davek
Player Valuation: £150m
I didn't say the LCC had lied. I suggested that whatever body the planning inspector is directly responsible to had lied.
I'll admit I'm a bit confused by vague definition of the various bodies involved.
The planning inspector is a presumably a council employee, whereas the planning committee is made up of elected councillors and advised by council employees?
Anyway the fact remains the plan was rejected initially for one set of reasons
which it was later admitted were spurious :
and a completely new set of reasons were given :
Robin, the Inspector is independent - you'd hardly expect an appeal to be heard by an LCC employee would you? She reached her conclusion which was to accept part of the original objection by LCC. How you can say that LCC's original point on loss of open space isn't in the judgement of the Inspector concerning loss of green space I'm not quite sure. How many green spaces do you think we are talking about in this?!
The objection was cosistent; the inspector found in the objector's favour. End of story.
As for you not saying LCC were lying: you stating LCC were practically saying "ok we lied the first time", sort of confirms you were saying they were lying.










