TOWN Hall planning chiefs at Warrington are being urged to take enforcement action against a local resident in a planning row that has already resulted in the borough council being criticised by the Local Government Ombudsman.
A report is to go to the borough council’s development management committee recommending enforcement action in 
respect of an access created between a house in Twiss Green Lane, Culcheth and nearby Marton Close.
But the report by environment director Andy Farrall (pictured) recommends that no action be taken in respect of two other issues – an access from Twiss Green Lane which is alleged to be too narrow – and the construction of a house in Twiss Green Lane.
Neighbour disputes have been going on for several years over development in the Twiss Green Lane-Marton Close area – resulting in police being called to the area on several occasions.
The Ombudsman, Anne Seex, was eventually called into the affair by one of the residents and says maladministration arose from the fact the council had wrongly destroyed records of planning applications.
She said she had never come across a case like it.
The records were destroyed on the authority of a senior planning officer who has since left the council.
Ms Seex has recommended that the council apologise to two residents and pay each £5,000 in recognition of the negative impact of the development on them and for their time and trouble at having to pursue the complaint.
She also recommended the council serve a notice on the developer about the access road.
Mr Farrall is recommending the enforcement action be taken because use of the access between Marton Close and Twiss Green Lane will result in an increase in noise and disturbance for the two residents of Marton Close.
6 Comments
The arrogance of this Chief Officer of WBC needs to be seen to be belived. Is he employed on behalf of the residents of this Borough or is he allowed to just do what he wants. We are all still waiting to hear that an independent enquiry into the Planning Department has been set up!
Is there any particular reason as to why he is recommending no action be taken on two issues. There must be a valid reason especially considering the Ombudsman’s comments over lack of documented ‘evidence’ and the residents complaints. Has the senior planner who allegidely destoryed the documents and has since left been named yet ? Have any planning documents been ‘lost’ in any other councils by the way 😉
His report is disgraceful, it fails to mention the LGO findings of maladministration, it even comments about the LGO report as if it has not been completed yet!!!! Saying ‘should the Ombudsman find maladministration!!! The report is clearly intended to mislead the committee once again as it did in 2009. I fear another whitewash for those poor residents in Marton Close. With regards to the the other two issues one of them is regarding highway safety over a public right of way that runs along the access to the new house, School kids use it daily as a short cut to school. Highways wanted it widened on safety grounds!!! I feel there needs to be a public vote of no confidence in this Planning Department. The residents of this Borough need to unite and speak out! as the Planners have no appetite to take this developer on and are clearly being bulied by him. No doubt he is threatening to appeal, and sue them etc.. and they don’t want the hassle, so the people who follow the rules suffer and the fat cat developers get away with murder!!
http://cmis.warrington.gov.uk/cmis5/Meetings/tabid/73/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/410/Meeting/6882/Committee/1197/Default.aspx
His report is disgraceful, it fails to mention the LGO findings of maladministration, it even comments about the LGO report as if it has not been completed yet!!!! Saying ‘should the Ombudsman find maladministration!!! The report is clearly intended to mislead the committee once again as it did in 2009. I fear another whitewash for those poor residents in Marton Close. With regards to the the other two issues one of them is regarding highway safety over a public right of way that runs along the access to the new house, School kids use it daily as a short cut to school. Highways wanted it widened on safety grounds!!! I feel there needs to be a public vote of no confidence in this Planning Department. The residents of this Borough need to unite and speak out! as the Planners have no appetite to take this developer on and are clearly being bulied by him. No doubt he is threatening to appeal, and sue them etc.. and they don’t want the hassle, so the people who follow the rules suffer and the fat cat developers get away with murder!! http://cmis.warrington.gov.uk/cmis5/Meetings/tabid/73/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/410/Meeting/6882/Committee/1197/Default.aspx
(Reply to this comment)
(Cancel this reply)
(Comment Replies Disabled)
His report is disgraceful, it fails to mention the LGO findings of
maladministration, it even comments about the LGO report as
if it has not been completed yet!!!! Saying ‘should the
Ombudsman find maladministration!!! The report is clearly
intended to mislead the committee once again as it did in
2009. I fear another whitewash for those poor residents in
Marton Close. With regards to the the other two issues one
of them is regarding highway safety over a public right of way
that runs along the access to the new house, School kids use
it daily as a short cut to school. Highways wanted it widened on
safety grounds!!! I feel there needs to be a public vote of no
confidence in this Planning Department. The residents of this Borough
need to unite and speak out! as the Planners have no appetite to
take this d
eveloper on and are clearly being bulied by him. No doubt he is
threatening to appeal, and sue them etc.. and they don’t want the hassle,
so the people who follow the rules suffer and the fat cat developers
get away with murder!! (Reply to this comment)
(Cancel this reply)
(Comment Replies Disabled)
Yes you get some sense of Andy Farrall’s muddled manner of dealing with things from the report he submitted to the committee. He wrote it as though the Ombudsman’s report had yet to hit the streets. For example he says in paragraph 9.1 “Should the Ombudsman conclude there has been maladministration resulting in injustice, compensation for those who have suffered such injustice can be suggested ” The Ombudsman reached that conclusion nearly three months earlier. Why is Mr Farrall suggesting otherwise, were he and his colleagues still in denial before they appeared before the committee? Or were they trying to mislead members? Or were they trying to set their stall out so that their advice was based on a different time frame? It’s certainly not real in time or meaning.
In para 12.2 his report says “It is clear that an impression has been gained by those who live in the vicinity of Marton Close that a promise has been made that once construction has been completed the accessway will cease.” Why deliberately misuse the tense? The residents undoubtedly received firm written assurances from the planners the one in 2002 said that Mr Houghton would have to submit a new planning application if he wanted to use Marton Close as an access. As we all know he did no such thing nor did they ask him to, but they don’t explain why. Secondly after ignoring that undertaking the planners wrote, as the LGO says emolliently, to the the residents whilst the house was being built, stating that once the house was complete the Marton Close access would be closed off. His report fails to say why explain both promises were not honoured, it just recites a meaningless form of words. One early posting referred to it as Newspeak, but we’re well passed 1984, or are we?
In paragraph 3.5 AF reports “There was no appraisal of any alternative access contained within reports on the applications for planning permission for the new house” which raises the questions why not? and since there was not, why did the council allow Mr Houghton to use Marton Close and conceal the fact it knew he would do so from the residents? why did the council not put a stop on the use of Marton Close as it had the powers to do?
How can anyone take this man’s explanations, advice, guidance seriously?