Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5327
Received: 06/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
This statement is misleading and wrong, the planning committee were not given all relevant information in which to make an informed decision, this included the ecology report of 1998 and the fact the site contained ancient woodland. THIS WAS NOT NEW INFORMATION, members of the public had protested about the ommision of this long before the planning meeting, all of which was ignored. Had the true facts been presented to the planning committee, I'm sure planning would not have been granted. It was only after a legal challenge that HBCs own legal department recommended that the planning application be withdrawn.
This statement is misleading and wrong, the planning committee were not given all relevant information in which to make an informed decision, this included the ecology report of 1998 and the fact the site contained ancient woodland. THIS WAS NOT NEW INFORMATION, members of the public had protested about the ommision of this long before the planning meeting, all of which was ignored. Had the true facts been presented to the planning committee, I'm sure planning would not have been granted. It was only after a legal challenge that HBCs own legal department recommended that the planning application be withdrawn.