Our Formal Complaint To Chelmsford City Council.
We have today submitted this formal complaint to Chelmsford City Counil. Read more about the Complaints Procedure here.
Hamptons Sports and Leisure, Tydemans, Great Baddow, Chelmsford CM2 9FH
In relation to the ongoing situation at the above address, we wish to complain formally in the strongest terms that Chelmsford City Council have:
A. Failed to act in an open and transparent manner.
i) Did not notify residents of changes of position to allow worship. In a letter to residents and interested parties dated 23.09.20 the council state : “We will update residents as to the timeframe for the submission of this application, and any other significant developments in this case”
ii) Issued confusing and incorrect information in the response to residents dated 23.09.20. The council are now claiming that this letter refers to plans submitted by the CMS in June 2020, and not the documented planning breach.
iii) Did not notify residents of the full results of the enforcement investigation in July/August 2020.
iv) Have not issued any public statements explaining the ongoing situation despite considerable public interest.
v) Have withheld documents requested under the Freedom Of Information Act. vi) Responses from Town Planning are now unsigned. Residents have a right to know who they are dealing with !
vii) Responses from Town Planning now largely consist of sections copied and pasted from the briefing statement prepared by Legal Services and Connected Chelmsford.
viii) Made significant decisions behind closed doors that will affect the residential amenity, without public consultation of any kind.
ix) Sought to gag councillors and prevent them from responding to residents concerns, and issued a briefing statement for them to use. Thus denying them the right to exercise their own independent judgement, and to take decisions for good and substantial reasons by attaching appropriate weight to all relevant considerations including, where appropriate, public opinion and the views of political groups.
x) The CEO in particular has publicly stated that “There is no formal role for Councillors as regards this site or indeed in the vast majority of planning issues” This clearly conflicts with the 1997 Nolan Committee report which concluded “It is essential for the proper operation of the planning system that local concerns are adequately ventilated. The most effective and suitable way that this can be done is through the local elected representatives”.
B. Failed to properly apply due planning process as per the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Localism Act 2011.
i) Made an informal ruling that a materially and substantial change of use is lawful and permissible. No formal application for a change of use under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 has been submitted or granted.
ii) The above will not stand the test of a Judicial Review.
iii) No Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development has been applied for or granted under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990: Section 191 as amended by section 10 of the Planning and Compensation Act 1991
iv) The above will not stand the test of a Judicial Review.
v) Failed to fully consider the impact on the residential amenity, highway safety and traffic generation on local roads.
vi) Acted in a manner which could expose the council to legal action.
C. Failed to act impartially:
i) CMS have been assisted a member of the planning committee inappropriately, since there has been no formal submission of a planning application for a change of use under the TCPA 1990. It is clearly against LGA guidelines for a councillor to offer material planning advice without the assistance and guidance of a member of the Town Planning department. Any meetings, emails or telephone calls should be documented. As an experienced member of the Planning Committee, this councillor is well aware of these restrictions.
ii) Cllrs Sosin J and Wright are the chair and vice chair of the Planning Committee. Their involvement in the ongoing discussions of the situation are inappropriate, and would result to predetermination and bias should any formal application be submitted by the CMS
iii) By failing to attempt to mediate or help resolve the ongoing issues, have acted merely to protect the council’s legal position instead of acting on the genuine concerns of residents.
iv) By making questionable informal decisions behind closed doors, without full public consultation and by failing to be open and transparent, have acted in a manner that reasonable person would consider to be biased and impartial.
D. Failed to enforce a documented planning breach:
i) The breach reported by a number of residents regarding the use for Friday Prayers that started on July 31st 2020 is still live and unresolved. No formal application for planning permission or CLEUD has been submitted or granted. The breach has not been resolved by the informal decision that the council has made.
ii) Planning Enforcements email to residents dated 23/9/20 referred to 'regularising the situation' which indicates the council’s view was that the use investigated did in fact amount to a planning breach.
E . By virtue of all of the above have failed to act in a manner that inspires public confidence.
We will update you with any responses we receive from Chelmsford City Council.
KBO