Who decides if something needs planning permission?, another Newbury Town Council ****-up Options

[Andy Capp]

We already know about the relocation of the skate park 'in readiness for the pavilion', but I have now read how residents of the Middle Close/Elizabeth Ave were about to be subjected to a basket ball park on their doorstep without consultation. Like the skate park in Victoria park, It seems the park needed no planning permission.

The basket ball court was another Newbury Town Council ****-up. A case of every one else thought someone else knew.

Personally, I doubt it was a ****-up and am more inclined to think it was the council trying to do a sneaky one before the elections. The person that arbitrated between the residents and the council was Adrian Edwards (CON) of Falkland Ward.


Would anyone tell me who decides in cases like this, if planning permission is required?

[Simon Kirby]

We already know about the relocation of the skate park 'in readiness for the pavilion', but I have now read how residents of the Middle Close/Elizabeth Ave were about to be subjected to a basket ball park on their doorstep without consultation. Like the skate park in Victoria park, It seems the park needed no planning permission.

The basket ball court was another Newbury Town Council ****-up. A case of every one else thought someone else knew.

Personally, I doubt it was a ****-up and am more inclined to think it was the council trying to do a sneaky one before the elections. The person that arbitrated between the residents and the council was Adrian Edwards (CON) of Falkland Ward.


Would anyone tell me who decides in cases like this, if planning permission is required?

I understand it's the planners. Even when there's deemed consent if the planners disagree I think the next higher authority is a judicial review.

If I can I'll dig out the Regulation made under the Town and Country Planning Act that gives councils deemed consent for ancilliary stuff in their parks.

The thing I don't understand about the Victoria Park snafu is that WBC and NTC are not the same council, and so NTC can only build on bits of the park that it rents from WBC, and WBC can only build on bits of the park that it doesn't lease to NTC. So this stuff about building the pavilion where the skate park was to go doesn't make sense to me.

[Exhausted]

The thing I don't understand about the Victoria Park snafu is that WBC and NTC are not the same council, and so NTC can only build on bits of the park that it rents from WBC, and WBC can only build on bits of the park that it doesn't lease to NTC. So this stuff about building the pavilion where the skate park was to go doesn't make sense to me.

You would have thought so, but moving the skate park north followed by the play area would then have made room for the footprint of the pavilion which would have been too close or even covered part of the kiddies play area if they don't both shuffle along several metres. NTC just go along with whatever the WBC planners want. Toothless tigers I'm afaraid.
NTC have already lost one grant because of the uncertainty of what WBC were planning to do in the park. The lead up to getting the grant cost a bob or two. Money down the drain. Not even a 'sorry chaps' from WBC.

[Andy Capp]

You would have thought so, but moving the skate park north followed by the play area would then have made room for the footprint of the pavilion which would have been too close or even covered part of the kiddies play area if they don't both shuffle along several metres. NTC just go along with whatever the WBC planners want. Toothless tigers I'm afaraid.

I can't help think that the damage to the tree argument was a 'convenient' excuse.

[Exhausted]

I can't help think that the damage to the tree argument was a 'convenient' excuse.

Well, of course it was. On the pictures that have been touted around, the skate bowl was just that and appeared to be level at the top with the grass, so it would have required a dig down thus perhaps endangering a tree or two. But, there has been virtually no dig down, the bowl is elevated by a lot of hardcore up to almost level with the A339 so no trees are at risk. Either it was a trumped up reason to relocate or someone (project management or tree officer) hadn't done their homework.

Certainly there is no danger of anybody inebriated, confused or otherwise walking into it in the dark.

[Cognosco]

Well, of course it was. On the pictures that have been touted around, the skate bowl was just that and appeared to be level at the top with the grass, so it would have required a dig down thus perhaps endangering a tree or two. But, there has been virtually no dig down, the bowl is elevated by a lot of hardcore up to almost level with the A339 so no trees are at risk. Either it was a trumped up reason to relocate or someone (project management or tree officer) hadn't done their homework.

Certainly there is no danger of anybody inebriated, confused or otherwise walking into it in the dark.

Are you implying that you would like an explanation from NTC? Yes dream on?