June 2006
The NSE announce a public consultation exercise regarding their future direction and use of their Chalfont St Peter site.  The information is aimed at a much wider audience than just their neighbours. Furthermore, it addresses all of the NSE's activities and not simply long-term residential accommodation.  The downloadable consultation paper is an interesting and informative read.  The NSE invite interested parties to complete an online questionnaire by 30 June with the intention of putting the results to an internal Board meeting near the end of July 2006.

The information provided is more direct and useful than the newsletters of 2003/04. It talks about being commercial, including depreciation in fees, staffing fees and recruitment issues, etc. It touches on problems of maintaining existing and excessive properties but does not put forward plans for the future of the site - perhaps, given the 'consultative' nature of the exercise this is understandable.  But the proof of the pudding will be the eating.

February 2006
sense received notification from the Charities Commission that the NSE have reported to them that their costs in relation to the planning application and appeal were £838,000. It is not clear up to what point this sum relates to or whether (as sense expect) it is external costs only or if it includes allowance for internal staff costs, associated overhead etc. It is probably fair to say that £838,000 is the minimum outlay incurred.

November 2005
Early on the morning of 23 November sense received notification that the Planning Inspectorate and the ODPM have formally rejected the NSE's proposals as unacceptable. This is fantastic news. Although we have long been confident on the principles involved we did feel some uncertainty after the Planning Inquiry, when the decision-making process moved out of the open and into the political arena. There is a 'sense' of euphoria after all the hard work by so many people and such widespread support in the immediate community.

Yet this doesn't change sense's respect for the NSE's work, admiration for their staff or recognition that the care residents deserve better accommodation. But the scheme was unbelievably large for its stated purpose and out of character with the surrounding area.  The NSE management decision to run with the £32M scheme has cost them perhaps £750K, 'lost' 3+ years and diminished their local community standing.

The notification letter and Inspector's Report are available as pdf's in the download section.

October 2005
The NSE appealed CDC's decision to refuse permission for a replacement substation (original posting here). The 'replacement' proposed was a long way from the original, on Green Belt land and close to a bend on Chesham Lane where the footpath crosses the road. sense's appeal letter highlights the issues and provides the address for anyone else who wants to appeal.

August 2005
Public Inquiry Summing Up held at CDC offices. Details here. The decision is expected to be made public around 23 November 2005.

June/July 2005
Public Inquiry held at CDC offices, Amersham. Details in Planning Application section.

June 2005
1. Public Meeting
sense and the Chalfont St Peter Parish Council hosted a joint public meeting in the Community Centre on 7 June 2005.

High-rise Chalfont.   The NSE propose that ALL the sheltered accommodation, ALL the retirement home accommodation and 9 other buildings on the Rickmansworth Lane Housing Estate be built 3 storeys high.

Extensive road changes on Local Lanes.   The NSE previously said their proposals wouldn't unduly affect traffic, yet they now propose roundabouts, width restrictions etc. on Chesham and Monument Lanes.

Is the 'Road to Nowhere' is back on the NSE Agenda?

2. sense newsletter #8
Prepared and distributed. This can be viewed/downloaded in the Information section.

April 2005
1. Forum
In early April the cgi and PHP servers at the ISP hosting the sense Website failed with total loss of programs and data. At 18 April the issue was unresolved. Although data backups are available, reinstatement is low priority work (given the forthcoming Appeal).

2. sense newsletter #7
Prepared and distributed. This can be viewed/downloaded in the Information section.

3. Pre-Inquiry Meeting (PIM)
Attended by sense. Details here.

January 2005
1. sense Newsletter #6
Prepared and distributed. Newsletter #6 can be viewed/downloaded in the Information section.

2. Retrospective
At the foot of this page sense observed that if the NSE had acted 'fleet-of-foot' on a low-cost scheme without major Green Belt impact, some of their care residents could have been in new accommodation by Christmas 2004. Christmas is gone and the commencement of any building works still a significant time away.

December 2004
1. Planning Inspectorate Appeal date set
We understand this is scheduled to commence on Tuesday 28 June 2005. Our information is that it will be held at Chiltern District Council's offices in Amersham and is expected to last 6 days. Appeals are not heard on Mondays, so the expected concluding date is Wednesday 6 July 2005.

2. Parish Council Funding
sense are delighted to be able to announce that Chalfont St. Peter Parish Council are supporting supporting us in the Planning Inspectorate appeal in the most tangible way possible - CASH. There is a substantial sum provided to assist with legal costs and the possibility of further funding later, should that become appropriate.

3. The Substation Saga
The NSE withdrew the original substation application on 14 December just before determination by CDC. The next day they submitted an application for a substation that, to all intents and purposes, is the same as the first one. However, the stated need has changed from 'to anticipate their future needs' to one of renewal of worn-out infrastructure, so is now on health and safety grounds. Strange they didn't think of that first time round.

The new planning application reference is CH/2004/2338/FA and anyone wishing to object should write to CDC by 13 January 2005.

4. sense Appoint Barrister
sense has formally retained the services of a barrister, an expert in planning law, to represent the local community at the Planning Inspectorate appeal.

June 2004
1   Cheryl Gillan resigns as NSE Officer
Ms Gillan has identified a potential conflict of interest and resigned as Vice President of the NSE.  The conflict is (presumably) arises because she has been supporting the NSE's massive redevelopment scheme as a VP, whilst many of her constituents want her to act for them (in her capacity as their MP) to oppose its excesses.

2   2nd (Duplicate) Planning Application
The NSE has submitted a second planning application to CDC. The application letter was dated 12 May 2004 and stamped as received by CDC on 3 June 2004. In all material regards it appears identical to the original £32Million application debated and rejected by Chalfont St Peter parish council on 8 June 2004. No mention of this was made at the parish meeting. The new reference is 2004/1030/CH. It cost the NSE £5,500, the same as the original one under reference 2004/859/CH. This needs to be opposed just as strenuously as the original (fortunately CDC are writing to all original objectors, detailing the 2nd application, else the local community might not be aware of it). With two planning applications in progress the NSE can pick which one to back - presumably the one that appears to have less opposition.

sense publish and distribute their newsletter #4 from 25 June 2004 to draw local attention to this action by the NSE and to request further public objection.

3   NSE starts Development Work
Development of a tarmac roadway off Chesham Lane and into an NSE field commenced at a location approx. 200 yards northwest of the existing Debenham House entrance on Chesham Lane.

4   Parish Council Meeting, (8 June 2004)
The NSE's Mr Faulkner gave a brief presentation to a packed (200 sitting, 100+ standing) Community Centre audience prior to a formal Parish Council Planning meeting. This was followed by 2 hours' of questions/comments from the floor. In summary:-

  * The NSE team were inadequately prepared for questions they should have anticipated
  * The local infrastructure (schools/services/roads etc.) is already fully-loaded
  * Their scheme was felt to be disproportionate to their needs
  * If allowed, dangerous precedents would be set for other developers 'in the wings'
  * The NSE's residents deserve a fair deal. But so do the Chalfont Common residents
  * Local childrens' interests would be prejudiced during and after construction.

May 2004
NSE submit formal Planning Application to Chiltern District Council. Neither sense nor local community forewarned.  So much for keeping the local community informed.  The NSE want to sell even more greenfield land to raise even more cash than their 2003 scheme that outraged the community. The inclusion of a large residential care home and sheltered accommodating drives up the would-be population even more sharply. The proposal remains several times larger than required for rebuilding the care residences and continues to steamroller over the interests and concerns of anyone outside their boundary. There is a limited time in which to object.

NSE Leaflet #3 distributed from 17 May, two weeks after planning application submitted.  sense publish and distribute their newsletter #3 from 25 May. (Page 1, 2).

April 2004
Travellers set up 'hard' camp on Roberts Lane, approx. 1 mile from the NSE's HQ. This is/was part of the NSE's Skippings Farm Estate. Needless to say, it is Green Belt.

March 2004
Mr Faulkner (NSE) attempts to stifle public debate by marking outward correspondence as 'confidential'. Several correspondents give up as a result.

We are now six months since the NSE's Governors signed their 2003 Annual Report and said planning permission was expected to be sought in a month.

February 2004
The NSE submits a planning application to convert its Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre to house 12 long-term care residents. Whilst clearly good in principle (for the residents and reducing the balance of care-home renewal), sense note that:-
 1 The National Care Standards occupancy limit of 10 people is ignored,
 2 The proposed development impinges on Green Belt land, and
 3 The NSE want to change established public rights of way.

For a small development, they seem to have gone out of their way to step on the toes of as many people as possible.