[HTS-members] Fw: Outcome of the Mill Lane planning applications

[Karl Lawrence]

From: Euan Felton 
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 2:36 PM
To: Alastair at ahaltd.co.uk ; andrew.findlay at skills-1st.co.uk ; 'Barrie Peroni' ; 'Bernard Trevallion' ; 'Caroline Gillies' ; Cazanig at aol.com ; 'Eva Lipman' ; 'Fred Russell' ; 'Heather Lindsey' ; 'Karl Lawrence' ; 'Louise Symons' ; 'Mike Yeadon' ; 'Miv Wayland' ; 'Myra Drinkwater' ; 'Peter Mole' ; 'Roger Worthington' ; 'Tony Hickman' ; martinandcath at gmail.com ; Knight, Martin ; charlotte.cook at urs.com ; 'Martin Maund' 
Subject: Outcome of the Mill Lane planning applications

Dear All

 

Here are links to the outcome of the planning committee meeting consideration of the Mill Lane applications last Wednesday.

 

The main application was refused,  the gasholder site application was withdrawn at the last minute, the footbridge was permitted (well done Martin, the design was much praised by the planning committee and all of us!) and Listed Building consent was granted for the conversion of Glen Island House to flats.

 

Mill Lane main Application – refusal notice and Officer’s report

http://sbdc-pa.southbucks.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NBDK2NOH0FB00

 

Gas Holder and depot site. Officer recommended refusal and applicant withdrew application prior to decision

http://sbdc-pa.southbucks.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NBOTKHOH0FB00

 

Listed building consent for the conversion of Glen Island House to flats - Officer’s report and permission granted

http://sbdc-pa.southbucks.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NBDPSNOH0FB00

 

Construction of footbridge.   Officer report and permission granted by Committee. Pending issue of Decision notice

http://sbdc-pa.southbucks.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NBDQVJOH0FB00

 

Seems there are 3 possible outcomes for the future:

1.     The Applicant appeals.  I would have thought unlikely due to the strength of the refusal. N.b they have 6 months in which to take this option, should they wish to.

2.     The Applicant revises the plan and tries again. Back to the drawing board, but I think the most likely outcome.

3.     The Applicant sells and goes away. Well they have £23.5 million invested plus costs incurred to date, so I wouldn’t  think so.

 

Regards

 

Euan

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ourshack.com/pipermail/hts-members/attachments/20141225/b0b2adf7/attachment.html>