|
20200504a-EM-NPTC-RICD-contam2008 (Our
notes in red - only a partial analysis of this document has been
completed we have since discovered that.....................
according to the properties of the document
this reply was written by Steve Ball
CLICK
HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT
Dear Mr Richards,
Further to your correspondence below, please
find attached my letter of response – I trust you will find my
comments of assistance.
The Council has treated your concerns as a Stage 2 Complaint
under our Complaints Process. Although you have not deemed your
concerns a complaint, it was felt that this was the best process
to consider your concerns and to ensure you had a response on
the issues you raised.
In the event you are dissatisfied, you are of course able to
make a referral the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales via their
website (www.ombudsman.wales).
With regards – Ceri.
The letter was attached as a .pdf - the
information from the .pdf is contained below.................
Mr D Richards, On behalf of: Glynneath Residents
“say enz-NO” Group
BY EMAIL ONLY
Dear Mr Richards,
Re: Heol Y Glyn, Glynneath – Are Neath Port
Talbot Council contravening the
Environmental Protection Act 1990?
In your email of the 19th April 2020 directed to
the Leader of Neath Port Talbot Council (“the Council”), you
refer to a number of concerns where you feel the Council has not
upheld its responsibilities in relation to the Environmental
Protection Act 1990 and as
part of this, you highlighted concerns in regard to the conduct
of my Development Manager, Mr Steve Ball, specifically the
handling of the (current) planning application at the above
mentioned site and the fact that Mr Ball had not answered
questions that had
been raised with him. In line with the Council’s protocols,
these concerns were forwarded to me for me to consider and
respond to you accordingly. As Head of Service, I was appointed
to oversee this investigation and respond to you to demonstrate
the seriousness as to how the Council takes such matters and to
ensure your views are considered in detail.
Notwithstanding the fact that in a subsequent email to myself
(dated 28th April 2020), you indicated that you did not wish to
make a complaint, I have since advised that the matters you have
raised in your email of 19th April would nevertheless require
investigation in order to ensure your views can be considered in
an open and transparent manner. As part of my investigation, I
have held discussions with all relevant officers and reviewed
the extensive and continued correspondence that you have
submitted to the
Planning Department in respect of the current planning
application associated with the Heol Y Glyn site.
Dealing first with the conduct of Mr Ball, you
have referred to the ‘Policy Statement and General Principles
of Code of Conduct’ which states:
"The public is entitled to expect the highest standards
of conduct from all employees……The role of such employees is
to serve the Authority in providing advice, implementing its
policies, and delivering services to the local community. In
performing
their duties, they must act with integrity, honesty,
impartiality and objectivity. Public confidence in the Authority
and in an employee's integrity would be shaken if the least
suspicion were to arise that an employee could in any way be
influenced by improper motives”. (avoidance
of subject matter by valueless copying of my email - he should
have copied Mr Ball's paragraph)
I note that you then state that Mr Ball has been ‘openly
ignoring and refusing to address [your] legitimate concerns
regarding planning at Heol Y Glyn’ and allege that this
‘brings into question the planning departments integrity,
impartiality and objectivity’ and
‘constitutes a breach of your code of conduct [which] erodes
[your] confidence in the Council’. (change
subject avoiding the evidence I provided the council leader).
You have further inferred in your email that Mr Ball is not
‘impartial’ because he has stated that he sees ‘no reason
why matters of land contamination cannot be
addressed in the usual manner through imposition of
conditions’. (if the NPTC were to impose
conditions on the site then they should have done so in 2008
when the contamination was first discovered. The contamination
was then hidden by allowing the Cuddy Group to submit a new
survey without chemical testing in 2010. )
In response, I would advise that Mr Ball is a
highly qualified and respected Planning Officer with
considerable experience of the Development Management process,
and I am wholly satisfied that both in general terms, and on
this case in particular, that he has
and continues to uphold the highest standard of conduct at all
times. (personal opinions)
While I note that Mr Ball has advised you that the Department
would not be able to continue to respond to you, citing your
continued and extensive correspondence, he has nevertheless sent
you a very comprehensive email on 9th April 2020 seeking to
address the issues you have raised. While you might disagree
with Mr Ball, I consider this to be very good service on his
part. Furthermore, I wish to advise that I am fully supportive
of the general stance taken by Mr Ball to cease further
responses to you and instead to deal with matters in the
Department’s assessment of the application in question, not
least because even in ‘normal’ times officers are unable to
respond to emails on individual applications, and in these
extraordinary times officers simply do not have the capacity to
do so. I would also add that the comments made by Mr Ball in
respect of land contamination are his professional views (professional
views = personal opinions what chemical qualifications does he
hold) at this time based on the information the
Department has available, and based on his considerable
experience and the fact that this site has an extant planning
permission – i.e.
material operations comprising the development or the use
authorised by the permission at the site have been initiated
before the time limits set by condition have expired. (he
is using bullshit terminology because he is trying to confuse
me, there is no evidence of planning approval within the last 5
years)
Accordingly, I find that Mr Ball has undertaken his duties to
date in a highly professional manner and that there has been no
breach of any code of conduct. (personal
opinions)
Turning specifically to the issue of land
contamination at the site and whether the Council has
historically contravened the Environmental Protection Act 1990,
I would advise that this legislation no longer applies when a
site is going through the planning
process; by definition therefore the Council has not at any
point contravened its duties under this legislation, as it is
not relevant once the planning process has commenced.
What is relevant however, is that through the
planning process, the Council is required to address land
contamination to ensure sites are safe and suitable for use
after development has been completed. Mr Ball has already quite
rightly drawn your attention
to the fact that these matters are routinely addressed
throughout the process in consultation with the Council’s
specialist officers on land contamination matters, as well as in
responses from Natural Resources Wales (NRW).
I note that the Geo-Technical and Geo-Environmental Report to
which you refer, which supported planning application
P2008/1462, did find low levels of contamination (personal
opinions what chemical qualifications does he hold) and
concluded that clean cover should be provided in residential
gardens which would mitigate all risk posed by any contamination
present at the site.
As part of ongoing consideration of the current
application therefore, my officers will be giving full regard to
all available information, and given the date of the historical
report referenced above, will need to make a judgement call as
to whether a new updated study is required.
In conclusion, while I appreciate that you are
concerned about the development of the site in question, and
wish to ensure that matters such as contamination and wider
impacts on amenity are appropriately considered, I am wholly
satisfied that a decision
on the application will be made in due course in an open and
transparent manner, and that all matters raised will be
appropriately considered through the determination process.
Furthermore, I would note that the application
has been ‘called-in’ by your local Members for a decision by
members of the Planning Committee and through their review of
the report (which would be publicly available for inspection in
advance) they will ensure that they are satisfied that local
concerns are adequately addressed before reaching their
decision.
Should however you consider at a later stage that the Local
Planning Authority has failed to act properly, then it would be
open to you to raise this first as a formal complaint to the
Council and then, if you remain dissatisfied, to the Public
Services Ombudsman. Alternatively you are of course able to
pursue a judicial review of the Council’s decision. However,
please be assured all legal and procedural processes will be
complied with in decision making.
At this time however, I reiterate that I am wholly satisfied
with the conduct of my officers and of their ongoing assessment
of the application in question. Moreover that when the
application is reported to members of the Planning Committee in
future (in whatever
form that exists at the time due to Covid-19), I am confident
that your concerns will be appropriately addressed in their
report and, in the event of a positive recommendation, in any
relevant conditions they would recommend are imposed.
Finally, while writing, I would wish to
reiterate the advice given by Mr Ball that the Department will
no longer respond to your requests for information or respond to
your questions. Instead, I give you the assurance that any
representations you make or have
made expressing any issues or concerns with the development will
be considered as part of our assessment of the application in
question.
I trust you will find my response of assistance.
The Council has treated your concerns as a Stage 2 Complaint
under our Complaints
Process. Although you have not deemed your concerns a complaint,
it was felt that this was the best process to consider your
concerns and to ensure you had a response on the issues you
raised.
In the event you are dissatisfied, you are of
course able to make a referral the Public Service Ombudsman for
Wales via their website (www.ombudsman.wales).
Yours sincerely, - Mr Ceri Morris - Head of
Planning and Public Protection
|
