I must respond to your on-line commentator ‘terrorbird’ who, in response to my letter ‘One rule for Barnitts - another rule for Spark’ (November 14) says I know nothing about planning law and claims Barnitts is different to Spark because Spark is only temporary.
Wrong on both counts.
I’ve submitted over a thousand planning applications and fought scores of appeals. Moreover, ‘temporary permissions do not outweigh the harm caused by inappropriate development’ according to a letter I received from York Council. Shortly afterwards they granted permission to Spark for steel boxes on a prominent site on the grounds that it would only be for three years - now extended to five!
Unfairness and double standards have been rife in the planning system for years. The temporary nature of Spark is not a justification to ignore major planning policies.
Matthew Laverack,
Laverack Associates Architects,
Lord Mayors Walk, York
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel