Update 2 8th July 2014 The information is coming in now; I am waiting for a final approval. Meanwhile I would stress that while the application contains for the most part information that does not relate to planning matters. Comments that contain a lot of non-material points will achieve little as the important points that are material to planning tend to get lost. I will update you when I can and probably see many of you at the Parish Council Meeting, where I believe this is going to be raised.
Update 1 6th July 2014: I had a very useful meeting with the Case Officer last week. I have never had to deal with these sort of things until now so I will share some insights. The Planning Officers and the Parish Council will (?must?) speak privately to members of the public about Planning Applications. Such conversations are private, just as private conversations between property developers and the Local Planning Authority (LPA) remain private. If you wish to speak to them, contact them and they will probably welcome you at their offices, by appointment. I was made very welcome so please don't feel deterred, and there is no need to speak 'planning-speak' - they speak English!
Understandably, being private, I am not going to go into all the detail here, but please note: The re-application of this case - despite having been turned-down by the IWC and rejected on appeal - can be re-submitted essentially by making a new application. From what I understood, there is no limit to the number of times they can resubmit essentially the same application even after losing an appeal. Sounds crazy, but apparently it is a well-known technique used by property developers. The applicants, being Directors of several property companies, would presumably know this particularly as they have a stream of legal, planning, veterinary, insurance and trade association professionals working for them --- which might sound steep for planning consent on a mobile home if they have no intention to develop residential properties on the land. As someone said to me very recently "I don't understand why they didn't buy a farm with farmhouse; there are often nice ones available on the Island". I found myself unable to disagree with them.
What is coming out of my research and discussion with the Case Officer is that the issue of bTB (DEFRA) and the Open Farm regulations from the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) while seemingly not a material planning matter at first sight, almost certainly are, after all. I need to take some advice before making the detail public (the threat of their solicitor's letter) but I expect to upload this to the Planning website later this week. I have an extension. Indeed, given that a key paper the applicants had used to support their application had been revised by them just one day before the official close of public comments, should you wish to upload further comments I understand your comment will be taken into consideration.
------End of Update 1 ---
First they objected to Shalfleet Parish Council releasing the letter read out by the Clerk at the last Council meeting (SPC had to take legal advice!) and when I, as a courtesy, invite them to have their 'say', the next thing I get is a solicitor's letter. The correspondence is all below for you to read, including the letter that they did NOT want you to read.
