Breaking Cinmematic News.

Hmmm; – once again, Blogger’s photo resizing doesn’t seem to help much!

But I’m not whinging too much, as basically, I’ve had some rather good news.   Hazel Blears has refused the appeal that was going in against the cinema development.

I’m as happy as Larry!!!

I’ve been writing frequently about this, as it’s something that affects me, and my friends and neighbours, very directly; – you can read my post, here.

But, here, let me give you the text of the letter I had from Lindsey Speed, the Head of Planning Casework for the relevant department, and initially sent to Ms Whettingsteele, the developers consultant

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (SHOPPING DEVELOPMENT) (ENGLAND AND WALES) DIRECTION 1993 

PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES, AND ERECTION OF NEW BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES TO PROVIDE A CINEMA (USE CLASS D1), RETAIL STORES (USE CLASS A1), MULTI STOREY CAR PARK, 14 NO.1 BEDROOM FLATS WITH ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING, TOGETHER WITH SERVICE AREAS, HIGHWAY WORKS, HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING AND OTHER ANCILLPARY WORKS AT WILLIAM HUNTER WAY CAR PARK, BRENTWOOD, ESSEX 

APPLICATION NO. BRW/729/2008 

I refer to your letter of 6 March 2009 referring to the Secretary of State under the Town and Country Planning (Shopping Development) (England and Wales) Direction, an application for planning permission for the above development 

As you know, the Secretary of State's general approach is not to interfere with the jurisdiction of local planning authorities unless it is necessary to do so. Parliament has entrusted them with responsibility for day-to-day planning control in their areas, Local planning authorities are normally best placed to make decisions relating to their areas and it is right that in general, they should be free to carry out their duties

 responsibly, with the minimum of interference. 

There will be occasions, however, when the Secretary of State rnay consider it necessary to call in a planning application to determine herself instead of leaving it to the local planning authority. Her policy is to be very selective about calling in planing applications, She will in general, only take this step if planning issues of more than local importance are involved and if those issues need to be decided by the Secretary of State rather than at a local level.   Each case is considered, however, on its own facts.

We have carefully considered all the matters raised about this application.   Bearing in mind that the issue before her is not whether the application should be granted planning permission, but whether of not she should call it in for her own determination, the Secretary of State considers that the main matters relevant to her decision are her policies which promote high quality, inclusive design in terms of function and impact, which takes the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area (PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development); re-use previously development land within urban areas in preference to the development Greenfield sites (PPS3 Housing); enhance consumer choice by making provision for a range of shopping, leisure and local services, which allow genuine choice to meet the needs of the entire community, and particularly socially excluded groups (PPS6 Planning for Town Centres); accommodate housing principally within existing urban areas, planning for increased intensity development for both housing and other uses at which are highly accessible by public transport, walking and cycling, (PPG13 Transport); for the preservation or enhancement of the character or appearance of conservation areas designated for their special architectural or historic interest (PPG15 Planning and the Historical Environment); control or reduce the impact of noise, as far as is practicable, at the planning stage (PPD24 Noise); ensure that the planning applications are supported site specific flood risk assessments, as appropriate; apply the sequential approach at a site level to minimise risk; give priority to the use of SUDS; and ensure that all new development in flood risk areas is appropriately flood resilient and resistant (PPS25 Development and Flood Risk), and plan for the area (that is, the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan (adopted August 2005))

Having carefully considered the relevent planning issues raised by this proposal, we have concluded that the Secretary of State’s intervention would not be justified.   It does not in the Secretary of State’s view raise issue’s of such wider significance requiring a detemination by her.   The decision as to whether to grant such planning permission will therefore remain with Brentwood Borough Council.

And here’s the text of the letter from Janna Tweed.

Dear Sir

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT WILLIAM hUNTER WAY, BRENTWOOD, ESSEX

I am writing to let you know that the Secretary of State has completed her consideration of the above case and decided, on the basis of the information submitted and your comments, that she should not intervene.  She has therefore authorised Brentwood Borough Council to decide the application as they think fit.

A copy of the letter sent to Brentwood Borough Council is enclosed for your information.

Yours faithfully

Janna Tweed

Planning Casework

I’ll be forwarding them to the various local councillors, and to the Gazette.   But I’m feeling better than James Brown, at the moment.

You can tell, can’t you?

It looks like, barring any major problems, Brentwood will get its cinema.