.
Sunday, 12 September 2010
Parish Council Opposes New Builds!
Once again Fulford Parish Council has voted to oppose the proposed development on the pub site. A number of villagers turned out to make Councillors aware that the new houses are not wanted by the residents of Rough Close, a view endorsed by County Councillor Ian Parry who also attended.
Even though most residents remain opposed to the plans, we need to make the point forcefully by sending in letters of objection to Stafford Borough Council. If you haven't written in already, get those letters off!!
Even though most residents remain opposed to the plans, we need to make the point forcefully by sending in letters of objection to Stafford Borough Council. If you haven't written in already, get those letters off!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)