Case Study of the English planning system

This case study shows how rich and influential developers manipulate the planning system.

The developer in this case study is Sainsbury's Supermarket. They had their planning application to extend their store in Melksham refused twice by Wiltshire Council, but sadly we have a planning system where NO seldom means NO. So Sainsbury's appealed against the planning decision and had it overturned.

To add insult to injury Sainsbury's applied for costs against Wiltshire Council, the Council then had to manage the development - how crazy is that, they had just been beaten up in the play ground and had their money taken, now they had to manage the bully!

The Government are now about to reform the planning system giving more power to the developer under the label of 'presumption in favour of sustainable development'. Unless loop holes and weaknesses are made tighter we are potentially about to see the demise of the English countryside as developers driven primarily by profit take advantage of an already weak planning system - in short a land grab.

This case study has been compiled by many people living in and around Melksham - people that care. I only hope that the government take heed to the message it contains.

Please note: This case study is not about whether Sainsbury's had the right to develop their site, it is about the processes that were used to evaluate the site. If such tactics are adopted throughout the country then God save England!!!!

The clip was compiled in response to:
1. Over 2000 people signing a petition stating that 'we the undersigned are angry and shocked by the cutting down of over 400 trees in the Sainsbury's site next to the Nature Reserve in Melksham'.

2. Concerns that no consistent criteria or standard was used in order to differentiate between different grades/types of vegetation. This allowed Sainsbury's to manipulate tree numbers and deceive the public as to how many trees were to be removed from their site.

3. Concerns over the level of earthworks that were required. Work related to the food alleviation pit came under the guise of landscaping and/or the guise of minor materials amendment. This allowed Sainsbury's to make major amendments to the plans without consulting the public.

4. Fears about the water table. Sainsbury's contractors cut through the water table and effectively built a dam to interfere with the flow of the ground water - this may increase the risk of flooding or ground water saturation in areas originally considered not at risk.




5. Lack of enforcement to national standards. For example, Sainsbury's claimed to have adhered to BS:5837, yet the tree survey documents contained exclusions which indicated areas as not being surveyed to this standard - this resulted in hundreds of trees being excluded from the tree survey.

6. The total disregard of public concerns regarding this development.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Sainsburys
• Melksham
• planning
• reform
• government
• development
• trees
• wildlife
• environment
• sustainability
• river
• flooding
• hydrology
• water
• table

[MrTree400]

Correction - according to local residents, Sainsbury's contractors have completely ignored the legal notice, I should have re-read my reply to 'aberbear' below.

[ggg43211]

everyone discusted that the trees and local amentiy had been distroyed, yet i bet the store is absolutelly packed with local customers every day!

[MrTree400]

@ggg43211 Somehow I doubt it ... apparently Sainsbury's have been served a legal notice about the excessive noise their contractors have been making ... this was in response to a number of complaints from local residents. I would suspect that those resident will NOT be shopping at Sainsbury's at any time in the near future.

[aberbear]

Wow really detailed analysis

[MrTree400]

@aberbear Thank you for the comment - it needs to be. I hope the clip clearly demonstrates that once planning permission has been granted there is basically nothing the public can do to challenge a developer like Sainsbury's. Our Local Planning Authority has been compromised - so the public has no say or defence - Sainsbury's now basically does what it wants. I have more information to post so watch this space.

[MrTree400]

@MrTree400 Well at least Sainbury's cannot make as much noise as they want at all hours! They have been served a legal notice about excessive noise.

[yappy911]

There is something we can all do about this. May I suggest that EVERYONE boycott Sainsbury's because they have plainly lied and cheated their way to get this site. Let's show SAINSBURY that they WILL LOSE BUSINESS for their corrupt and despicable actions. DO NOT USE their store... I will not use any Sainsbury store not just this one that's for sure.