Lord Conyers Planning Appeal

Couldn’t resist bringing readers up to date on this one:

From: Anne Jarvis
To: Dave.Pickering
Sent: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:18
Subject: lord conyers planning appeal

Dear Sir

I am in receipt of your reply (undated) to my email of 3rd January 2013 regarding the Planning Inspectorate Appeal Hearing. I was fully aware of the history of the application, and although dis-satisfied with the outcome my concerns were more to do with the actions or in-actions of RMBC.

You state in your reply that ‘The officer recommendation to Board was that the demolition of the building was acceptable in this instance as it had been proved that it was not economically viable to retain or convert the building.’

Yet the very same Officer recommending demolition had on the 29th Nov 2011 stated in his role as Conservation Officer that ‘the building represents a significant heritage aspect for the Wales Conservation Area as part of a link to its past’
See attachment *peckjpg (1.4MB) Below.

Since when has it been the duty of RMBC to ensure a developer who has overpaid for a building ‘turns a profit’? There would appear to be a ‘conflict of interest’ in the Officer holding two roles within the Planning Department.

You state that English Heritage have responsibility for the listing of buildings. The Borough Council can ask them to consider listing and given the Conservation Officer’s report of Nov 2011, I would have thought that this would have been a logical step for the Borough Council to have taken.

If the Borough Council had pursued the retention of The Lord Conyer’s Arms as being an integral part of the Wales Conservation Area and refused demolition under the Conservation status, the planning application would not have had any chance of succeeding.

The Inspector states ;
‘The Council refused the applications for conservation area consent and
planning permission, which are the subject of these appeals, for a single reason
relating to the provision of inadequate information with the applications to
justify the demolition of the existing building’

You say ‘you are satisfied that the Officer representing the Council substantiated the reason for refusal’

How you are able to make that assertion when the planning department have failed to promote the Conservation of Wales  Square and after writing a report for retention they then fail to take action to ‘conserve’ at which point the proposed planning application for houses would have been academic.

the Inspector further states;

Members (Refs. RB2012/0852 and RB2012/0851), no additional expert advice
was sought. Hence the refusals relate to generalised concerns, unsupported by
substantial evidence either in writing or other form, with no detailed objective

I am at a loss as to how this equates with your statement :’The Planning Officer who represented the Council at this Hearing is a qualified and experienced officer, who is the lead officer in the Council for Conservation matters, and I therefore cannot accept your criticism in relation to the representation at the appeal’.

It would appear to the layman that there is implicit criticism in the Inspector’s statement and that your ‘qualified and experienced officer’ did little to support members decision.

Under the heading VENUE of your reply you state;

In this particular case the Planning Inspectorates admin team did request that the Hearing be held at Riverside House, although the Council could have requested that it be held an alternative venue. I have asked that in the future the Council gives consideration to the suitability of other venues closer to the application site.

I wrote to the Inspectorate quoting your reply to me and asked for clarification of your assertions. Find attached  (2179568 reply to Mrs J) a letter from the Inspectorate in total contradiction of your reply. Indeed had the Inspectorate requested the venue be at Riverside House they would have been contravening their own guidance. P.I. Advise & Equality Act 2010. Guidance which RMBC chose to ignore. Wales has a perfectly adequate village hall with all facilities required by the public and the inspectorate within 1/4 of a mile of the subject of the appeal.

It would seem to me that someone is adept in the art of lying.

The Officer’s and member’s of the Planning department and committee have failed in their duty to protect our local heritage. For what reason can only be left to the imagination!
I wonder just how much of Rotherham’s heritage you are willing to sacrifice in the pursuit of profit, either yours or the developers who you seem to favour over local heritage, Herringthorpe playing field and Stubbin Lane are they next on RMBC’s hit list?

Yours faithfully

Anne Jarvis



16 thoughts on “Lord Conyers Planning Appeal

  1. Whatever the rights and wrongs of this matter, Anne is fortunate – in one way – to be dealing with RMBC, which at least doesn’t label people like her vexatious in order to get them off its back. It’s not unknown in principal local authorities. I could give a very good local example.


  2. Bassetlaw. I could write a book. Perhaps I will one day. Here’s (just) one example that I experienced. After getting nowhere over a certain matter, I lodged a complaint under the formal complaints procedure. Bassetlaw refused to even accept it for consideration. I couldn’t go to the Local Government Ombudsman because certain matters are outside her jurisdiction – so I was thwarted. It’s a little-known fact that a local authority can get away with things such as that. After protesting I was labeled vexatious. It’s a shame there isn’t a Bassetlaw blog like Rotherham’s.


    • Hello David – are you the David Wright I know and love 🙂 ? If you are, you will know that I am a ‘like a dog with a bone’. Never vexatious always tenacious, vociferous, idealistic, gobby, and a pain in the backside when I believe an injustice has been done. I don’t like being treated like a fool and RMBC shouldn’t have tried to fob me off.
      If RMBC want to act like fools they should expect to be treated like fools!


      • Hi, Anne, tis I, the very same, and I agree with your self-description. You’re probably aware that I had a hard time at RMBC during the 90s reorganisations. But I got through it, and became Clerk to several Nottinghamshire parish councils. It was whilst working at Misterton that I and most members suffered a defamatory, 5-letter anonymous attack, starting with the illicit use of confidential Bassetlaw Standards Committee material. Other attacks followed. Bassetlaw refused to apologise, and erected a wall of silence, despite spending £10,450 on two investigations. We, the victims, have tried hard to discover the truth behind the attacks, but, instead of being treated with respect, have been labeled vexatious instead.

        Since retiring last year, I’ve formed a little rock band. We’re doing a trial gig at The Cutler tonight. Everyone welcome.

        Rock on!


  3. Yes, my recollection of the one incident I had with that bunch of layabouts, was much the same.

    However, the view I took was not so much to win the argument, it was more to cause them as much grief as possible – which I did!


  4. “It’s a shame there isn’t a Bassetlaw blog like Rotherham’s.”
    It is indeed David. Every town and parish needs a blog to make sure information is distributed correctly and fairly and to ensure those in authority and those elected are held to account.

    Perhaps you will start a Bassetlow Blog – it has a certain ring to it, I think !
    In the meantime I am sure rothpol welcomes all your comments as I do on http://www.maltbyblogger.com
    Bassetlaw is only down the road from Maltby. 🙂 I look forward to hearing more from you.


    • Hi Maltbyblogger. Thanks for your interest. I’ve drawn this to the attention of certain folk in Misterton. It would be great to see a Bassetlaw Blog – or Blag?

      There’s masses to report. Here’s a taster. A parish council representative (Misterton) on Bassetlaw’s Standards Committee was given a weekend’s notice that her future on the Committee was to be debated on the Monday (no reason given), and she was advised by the Monitoring Officer to declare a prejudicial interest and absent herself from the meeting. A protestation that what was happening was unlawful was ignored. Hard to believe? 100% true! Fortunately, Misterton Parish Council put a stop to things by taking legal action. Unfortunately, six weeks later she received an anonymous letter warning her to resign from the Standards Committee. I really should write a book.


  5. I was really concerned that the Trooper in south anston was looking really tatty, it would have been a shame to see it close down, pubs can be the centre of village life. Punch Inns have completely renovated it and it looks the best I have seen it in my life time. I would be interested to know Dominic Becks views on the above article, I am sorry to Wales, but I would prefer to see him leave Anston and focus on his job on your council, which I think he is paid to do.


    • Ann. I think it is totally wrong he can be on Anston Parish council and a borough councillor on Wales with you. I am not sure how he got voted onto Anston Parish council or if he was co opted by the Labour party. I was shocked when he suddenly appeared as the Chairman on Anston. The people of Wales voted him onto your council and doesn’t he get paid 13K a year, plus expenses.


      • Yea gods Tim he is paid much more than £13k. He has ‘special responsibility’ allowances that hike his pay up much more than that. There are very few RMBC councillor’s who only get £13k most ‘earn’ in excess of £23k! He was foisted on Wales because the Labour Party in Wales has almost collapsed and hey couldn’t field a local candidate. This has happened twice now and two out of the three councillor’s are not local. This is not good for Wales ward as they have no local allegiance or knowledge and certainly don’t appear to care very much what happens to us. Hence the destruction of our Conservation area. Neither Beck or Watson even knew this was happening although they all get ‘weekly lists’ about planning applications. They don’t seem to even bother to read them. If I had my way both Beck and Watson would stick to their own area’s and leave us alone – we couldn’t do any worse RMBC have never recognised any area south of the A57.


  6. Bassetlaw’s hierarchy are beginning to think they are God, pulling the wool over the eyes of the current elected politicians. David came to Misterton after having a hard time at RMBC, but then politics came into play (power seems to go to the heads of the plebs). Then they are aided by a few Misterton residents who can’t stand success with anonymous letters (with information leaked by Bassetlaw’s Standards Committee), Spending a fortune on two reports, one of which they deny existence. They might hide behind calling some of us vexatious but it will all come out in the end, just look at the trouble the BBC are in.


  7. Just an update : Needless to say I have received no answers from Dave Pickering Chairman of the Planning Committee. Seems they find it difficult to respond when they have been proved to be lying. God help Ulley who have just been granted Conservation Area status!!


Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.