Member Info for stokey12

BumbleB - In relation to your 19.59 post of yesterday I was referring to the Information to support a habitat regulation assessment. That document was sent by Peel's agent to the Planning Authority on the 9 December according to documents on the council website. I am not sure when it would have been sent to Natural England but if when it was sent they were told a response was needed by a particular date then Natural England should comply with that deadline. A short extension of a week or so may be possible. However this would impact on the matter going to committee. It is for Natural England to comply with the planning authority's timetable not for the planning authority to comply with Natural England's timetable. While there can be some flexibility the overrall objective is to deal with planning applications with in statutory deadlines.

BumbleB In relation to your 18.38 post I am not sure that I totally agree with you. while there may be some fault on Peel/W2T's behalf despite the pre application advice. The question must be when did Natural England get the information and what they were told about when a response was needed by. If they received it before Christmas and were given 28 days to respond by then if they fail to do so I do not see how Natural England if a decision is made without thier advice.

BumbleB - Thanks for your 15.02 post. If it looks like there will be a delay beyond February then Peel might make a complaint to the Chief Exec of Cheshire West and Chester Council. In that case the Chief Exec would have a word in the ear of the Director of Planning and it will go before the Planning Committee. This would especially the case if Peel threaten to pull investment in the area. Advice has to be timely so if it looks like Natural England are unduly delaying things then the scenario I have just outlined might happen.

kenny100 Thanks for the link in your 14.45 post a veryn interesting document. I would say that increases the likelihood of a favouable planning officers report.

Kenny = In relation to your 14.30 post PHE are next door on plot 10B.

Jimiam - In relation to your 14.14 post that is not wht BumbleB is saying. That particular thread relates to sonething totally different if you read the whole thread.

Kenny100 - In relation to your 13.36 post planning permission for plot 4 was granted at the December Planning Committee meeting.

BumbleB - In relation to your 13.30 post If natural England have been given a deadlineto respond and they do not then I would epedt the planning officer to go ahead on the sis of the information she has. The application cannot be he,d up indefinitely for Natural England. I note that although the March meeting is in the first week of March depending on the positin with regards to the other condition this puts the grant in jeopardy.

curiouserandcuriouser - Thanks having had an exchange of emails with the planning officer those considerations will not affect this planning applcation going to committee.

Manaboutown - The local elections were in May and in any event only related to councillors not officers. There was a planning committee hearing on 3 December 2019 so there should not be any baclog arising out of the general election.

Manabouttown - In relation to your 11.02 post what backog are you referring to?

Adamadd - In relation to your 10.00 post Manabouttown is correctin his 10.12 post that we are talking about the development at Immingham. In realtion to the Protos application I anticipate that it would be considered at the next planning committee meeting. I have a note to check the council website on the 27/28 January to see if the Planning Officer's report is up and confirmation that it is going to the February meeting.

Wolveshaveeyes - Further to your post of 18.53 yesterday I would not be worried about Natural England the more worrying thing is the position bing taken by Highways England that can scupper things if they do object. I think one of the other staturory consultees may be objecting so I am not sure that they would get planning permission even if Natural Engalnd do not object in the end.

My 5.29 post should have read about this is that the councillors

What I noticed about tis is hat the councillors went against officers advice to rejec the application. This is rarely done.

Wolveshaveeyes - In relation to your 16.47 post I have not heard about that project do you hve more details. PHE seem to like left field RNSs so I would not rule anythng out. I note some members of the advisory panel have connections with waste managemnet companies. From a waste management company point of view they save around £30 a tonne on landfill costs using the DMG so that is a lot in potential savings. So it is likely that some arr talking to PHE.

Kenny100 In relation to your 20.06 post of yesterday an interesting document a bit too technical for me. But it does make me wonder if Shell and Powerhouse have been in discussions for the next iteration of the study.

Newboy58 - In respect to your 12.55 post it should be noted that PHE are not the applicants in this so it would not have been up to them to consult BB on this matter.

If you have your shares in a nominee account then do not forget to ask your broker to sedn you a copy of the shareholder circular when it is published. I am not sure if all brokers do this automatically or if like HL you have to put in a request.

Another thing anyone concerned about the price could do is ask David Ryan if he is comfortable with the price. He was not part of the nrgotiation due to a conflict so quite properly stood aside.