fast4truth2

First, let Tim wilmot make it clear
that at all times he had proper regard
for the potential dangers of landfill gases.

He had previously owned a business
selling butane and propane gases,
which had very similar dangers to methane.

He was fully aware of the dangers of 'gas traps'.

Tim Wilmot explained that it was an outline application only,
with no other intent than asking the question
"Is this geographical site suitable as a garden centre?"

He explained that he was perfectly happy
for any other questions
to be dealt with at detailed stage,
if outline planning consent was granted.

In reply, the three officers explained
that they were advisory only to the planning department,
and had no say in any decision
( which Tim Wilmot already knew ).

However they all agreed that Tim Wilmot's position
satisfied their professional requirements.

For some reason this is not made clear
in the police witness statements the three men made
for the 1992 police investigation.

However it is clear
that this agreement was extremely unwelcome
to the Chief Planning Officer.

So much so, he specificly mentions it in his 1993 Affidavit

-====================================================-

18.1a.    I cannot agree with the Plaintiff's assertion
18.1b.    in Paragraph 14 of his Affidavit
18.1c.    that the 2 Environmental Health Officers
18.1d.    "agreed that they would be happy for any landfill gas question
18.1e.    to be dealt at a detailed planning stage...".

18.2a.    In my experience
18.2b.    Environmental Health Officers are aware that it is not their remit
18.2c.    to advise applicants of how they envisage an application
18.2d.    will be determined by the local planning authority.

18.3a.    It is, however, entirely appropriate for environmental health officers
18.3b.    to advise applicants upon the salient safety aspect
18.3c.    of an application for planning permission
18.3d.    and the information they require to enable them to respond positively
18.3e.    to a request for advice by the District Planning Department.

-====================================================-

Another point of interest
is that Tim Wilmot contacted Mr John Inman
to see if he could clarify any points.

Inman had retired a few months after the site meeting.

While he was not helpful,
he did say that he was glad he had retired from the council,
and that he hoped he would "never have to step inside the front door again!"

Which suggests that relationships at Caradon District Council
were less than happy
( confirmed by another police witness statement by Kimberley ).

-====================================================-
Link - Planners briefed on site meeting - sequential
-====================================================-
Link - Return to Start Menu to Site Meeting section -===============================================================================-
Click "back" to your last webpage location

[C] 2010 - Zen asserts copyright on text, context, and design.
-===============================================================================-
Go to Instructions & Contact Details at top of Start Menu for:-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1. you want to use some of this site for a non-commercial purpose.
2. you want to use some of this site for a commercial purpose.
3. you want to use the design of this site for your own legal work,
    and would welcome professional assistance.
-===============================================================================-

Zen wishes to say "Thank You!" to BLOGGER

-===============================================================================-