What Are They Hiding ?
In a response from Town Planning on 18/12/20 (again unsigned), we saw the following statement :
“It is the opinion of officers that the lawful use of the Hamptons is sui generis mixed use, being that of a community use for sports/recreation/leisure and social activities. As previously stated, officers have concluded that the lawful use of Hamptons can accommodate a certain degree of public worship/religious instruction use. Whether planning permission is required is a matter of fact and degree”
In planning terms the club is covered by the Sui Generis building use class (which includes building uses that are unique or cover a number of classes). The building use class would have been assessed in 2012 on the clubs opening, and documented. On 01/09/20 the building use classes were redefined, and the community centre/place of worship use class (known as D1) was separated and become F1(f) Public worship or religious instruction (or in connection with such use) and F2(b) Halls or meeting places for the principal use of the local community
The basis of the council’s recent assessment of the use is related to information supplied by the Chelmsford Muslim Society on 05/11/20. It confirms that the centre is being used for “F1(f) Public worship or religious instruction (or in connection with such use)”, which are new and additional uses of the building not present in 2012. Read more of Building Use Classes here.
The Town And Country Planning Act 1990 is quite clear on this, activities that are added to the initial building use (and attract their own use class) do constitute a material Change Of Use, and require planning permission.
To fully prove this, we’d need to see any orginal documents relating to the building use class from 2012, and this is where things take an alarming turn. On 18/01/20 we submitted a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for :
1) The existing approved Use Class (As defined under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987
2) Details of any previous approved use class and any amendments made since the original building was built under planning reference 08/1872/FUL
3) Any conditions set within the existing approved Use Class.
4) Copies of any documentation associated to the initial application for Use Class and associated response
5) Details of any current submitted applications for change of use from the current approved Use Class.
The response from the council was to refuse to disclose any documents, citing legal privilege and claiming that it would not be in the public interest. We appealed the decision to the Information Commissioner’s Office (and lost), and are still unable to access these documents.
so what are the council hiding ?
The ruling from the Information Commisioners Office gives us a few clues :
“The Council confirmed that the withheld information in question consists of a document which contains a number of questions which were raised by its planning department in the capacity of client and the responses to the questions raised provided by the Council’s legal department in the form of legal advice. The questions raised were in relation to the legal use of a specific building - the subject matter of the planning permission referred to in the complainant’s information request. The Council’s principal lawyer, in this case, provided legal advice in the capacity of the legal adviser.
“The Commissioner considers that a public disclosure of the legal advice that the Council obtained in relation to this specific property would inhibit the Council’s ability to defend its position in a potential legal dispute”.
Now this clearly confirms that the planning department sought legal advice specifically on the information we asked for, but has decided that they will not disclose the answers they received from Legal Services. How very open and transparent !
More importantly why would that those answers “inhibit the Council’s ability to defend its position in a potential legal dispute”. Who exactly would be launching a legal dispute against the council, and why ?
INTRODUCING OUR EXPERT WITNESS
Many of you know Veronica Reed, who was manager of MASC/Hamptons from 2008-2018. We asked Veronica about the use of the new building when it opened in 2012 :
“When the new club opened in 2012 we moved in taking with us all of our existing clubs and sections namely Tennis, Squash, Modern Dance Section, Tea Dance, Keep Fit, Short Mat Bowls and Snooker.
Weekly Bookings:
The Jive Club, Salsa, Line Dancing, Ballroom Dance Lessons, Karate Classes, Pregnancy Yoga, Pilates, Bam Bam Boogies, Children Drama and Dance Club, Buddhist Meditation.
Monthly Bookings:
Jive Night, Salsa Night, Latin and Ballroom Dance nights. The Mildmay Rotary Meeting and Lunch, Chelmsford Rotary and Lunch and The Cavaliers Lunch. (Roamers cooked the lunches, we supplied the bars) and the Military Fair
Larger Events
Essex Rotary Quiz, The Inner Wheel Quiz, Squash Quiz Nights, Tennis Quiz Nights, Marconi Veterans Dinner, NHS Childrens Christmas Party, NHS Awards Dinner, Chelmsford Indian Association Dinner, Mitzvahs Event, various weddings and birthday celebrations from a huge range of communities, Amateur Boxing Nights, Stamp Collectors Fair and the very popular Lee Hirst Backyard Comedy Club. Christmas and New Years Eve Dances and Parties in the Hall and Terrace Bar also a yearly Dinner Dance. We even hosted BBC Question Time in 2016.
Corporate Bookings
NHS, Essex County Council, Citizens Advice, Essex FA, Active Essex”
We were particularly interested in the Buddhist Meditation Classes, and Veronica had this to say
“They had a permanent room which they held their meditation classes in. These were mostly evening times and could be for one to three hour sessions depending on how many attended, never more than five or six people. In fact there were times when we didn’t know that they were in the building”.
We’ve covered the use for meditation classes before (read it here), and it clearly does not constitute an act of worship, in that you didn’t have be to a Buddhist to attend, and that it taught meditaion techniques not the Buddhist religion.
A comment on our YouTube channel confirmed this, AW: “That's correct. I have been to several Buddhist meetings and they are of discussion and meditation as Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion..you cannot worship Buddha!”
Compare and contrast the Buddhist Meditation classes to the use now considered lawful and permissable under the same building use class.
In relation to the original use class, it’s our opinion that the council are hiding something which could undermine their current decision on the Hamptons, why else would they withhold the documents ? We are happy to post any formal response from Chelmsford City Council.