Appeal 13-2-02

Planning Inspectorate appeal decision

***  The Vodafone appeal is upheld.  ***

The Vodafone planning appeal has gone to an Inspector, appointed by the Secretary of State who has upheld the appeal.

But the permission given is for a different plan ! Not the one we fought against and which Harrogate Borough Council rejected.
Appeal permission has been granted for visible antennae positioned to the front of the louvres, yet the planning application, which the public saw and could object to, was for antennae hidden behind the louvres. The antenna are to be painted in an attempt to disguise them but the inspector is uncertain that the shadow effects can be done successfully.

This new plan has not been through the planning process, the public has had no opportunity to object and has no right of appeal!

Vodafone had submitted a planning application for hidden antennas and repeatedly denied that the antennas would be visible despite our claims that they would.
Eventually Vodafone had to accept that we were telling the truth, i.e. they had been lying. Even if their original application had been passed Vodafone would then only have been able to install the antennae inside the louvres (where they wouldn’t give the required coverage).

Just what can The Planning Inspectorate do and is their any point in having a planning application process in the first place.

 

The Inspectors appeal decision

Decision items 2 and 3 say that the Inspector is not acting in respect of a Conservation Area listed buildings appeal, because Ecclesiastical Exemption consent under Faculty jurisdiction has been secured, and is instead treating it as a normal planning appeal.

The Vodafone appeal submission included a statement that the Parochial Church Council Faculty permission giving Listed Building work Consent, had been secured. Yet, as of 21st Feb. 02, the Faculty has not even started considering this matter!

The appeal decision can only be challenged if it can be shown the Inspector’s has made a serious mistake, not on grounds of the Inspector’s judgment. Is believing Vodafone a mistake or bad judgment ???
 

Letters and Published Articles

[Addresses]
[What Happened]
[Objection]
[Post 24-11-00]
[Bishop 28-11-00]
[Bishop 1-12-00]
[Post 1-12-00]
[Wardens 3-12-00]
[Post 15-12-00]
[Post 12-1-01]
[Bishop 25-01-01]
[Louvres 4-2-01]
[Post 9-2-01]
[ABC response]
[A-spire warning]
[Post 2-3-01]
[Protest Rally 4-3-01]
[Post 9-3-01]
[Faculty - Phil Willis]
[Plan refused 15-05-01]
[Appeal 13-2-02]
[Faculty permission claim]
[Faculty objection 7-03-02]
[How it will look]
[Case goes to court]
[Fundraising]
[Home] [Conservation] [Standpoints] [Church dialogue] [House prices] [Campaign]

PicoSearch