The site is filling up with documents at an amazing rate. I'm sure this must be atypical for this type of application. In fact 2 new people appeared with e mails to the DPEA stating that they had complained originally (but they are not on the council list of representors? and I certainly never saw complaints from these 2 people previously - are they making it up?) It seems very odd. You don't have to have represented previously as I understand things - you can make representation no matter. I think - but I'm not sure- that no new matters can be introduced.
The planning matters seem pretty clear to me and I'm sure all sensible people will continue to appraise in planning terms. I am personally enjoying the RP9 debate since we called our house RP9 and this is the policy that means a lot to me. I actually share this with a Mrs Kate Duthie - I think its meaning does need to be explored. What is a locational need? what about the caravan park in Kevockvale in another area impacted by RP9. What will happen there? trouble is the caravans were there before RP9 so I don't think you can take them away and re plant woodland for example. But no-one wants to give permission for fixed housing to replace the caravans - even if the housing would look better. Actually the caravans have a somewhat attractive element to them. In a way maybe that only I might appreciate from my trips around Arizona. I don't suppose that makes it acceptable in Scotland though!
Here's the DPEA site if anyone wants to browse. You could be there a long time.......
http://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDetails.aspx?so=3&id=qJ13523&ps=10&pg=1#Categories
Oh and the 2 new people that e mailed the DPEA (Adrienne and Nichola) are the offspring of recent third party representors Mr and Mrs Bowie - mum and dad's letters get fairly personal and are factually wide of the mark on a number of counts but never mind. I can't remember them all there are so many - 1 good example is that the 2 management plans are in some way different but they are not - just 10 or so years apart, written by 2 different people as it happens, and both paid for by ourselves and a necessary requirement in my opinion for the management of any significant piece of woodland. As well as getting the plan, the advice from the experts is second to none. I just soak it up - bit like my summer sandals in the rain this morning.......as I teetered across the road to pick up some crockery.
Finally for Donald - the house is no bigger than the approved plans signed off by the council for the actual house and a minor mod at the decking approved under a non material variation; and you know it. So please move on from that. Your argument lies elsewhere and its actually none of your business.
Happy Saturday.
Just in
From: Millie Bowie <millieatthemill@fsmail.net>
To: susan goldwyre <susangoldwyre@yahoo.co.uk>
Sent: Sat, 16 July, 2011 13:33:17
Subject:
Dear Mrs Goldwyre,
It was suggested to me by someone today, that I should read your blog which mentions my daughters by name in relation to your Planning appeal. How dare you!
My daughters lived here for many years. They continue to visit with their families on a regular basis. One day they will inherit this property. They therefore have a legitimate interest in the integrity of our surroundings, and consequently your Planning Appeal.; I note several of your letters of support come from south of the border, one from as far away as London! What interest can these people possibly have in what takes place here - other than to lend their names in support of you ?
You do not know my daughters, so it is clear that you have been doing your own private research into my family. Should I find their identities bandied around your narcissistic ramblings again, or elsewhere in the public domain, I shall find it necessary to pursue you through the proper channels!
You have a perfectly legitimate and legal right to pursue your appeal through the correct channels. As do other people to object to them! You must learn to live with this!
Yours sincerely, Millie Bowie.
My reply
It was suggested to me by someone today, that I should read your blog which mentions my daughters by name in relation to your Planning appeal. How dare you!
My daughters lived here for many years. They continue to visit with their families on a regular basis. One day they will inherit this property. They therefore have a legitimate interest in the integrity of our surroundings, and consequently your Planning Appeal.; I note several of your letters of support come from south of the border, one from as far away as London! What interest can these people possibly have in what takes place here - other than to lend their names in support of you ?
You do not know my daughters, so it is clear that you have been doing your own private research into my family. Should I find their identities bandied around your narcissistic ramblings again, or elsewhere in the public domain, I shall find it necessary to pursue you through the proper channels!
You have a perfectly legitimate and legal right to pursue your appeal through the correct channels. As do other people to object to them! You must learn to live with this!
Yours sincerely, Millie Bowie.
My reply
Millie
I pointed out your daughters claim that they were original complainers when they do not appear on the listing for the application. I pointed out your personalised letter available for all to read on the DPEA site. I have no problem with anyones right to complain but they are all public documents and when they are registered I have a right to make that available on other media. In the same way as your daughters appeared on my facebook page! I am not in the habit of researching your family. I have no such interest. However - should you or your family ever need my help I would never withhold that no matter the personalised comments you have made about myself and Gerry.
Our supports from London come from the lovely girls that worked with us in the past. How dare you criticise that. They are also - likely to inherit our property! so that gives me just as much family right as you.
Good luck with your "proper channels" I wait to see what you will find considering all my postings are legitimate and accurate. Can you say the same for your letters regarding our planning application? I doubt it.
I have learned to live with your ramblings and your innacurate comments even although they are often highly personalised. That is why I use a blog site. It helps. You will also have to learn to live with what is MY legitimate right to counter your statements and to discover your daughters through a social media site which they chose to make open - to anyone who had their name.
Please pass this e mail on to your daughters. I have no truck with any complaints they wish to make. Please ask them to try to stick to genuine planning reasons.
Kind Regards
Susan
No comments:
Post a Comment