by David Smith | Feb 5, 2018 | Inquiry News
SOS Annual General Meeting: This will be held on Monday 12th March in the village hall annex starting at 7.30. The agenda is given below. It is hard to believe that this will be our eighth AGM since SOS was formed following the public meeting in the village hall on 17th March 2010. Some may remember that occasion when the hall was packed with many unable to gain entry and with the police attending to ensure order. Since then we have engaged in many activities including: recruiting over 2,300 members of SOS. holding some 24 public meetings. distributing 12 leaflets throughout the whole village thanks to our band of willing volunteers, taking part in the public enquiry (to our cost!), successfully opposing and reducing the cost claim in the High Court, several meetings with District planners and speaking at meetings of TDC Planning Committee, appearing on Anglia News, resolving an issue with the Advertising Standards Agency following a complaint lodged by the Priory owners, holding dozens of events including Race Nights with Clacton Rotary Club, quizzes, Garage Trail Sales, a Fun Dog Show and dances, and last but by no means least communicating via the St Osyth News magazine – many thanks to the editors for the opportunity. All this has required considerable work and commitment. We have had some magnificent support from the community but it is true to say that we are now somewhat weary. We haven’t finished yet but we would welcome some new blood to inject some fresh ideas. We have raised considerable funds from the events and are very grateful for the financial support we...
by David Smith | Nov 25, 2016 | Inquiry News
St Osyth Parish Council have arranged a public meeting concerning the approval of the plans to build 72 houses on Westfield (behind Mill Street) and 17 houses in the ancient Parkland along Colchester Road in order to fund repairs to St Osyth Priory – see previous news items. St Osyth Village Hall – Monday 28th November 7.30 pm start. . Gary Guiner, Tendring District Council Planning Manager will be present to talk about the decision. Mr Guiver is the planning officer who dealt with the applications which were rejected by the Planning Committee and were then the subject of the Public Inquiry which ended prematurely on Friday 18th November when agreement was reached between the appellants and TDC....
by David Smith | Nov 21, 2016 | Inquiry News
The Decision Notices relating to the approval of the Westfield and Parkland developments are available on the TDC planning website. They are referenced here if you wish to read them. You need to read right to the end. There are a few differences between them. . Copy each address below into your browser. This will get you to the list of documents. Select ‘Decision’. . https://idox.tendringdc.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=O6APP0QB0GS00 . https://idox.tendringdc.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=O6E5H0QB0EL00 . You will notice that mention is made of: . 1 Proposed covenant to prevent additional building on West Field or Parkland. 2 Reference to ‘further enabling development’. 3 Mention of FOUR properties within Parkland for occupation by the family?? 4 Mention of a Trust but no details of its scope. . As always, the devil will be in the...
by David Smith | Nov 17, 2016 | Inquiry News
Day three at the Inquiry. The day began with the inspector asking what progress had been made on the S106 agreement. Mr Village said that there were discussions last night and he was asking that the inquiry be suspended so that the agreement could be completed. Mr Village declined to supply any further details. The inspector reluctantly agreed to suspend the inquiry until 12 noon. All representatives then went into conference leaving the public assuming that they would agree something along the lines specified by Part B of the Planning Committee decision and that would be the end of it. However, early signs of life returning suggested that they had NOT reached agreement. The inquiry re-started at mid-day and the inspector said she was waiting with baited breath to hear the outcome. Mr Village apologized for the delay but said it had no effect on the inquiry as there was no agreement! He offered no further comments and the public and the inspector remain in ignorance of what happened. The inspector said she was a bit worried that the inquiry might overrun which would be a major problem as she already had commitments well into next year. She said she wishes the case of the Council and HE to end next week with the case for the appellants the following (final) week. She thinks the site visits will have to be arranged sometime after then. She asked Mr Village to pick up the pace a bit. Tomorrow (Day 4) we will start at 9.30 and end at 5.30pm. She then asked Mr Village if the above discussions were on-going...
by David Smith | Nov 16, 2016 | General, Inquiry News
Firstly, this is the correct version of the inspector’s Preliminary List of the Main Issues. effect of proposals on the significance, character and setting of St Osyth Priory. whether the character and appearance of St Osyth Conservation Area would be preserved and enhanced. effect on community infrastructure – in particular education, medical, highway safety, ecology. whether the benefits would secure the long term future of the heritage assets and the prospects of benefits coming forward along with the consequences should they not. Day 2 started with Mr Bird (QC for TDC) examining Paul Drury (TDC witness for Heritage). He took him through his qualifications and experience, some of which concerned important roles within English Heritage – Inspector of Historic Buildings etc. He was also involved in the compilation of a number of EH documents including “Enabling Development and the Conservation of Significant Places (2008)”. He went through all the things we had heard at the first inquiry – views into and out from the Priory, degrees of harm, the historical significance of Mill Street, the principle of building within the Parkland etc. The only person who hadn’t heard it all before was the inspector. In the afternoon session, Mr Village (QC for the appellants) cross questioned Mr Drury. Mr Village started off by extolling the virtues of City & Country as ‘market leaders’ and claiming they were the ideal company to deal with the Priory and invited Mr Drury to agree – which he did. Through his questions, Mr Village then drew attention to the fact that (in his opinion) TDC had changed their approach completely at the last minute before the...
by David Smith | Nov 15, 2016 | General, Inquiry News
The inspector appears very approachable. She started by explaining about public involvement and asked for names of anyone present who would wish to speak. A few people responded. She had also had emails from some others. She will hold an evening session on Tuesday 22nd November in the Weeley offices. Anyone else who wishes to speak should contact Leanne Nicholas (email: lnicholas@tendringdc.co.uk). The inspector has not stipulated any time limit but depends on how many wish to speak. She realises that some may not be available and so will try to arrange a slot for them during the daytime sitting. Anyone wishing to speak should provide something in writing in advance – doesn’t need to be detailed – just a series of bullet points will do initially but she would like a copy of the final version. She hopes that people will not repeat what has already been said. Mr Village (counsel for the appellants’) will cross question any speaker if he wishes to as will the inspector. Mrs Mahony also indicated that it would be possible for people to ask questions of witnesses from the floor during the inquiry provided it was in relation to their verbal statement. The inspector said that she had read through all the individual objections submitted as well as the documents from the main participants and identified what she considered were the main points of contention which were: Setting of the Priory – character and appearance. The conservation area. Community infrastructure. Education. Medical. Highway safety. 4. Conservation. Future of the Heritage Asset and prospect of delivery and consequences of not being passed. Mrs Mahony said...
