Wednesday, 20 June 2012

Development by Conygar on Newry Waterfront, Holyhead.

UPDATE 14 July 2012 - It seems outline planning permission has not been granted by the Council, which does allow for the Welsh Government to call in the application, as reported in the Daily Post. Seeing how strong the opposition is to the proposed development, it may be a wise move by  the Labour Welsh Government to call in the application and hold a public inquiry, or otherwise and as reported by North Wales Chronicle - Campaigners form anti-Holyhead marina party many Labour Councillors may be thrown out at the next local elections. The below does set out correctly what happens after planning permission has been granted, but seeing that planning permission has not been granted then there is something the Minister can do.   

A report in todays Holyhead and Anglesey Mail - "Residents fight to save the beach" by Ffion Williams, quotes Mr Lloyd Williams; chairman of the Newry Residents Association; whom are opposed to the proposed Conygar development on Newry Waterfront, as saying those against the plans are confident they will win their fight in Cardiff.

But what has Cardiff to do with this? - Apparently it is expected that Ieuan Wyn Jones AM will now write to the Welsh Government Planning Inspectorate to discuss the concerns of the objectors with him.

I'm not sure why, in the first place a third party cannot appeal against the decision, as explained in the Planning Portal:

After the decision

In England and Wales it is not possible for a third party to appeal against a local planning authority's decision.

For example, if your neighbour was granted permission to build an extension you could not appeal against it - even if you objected to the application at an earlier stage of the process.

Complaining about applications

In some cases, you can complain to the Local Government Ombudsman about how a local planning authority handled a planning application.

If you are the planning applicant, the Ombudsman will not usually look at your complaint because you have a right of appeal to the Secretary of State, through the Planning Inspectorate.

If you are a neighbour affected by a local authority's planning decision, the Ombudsman may consider your complaint, but only if there was administrative fault in the way the authority handled the matter.

The Ombudsman cannot investigate a complaint just because you do not agree with the decision.

The Ombudsman has no power to alter the decision, even if the local authority administration has not been entirely correct.

However, in cases where the Ombudsman decides that the local authority has acted incorrectly in handling a planning matter, the Ombudsman can recommend that the authority take action to mitigate the effect on you, and pay you compensation, if appropriate.


The only other route against granting of a planning permission is to apply to the High Court for a judicial review, which must be done promptly and within three months.

The Friend of Earth website explains what a judicial review is:

Judicial Review is a form of Court proceeding that allows you to ask a judge to review the legality of a public body‟s actions. It can only be used in situations where there is no other right of appeal and where you believe that the authority has acted unlawfully.

Judicial review is only concerned with whether the decision has been made in accordance with the law and whether the decision made is itself lawful. Importantly, judicial review is not concerned with the merits of a decision i.e. with whether or not it is a good or bad environmental decision. The court will not substitute its own decision for the decision of the authority.

In other words it is not about whether their decision was right or wrong. Decision makers are allowed to get things „wrong‟ i.e. to decide differently to the way that you, the Court or another decision maker would have decided. The question is whether they acted lawfully in how they got there.

The courts are usually less concerned with the decision than the manner of reaching it i.e. about lawfulness of process.


Not that this should stop anyone whom objected to the development, forgetting those Councillors whom supported the development at next years County Councillor elections.

1 comment:

The Red Flag said...

Now why would the AM get involved? Ciould it be because:-

The Chair of the County Council asked for it not to be accepted.

The Chair of the Planning Committee likewise

The County Council's Solicitor advised against it.

Proper 'due diligance' had not been carried out.

There is a fair bit of 'possibly', 'could' and 'may' being used as caveats over job creation and absolutely no guarentee that any local firm will get any work from it at all - quite the opposite in fact.

That there is already a similar development at the other end of the promenade that is still half empty and therefore there is absolutely no demonstrable demad to go ahead and build another.

That the site is in a conservation area.

Other than that, can't see any reason at all for the AM to be involved.