23 November 2005
The NSE Appeal is refused by the Planning Inspectorate.
The main points addressed by the decision were:-
   •   The proposal does not meet an identified need for housing in the area.
   •   Significant unplanned housing would conflict with the development plan.
   •   The proposed new housing estate is not sustainable.
   •   Traffic and utilities/services are not reasons to refuse permission.
   •   The proposal adversely affects the character and openness of the site.
   •   The proposal constitutes inappropriate development of the Green Belt.
   •   The scheme may be the NSE's preferred option, but it is not the only one available.
   •   The balance of evidence suggests there to be alternatives less harmful to the Green Belt.

There are circumstances under which the NSE can appeal the decision to the High Court. This would add to the NSE's costs and delay matters still further.  sense do not think it a likely route for the NSE to follow.

The formal decision letter fron the ODPM and the full text of the Inspector's Report are available as pdf's in the download section.

3 August 2005
Summing Up held at CDC offices.

28 June - 12 July 2005
Planning Inquiry held at Chiltern District Council offices in Amersham. The Inspector indicated he will undertake a formal site inspection on 2 August and hear closing speeches from the interested parties in CDC's offices on 3 August.

15 June 2005
The Planning Inquiry is due to start at 10:00 am on Tuesday 28 June 2005.  It is estimated to last 10 days.  See sense Newsletter #9 for further information.

11 April 2005
A Pre Inquiry Meeting (PIM) was held at CDC's offices. This was to establish the procedural framework of the Inquiry. sense were legally represented, as were the NSE and Chiltern District Council. The Parish council was represented by Cllr. Linda Smith. The main points were:
   sense are accepted as a party to the Inquiry (and are entitled to copies of submissions by other parties)
   Proofs of evidence to be circulated by 31 May 2005
   The order of hearing evidence will be NSE, CDC, sense, Parish, Other third parties
   The Inspector will make a site visit on the afternoon of 27 June 2005.

15 December 2004
The Planning Inspectorate appeal is scheduled to be heard at Chiltern District Council offices commencing Tuesday 28 June 2005. It is estimated that it will last 6 days. Further details as and when available.

28 September 2004
This was the closing date for representations to the Planning Inspectorate. Inlets the NSE submit another planning application the next stage will be a public inquiry which will be held locally. Date uncertain, but February - July 2005 presently seem likely.

3 September 2004
The CDC hearing is behind us. All efforts must NOW be directed to the Planning Inspectorate appeal - representations for this must be made by 28 September 2004.

 
2 September 2004
CDC Planning Committee consider NSE application 2004/859/CH:
1.  The meeting was attended by 15 councillors and approximately 100 members of the public. These packed the room.
2.  The report of the CDC Planning Officer, Mr Ray Martin, was made available to the meeting.
3.  The following spoke concerning the application prior to the committee formally considering it:
  a)  Councillor Palmer for the Parish Council
  b)  Bob Wilson for sense, against the application
  c)  Professor John Duncan, NSE, for the application.

The committee considered the merits of the application for around an hour. They broadly accepted the planning officer's report which detailed numerous objections the the NSE's application. They identified a further four major shortcomings and/or divergences from the Local Plan.

The application was REFUSED on a vote of 15-0.

Details of the Planning Committee Meeting here
 

25 August 2004 
Chiltern District Council (CDC) formally announce that the NSE's 1st application (Ref: 2004/859/CH) will be heard by their planning committee on 2 September 2004.  CDC state that 2004/1030/CH has already been appealed and so they cannot determine it.  As of 25 August the effect of twin-tracking becomes apparent - if CDC accept the NSE's application 2004/859/CH they've won; if not they can pursue 2004/1030/CH with the Planning Inspectorate.  This demonstrates how 'twin-tracking' bypasses local democracy - NSE application 2004/1030/CH will be considered by the Planning Inspectorate without having been considered at the local level.

It appears highly probable that the NSE knew or suspected a week ago that both applications were likely to be listed for consideration on 2 September. So although they had until 28 October to make an appeal, they elected to appeal one application to effect twin-tracking.


18 August 2004 
sense are made aware that the NSE have appealed their 2nd application (Ref: 2004/1030/CH) directly to the Planning Inspectorate. This department is run by the office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr John Prescott.  The basis of appeal was that CDC had failed to determine this application within 8 weeks from submission. This, perhaps, not surprising as the outline ran to approx. 40 lever-arch of information, much of which dealt with epilepsy at a technical level rather than the planning aspects of their application.

The 8 week deadline would have expired around 29 July. The NSE then had 13 weeks until 28 October to make an appeal. Their restraint, if any (see below), has been short-lived. 


26 July 2004
In a letter dated 26 July to a member of the local community, Mr Faulkner said that no appeal had yet been made by the NSE to the planning inspectorate.  Presumably the NSE could have appealed the 1st application by now on the grounds of non-determination by CDC.  sense welcomes this news of restraint by the NSE. We understand that neither application will be heard by CDC in August, so the next available planning committee meeting is on 2 September. sense would like to see the normal local democratic process for planning approval followed by the NSE and thus far this appears to be happening. It is now incumbent on CDC to consider the NSE's application as soon as reasonably practicable.


8 June 2004
Following the Chalfont St Peter parish council meeting, the planning committee met and voted to recommend to Chiltern District Council (CDC) that the NSE's application 2004/859/CH should be rejected.


12 May 2004
2nd Planning Application submitted to CDC.  (Ref: 2004/1030/CH)

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. It cost the NSE £5,500, the same as the original.

It goes into the planning application process exactly the same way as the original. The NSE can choose to promote one or both, appeal one or both etc. Rather than focus on the principles for or against their development proposals just on their merits, they appear now to be using smoke and mirror tactics to achieve their desired objective by whatever means possible. Obviously, if one application receives substantially less objections than the other, that is the one they are more likely to actively promote. Equally obviously, the initial application received a lot of adverse comment, so a reasonable expectation is that 2004/1030/CH is their stalking horse to sneak their scheme through.

7 May 2004
Planning Application submitted to CDC.  (Ref: 2004/859/CH)

No matter what the outcome is, an appeal is likely.

October 2003
In their 2003 Accounts (signed off on September 2003) the NSE said they expected to submit their planning application in October 2003.  This may well have been delayed whilst they gauged public reaction, in particular the 1,800+ name petition handed to them in December 2003.  sense understand that NSE staff have met with Chiltern District Council's planning personnel in private meetings on at least one occasion.