Nick Boles Reply Letter

7/27/2019 Nick Boles Reply Letter

1/4

1

Mr. Leonard Lowther

2 Pier Cottages

Marine Walk

Sunderland

SR60PL

Your ref: TO 025807/13

Date: 30 September 2013

Good day Rachael

Sunderland Planning Application Complaint

Ref. No: 13/00249/FUL

Thank you for you reply. I have to say I feel I am on a roundabout and getting

nowhere. There is simply no Government Department who has the power to

ensure local councils comply with the law.

I now know there are Laws and Regulations they should obey and many

guidance notes explaining how to comply with the law, but if they decide not to

comply there is no government department (as you say) to ensure they do

comply.

You have said the government is clear that localism and decentralization are at

the heart of their planning agenda and the Secretary of State only gets involved

in a small number of applications normally where issues of more than local

importance arise.

If this development is allowed to go ahead it will set precedence for future

developments nationwide to be built without regard for inclusive access for all.

The delegated decision report has many inaccuracies which I believe were

calculated for the purpose of allowing a building be built without inclusive

access.

Page 12 of the DDR states: In general, there are provisions to incorporate a

lift/lifting platform to non-residential properties. However in this instance it is not

required. LABC services have national agreements, that non-residential units

under 100 square meters and incorporate no unique facilities; do not require the

provision of a lift/lifting platform. Such small commercial units, as in this instance

cannot justify the cost / maintenance costs for such a small facility.

Page 14 of the DDR states: Notwithstanding the submitted plans, no more than

240 square meters of the available 450 square meters of internal floor space at first

floor level shall be used for the purposes of use class B1.

I have previously contacted the Planning Inspectorate here is their response:

I am afraid the Planning Inspectorate are unable to comment on your email.


2/4

2

The right to appeal is only for the original applicant who is unhappy with their

decision by the Local Planning Authority (LPA) i.e a refusal of planning permission.

If you are not the original applicant, there is no right to appeal.

You can contact the Local Government Ombudsman, they deal with mal

administration within the LPA Their details are below.

I have been to the LGO and here is their response:

Mr X says that a restaurant which has been granted planning permission has

inadequate provision for disabled people. Mr X is not disabled. He says that

advice given by the Council to the Council which determined the planning

application was inadequate.

Mr X has complained to the Council which granted planning permission and this is

being dealt with through its complaints procedure. The planning permission itself

has not, therefore, been considered as part of this complaint. It was a matter for the

other Council as to how they considered any advice given by South Tyneside

Metropolitan Council.

However, Mr Xs dissatisfaction lies with the planning permission itself and that

was not made by this Council. I do not consider therefore that the Council is

responsible for the injustice Mr X alleges. Nor do I consider that Mr X is affected

personally by the actions of the Council as he is not disabled.

Final decision

For the reasons given above I do not propose to instigate an investigation of this

complaint. There is no evidence of maladministration by the Council causing

injustice to Mr X.

I am a carer for two disabled people (my mother and uncle).

I am at stage two of Sunderland Complaints Procedure but they are not

complying to time limits and are avoiding answering the issues raised by the

RICS report. I paid for an access expert who as his report clearly shows,

considers the planning application approval as having not been considered

bearing in mind public sector equality duty. Here is part of Sunderland Councils

reply to the issues raised within the report.

The Content of the Design and Access Statement

A Design and Access Statement (DAS) is a succinct report accompanying and

supporting an application to illustrate the process that has led to the development

proposal, and to explain the proposal in a structured way. The level of detail

required in a DAS depends on the scale and complexity of the application and

should be proportionate to the complexity of the application. With reference to theaccess element of the statement it is important to note that this component relates


3/4


4/4

4

passenger lift.

Summary:

The plans do not comply with current legislation.

Small retail beach huts previously occupied the site. The constraint of the site is

its physical size. Therefore the site should be considered too small for a

development of this size if inclusive access cannot be provided.

The architect who owns the site has designed retail units at ground floor level

without level access and 240 sq meters of first floor office space without

inclusive access for all.

The architects desire to look at the sea from his offices is not a justifiable reason

to approve plans that propagate exclusion.

As this development will set precedence for future developments nationwide I

respectfully request you advise the Secretary of State of the issues raised within

the experts report.

For your information I am also in contact with a manager from the Equality and

Human Rights Commission regarding the same issues.

Regards Len Lowther

Documents

Nick Boles Reply Letter