Rail Freight Terminal Application - Live Webcast Tonight
The planning application for a huge rail depot in the south of St Albans district comes to the planning committee tonight. The meeting is being webcast from 7 pm on the St Albans council website, see link on right.
POSTSCRIPT
The meeting took three hours not to make a decision. The massive report to the meeting listed a large number of possible reasons for refusal. However, the Highways Agency had directed St Albans council not to give permission for the development yet as they were still looking at the impact of the proposal on local motorways.
It would have been possible to refuse permission at the meeting, but the council's officers recommended that it would be better to wait for a final response from the Highways Agency to see if they proposed an additional reason for refusal.
The officers recommended that the council should state that it is minded to refuse the application on the grounds they have identified but will take a final decision when the Highways Agency reports in the new year.
I must admit that given the Highways Agency direction, my preference would have been not to call the meeting until they established what advice or instruction they were giving to the council. However, given that the meeting had taken place, and after about three hours of discussion and debate, I proposed that the officer recommendation should be approved and this was unanimously agreed by the councillors.
Result - ten councillors, a similar number of highly paid professional experts, and hundreds of members of the public took part in or listened to three hours of debate with the end result that no final decision was taken. The issue is likely to come back to committee early in the New Year.
POSTSCRIPT
The meeting took three hours not to make a decision. The massive report to the meeting listed a large number of possible reasons for refusal. However, the Highways Agency had directed St Albans council not to give permission for the development yet as they were still looking at the impact of the proposal on local motorways.
It would have been possible to refuse permission at the meeting, but the council's officers recommended that it would be better to wait for a final response from the Highways Agency to see if they proposed an additional reason for refusal.
The officers recommended that the council should state that it is minded to refuse the application on the grounds they have identified but will take a final decision when the Highways Agency reports in the new year.
I must admit that given the Highways Agency direction, my preference would have been not to call the meeting until they established what advice or instruction they were giving to the council. However, given that the meeting had taken place, and after about three hours of discussion and debate, I proposed that the officer recommendation should be approved and this was unanimously agreed by the councillors.
Result - ten councillors, a similar number of highly paid professional experts, and hundreds of members of the public took part in or listened to three hours of debate with the end result that no final decision was taken. The issue is likely to come back to committee early in the New Year.
Comments