[HTS-members] Fw: Fwd: SBDCRE: SBDCRE: report 13-02140-CAN

Thu Jan 30 14:52:32 GMT 2014

FYI

From: George Sandy 
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 2:33 PM
To: mailto:martmax at f2s.com ; sarah lomax ; James Snoxell ; Fred Russell ; mailto:evalipman at talktalk.net ; Karl Lawrence ; Joy Marshall ; Roger Worthington ; Rupert Sellers 
Subject: Fwd: SBDCRE: SBDCRE: report 13-02140-CAN

Dear All

Mail below for your info. Am totally flabbergasted by this decision, and as you see have made a last ditch stand to contradict the SBDC 's Spooner opinion.

George
Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

  From: George Sandy <georgesallysandy at live.co.uk>
  Date: 30 January 2014 14:28:06 GMT
  To: Bob Smith <bob.smith at southbucks.gov.uk>
  Cc: "Cllr. Reed, Roger" <Cllr.Roger.Reed at southbucks.gov.uk>, "Cllr. Bagge, Ralph" <Cllr.Ralph.Bagge at southbucks.gov.uk>, Peter Beckford <Peter.Beckford at southbucks.gov.uk>, Gavin Treen <Gavin.Treen at southbucks.gov.uk>
  Subject: Re: SBDCRE: SBDCRE: report 13-02140-CAN

  Bob

  Thank you for Officer's Report. Having scanned it there is absolutely no way one can agree with your view that the matter has been dealt with in a manner fair to ALL parties! It may have been handled properly from an admin & regs point of view, but it is deplorable that a superior professional opinion given by the Watts Consultancy, and known about in time, should have been totally dismissed.

  It is a seriously cynical decision especially as SBDC's tree officer has proposed that the only tree to be TPO'd is the larch tree T1, which apart from the apple, was the only tree that Watts independent, professional arboriculturist said should be felled! How does that happen????

  All the others, whilst requiring some cosmetic treatment, were considered to have healthy futures.

  This whole matter leaves one with exceedingly uneasy feelings, and the decision certainly will do SBDC's standing in the local community no good whatsoever.

  The story is featured in today's Maidenhead Advertiser, from which you will see the degree of local support there is for retention of the trees in the CA. SBDC also received nearly 50 letters of objection.

  All that one can say is....shame on those who have been party to this outrageous decision, and if it is humanly possible, please carry out a review, as it certainly appears quite illogical and above all, an extremely disappointing and unbelievable result for all their efforts.

  Hopefully it can be rescinded.

  George

  Sent from my iPad

  On 30 Jan 2014, at 13:40, Bob Smith <bob.smith at southbucks.gov.uk> wrote:

    George, please see the officer’s report and decision regarding the above which is to protect T1.

    Whilst I appreciate it won’t please local residents I am content that the matter has been dealt with properly and in a manner fair to all parties.

    Regards, Bob

    From: Gavin Treen [mailto:Gavin.Treen at SouthBucks.gov.uk] 
    Sent: 30 January 2014 11:28
    To: Bob Smith @ SouthBucks
    Subject: SBDCRE: SBDCRE: report 13-02140-CAN

    Attached bob,

    Thank you for your assistance in this matter sorry you had to get roped in …

    Gavin

    PS For you information I am dealing with a Mr Saxena, who as an agent is being shall I say “a little difficult” in ensuring actions are happening in relation  to  a  breach of planning. I have therefore stepped up the action and meeting him on site to try and resolve next week, but he feels the  Council  are at fault and therefor  I am….. so  he may complain to you, but I assure you we are dealing with him correctly , just a heads up

    Again thanks Gavin

    Gavin

    From: Bob Smith @ SouthBucks [mailto:bob.smith at southbucks.gov.uk] 
    Sent: 29 January 2014 15:48
    To: Gavin Treen; Bob Smith
    Subject: RE: SBDCRE: report 13-02140-CAN

    No problem – meant to say please can you e mail be back a clean copy when signed off.

    Thanks, Bob

    From: Gavin Treen [mailto:Gavin.Treen at SouthBucks.gov.uk] 
    Sent: 29 January 2014 15:06
    To: Bob Smith @ SouthBucks
    Subject: SBDCRE: report 13-02140-CAN

    Noted and thank you 

    Gavin

    From: Bob Smith @ SouthBucks [mailto:bob.smith at southbucks.gov.uk] 
    Sent: 29 January 2014 15:03
    To: Gavin Treen
    Subject: report 13-02140-CAN

    Gavin, this appears a balanced and comprehensive report. I’ve highlighted a few typos and a couple of points marked ?????????????????????? which need checking.

    I get a mention which is fine but I think the delegation may be to Head of Sustainable Development rather than via me (it is for planning apps) but  as long as it’s you exercising a delegation in turn delegated to you then OK

    Thanks, Bob

     Save resources and reduce waste - do you really need to print this email?

    Visit our website: http://www.southbucks.gov.uk
    ***** South Bucks District Council E-mail Disclaimer***** 
    You should be aware that all e-mails received and sent by this Council may be subject to recording and/or monitoring to meet relevant legislative requirements.  They are subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and therefore may be disclosed to a third party. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, the use of the information by disclosure, copying or distribution is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this email in error please notify the system administrator at mailto:postmaster at southbucks.gov.uk. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. 
    *****End of Disclaimer*****

    <finalb.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ourshack.com/pipermail/hts-members/attachments/20140130/c5b796ab/attachment.html>