MAC Timbers

[Sheffield Tony]

I've just had an e-mail to the effect that Mike is being told to cease by the council, see the below enforcement notice.

http://www.east-northamptonshire.gov.uk/site/scripts/download_info.aspx?fileID=6290

A great shame if it happens. I'm sure he'd appreciate any support.

 

[Racers]

Dam shame its a cracking woodyard.


Pete

 

[kreed]

I've known Mike personally for a few years & spoke to him about this less than a couple of weeks ago. It's affecting him badly & I know he's fighting it as much as he can.
I reckon there's a personal vendetta going on & as said above, all support given would be much appreciated by him.
A great guy.

 

[hanser]

I can't think of a more appropriate use for a piece of land next to an ancient monument. Somebody has stirred up the jobsworth's. Great shame if they succeed in pushing him out.

 

[Glynne]

Just to add to the thread, this is the email that came out to people on the mailing list:-

"Hi
If you have not heard the news the council has told Mike to remove his Sawmill and timber stacks from his land by the end of October. I and a great many of his friends have written a letter stressing our concern and support for Mike. If you would like to help with the support please either write a letter with the Planning Ref: 12-00075-PPD and address it to Mike or you can email me [email protected]
I will send you a copy letter that you can add your details to and sign and send it to Mike.

My best regards in hope

Phil Hutton
Webmaster"

So if anyone wants to support directly, suggest you contact Phil Hutton.

 

[andersonec]

I really do not think that any letters of support will have any effect whatsoever ,this is, according to the planning office, 'A breach of planning regulations'. Had Mike applied for 'Change of use' to run a business on the site when he started maybe it would not have come to this, in any case he has the right to appeal the decision which will then go to a Government official who will deal with it, he will listen to no-one and his decision will be final.

Andy

 

[MMUK]

I really do not think that any letters of support will have any effect whatsoever ,this is, according to the planning office, 'A breach of planning regulations'. Had Mike applied for 'Change of use' to run a business on the site when he started maybe it would not have come to this, in any case he has the right to appeal the decision which will then go to a Government official who will deal with it, he will listen to no-one and his decision will be final.

Andy

I have to agree on this one. If he's never applied for planning permission for change of use then it's tough luck. He's lucky they're not demanding back payment on business rates as well.

 

[Glynne]

Having worked in Central Government and had close policy involvement with Minsters for many years, I would be very surprised if anyone making the final judgement will "listen to no one". That is not to say the facts of the case aren't of primary importance, but an arbiter these days needs to consider not only the letter of the law but also the impact of his / her decision. If the decision puts Mike and his family out of work, the political implications are not insignificant and do not under estimate how much politics influences government decisions.
The assumption has to be that someone has made a complaint as, having been to MAC Timber open days, I know that Mike has sourced a lot of his trees from his local authority and obviously they hadn't made the connection. Whether any letters of support will help Mike's case we won't know as we will never be privy to the details of the case and it may be that any complainant has a very valid and justifiable case.

 

[Rhossydd]

Setting up a timber merchant business next to a listed building, on a scheduled ancient monument, in a designated conservation area, opposite domestic housing without planning permission ?
Sorry, but not a lot of sympathy from here.

 

[Togalosh]

It's funny how we are told that the strongly emerging economies of Brazil & Idia are so because they are "dynamic" ..but then our dynamic entrepreneurs are stifled & thwarted by red tape, taxes & whatever new hoops are held up for them to jump through.

If the neighbours had an issue they've took their time to complain about it- 10 years !. I've only ever heard glowing reports of the place, so this important building is not only being well kept but it's also a living, lively place that's being enjoyed by all with it's (hi)story ever changing. It might otherwise be a dry, barren museum, forever stuck at 1 point in time (with a crap tea room) for the great washed to amble around or in private hands (which is a loss to us all in reality) or left to fall into disrepair as the red tape would be too prohibitive & uneconomical to take on. I know which one I'd prefer.

..but we need rules (I'm not an anarchist) .. I just hope sense prevails .. then hopefully I get to attend next year.

Good Luck Mike !

 

[Rhossydd]

If the neighbours had an issue they've took their time to complain about it- 10 years !.

Given the glacial rate of 'process' in local government it's likely that any complaints were initiated a long time ago. Besides any period of communication between the council and the business, which is likely to be protracted itself, it's likely that individuals complained privately before invoking the council's statutory duties. Also from the descriptions I've read it's probable that the business started on a small scale and has become more intrusive as the scale of operation has increased.

Customers are unlikely to be aware of any disputes between businesses and neighbours.

It's funny how we are told that the strongly emerging economies of Brazil & Idia are so because they are "dynamic" ..but then our dynamic entrepreneurs are stifled & thwarted by red tape, taxes & whatever new hoops are held up for them to jump through

Do you really want to live in the third world ? with no constraints on what your neighbours can set up next to you or where a business can buy a historic site and trample all over it ?
I'll take law and order with effective planning controls any day.

 

[Sheffield Tony]

I can see conflicting points of view on this.

Setting up a timber merchant business next to a listed building, on a scheduled ancient
monument, in a designated conservation area, opposite domestic housing without planning permission ?
Sorry, but not a lot of sympathy from here.

Put that way, yes, you can see the planners' point of view. And unfortunately for Mike I suspect that view will prevail.

But on the other hand, as an occasional customer, it looks like a low key business that has grown from a hobby, so perhaps more understandable that a change of use did not occur. We are not talking a local branch of Arnold Laver here - just some outdoor wood piles and some wooden sheds which skirt the ancient monument - which is not much of a thing if we're honest. I imagine his impact - in terms of disturbance of the site and any artifacts, machinery noise, and vehicle movements is no worse than that of modern agriculture, which is allowed to slowly erode many ancient remains.

Another, more selfish, part of me thinks that living in a small town as I do, I have to tolerate the disturbance of continual house building around me, as the small town I chose to live in is slowly but surely transformed into something else. yet acording to planners I am "not materially affected", whereas somehow the tranquility of the well heeled residents of a pretty rural village is more important ?

 

[Racers]

Photos from an open day earlier this year.

Pete

 

[Rhossydd]

perhaps more understandable that a change of use did not occur

"Did not occur" ? no, a change of use appears to have happened. The owner either; hasn't realised it, overlooked applying for change of use or thought he could get away with it.

I have to tolerate the disturbance of continual house building around me, as the small town I chose to live in is slowly but surely transformed into something else. yet according to planners I am "not materially affected",

The difference is that building work is temporary. Most people have to put up with a bit of this sort of disturbance, it's part of living in communities.
It's not the same as a business starting up and growing with the intention of continuing to operate from the same site, possibly for decades.

As woodworkers we might appreciate the sight of trunks in stick, but to the people living in the houses opposite it's probably just seen as an ugly eye sore.

 

[Racers]

You need to Google the location its a small village with farms and houses with tennis courts PE8 5AF

MAC Timbers are near the church see if you can find on street view.

Pete

 

[defsdoor]

Seems a bit of nimby-ism to me - some local snobs doesn't want the riff raff under their noses.

Can't see many people caring much that there used to be a castle there - it's certainly not there now and I suspect not a lot of people come to visit where it used to be. So you can't argue that its spoiling the setting really - especially as I doubt you can even see it from the mound as it's very tree covered.

There are some fugly house-like things nearby though and a tarmac covered flat surface that clearly aren't in keeping with an historic castle....

 

[marcus]

Seems a bit of nimby-ism to me - some local snobs doesn't want the riff raff under their noses.

Who knows? It could be something quite different. Maybe someone is trying to sell their house and buyers are being put off by a business operating next door without permission. I have a friend who experienced something similar — it was a nightmare, cost them two years of stress, and thousands and thousands of pounds. It wasn't fair at all. Things can look very different from the other side of the fence. It could be a good reason or bad reason but I can't see the point in imagining we know. I hope he finds a solution though, as it looks like a good little business apart from this. Retrospective planning application?

 

[Togalosh]

If the neighbours had an issue they've took their time to complain about it- 10 years !.

Given the glacial rate of 'process' in local government it's likely that any complaints were initiated a long time ago. Besides any period of communication between the council and the business, which is likely to be protracted itself, it's likely that individuals complained privately before invoking the council's statutory duties. Also from the descriptions I've read it's probable that the business started on a small scale and has become more intrusive as the scale of operation has increased.]

So wouldn't it have been better to approach the offender early on & see what could be done instead of leave it til breaking point & then serve a heavy handed notice. If he was advised of possibilities & definate no no's at the first signs of trouble then everyone would be happier. It's easy to get carried away with work & not being able to get around to official things. I've been meaning to swap my old business bank account over to my partner for 12 months due to working all the hours I can & the banks being shut at 8pm.

It's funny how we are told that the strongly emerging economies of Brazil & Idia are so because they are "dynamic" ..but then our dynamic entrepreneurs are stifled & thwarted by red tape, taxes & whatever new hoops are held up for them to jump through

Do you really want to live in the third world ? with no constraints on what your neighbours can set up next to you or where a business can buy a historic site and trample all over it ?]

If it was a case erecting a paper recycling plant inside the stone circles of Avebury or Stonehenge then yes we would all be outraged, but if it's just moving a few tree trunks about around a lump in a field that used to be something interesting with no permanent change to the ground works with any related buidings being well kept - then where's the harm? I love old buildings & was/ am very upset to see the old MG plant & upmteenth other beautiful industrial buildings in Brum being reduced to rubble to make way for vacuous tat with another ******* supermarket ..but the knobs with the cash & cloud didn't give a flying fox about them & got their way with the planner's consent .. & the Brum city planners of the 60's ought to be tracked down & strung up.

[I'll take law and order with effective planning controls any day.

Effective is the key word.. others might also be realistic, consistent & honourable.

If the neighbours & buildings are suffering badly & the site holds wonders for future generations that will be lost if the activities continue then of course that changes things.

 

[Rhossydd]

If the neighbours & buildings are suffering badly & the site holds wonders for future generations that will be lost if the activities continue then of course that changes things.

Remember that councils don't take this sort of action unless people are complaining( ie suffering) about the activities and the council have made other approaches to attempt to resolve the situation.

Other businesses manage to trade successfully and comply with relevant legislation, there's no excuse for non-compliance.

 

[cambournepete]

Remember that councils don't take this sort of action unless people are complaining( ie suffering) about the activities

Just because people complain doesn't mean they are suffering. :roll:
He has few close neighbours and the site is well hidden by trees and thick hedging - it's easy to drive past and not notice he's there.
I could understand the concerns about the castle if it was in good condition, but I've been there several times and never seen a castle - the ringing of the church bells probably more harm to that than anything else...
I hope he appeals and gets retrospective planning permission (which is often given) .

It seems ironic the council for who he has removed trees are now trying to shut him down.

Oh yeah, I do know a bit about planning having chaired over 150 planning meetings...