Aquinas College - planning anomalies

Dear Stockport Borough Council,

In a previous FOI request you stated:

"We have interpreted your reference to the 'winding room' as the
lift shaft. On this basis it is shown on the following plans:
Roof Floor Plan - drawing number 24999 (03)004 rev T11
Section BB - drawing number 24999 (04)001 rev T04
North/South Elevations - drawing number 24999 (05)001 rev T07"

The drawing revision numbers do not appear match the drawings on
the website. The ones you quote are later revisions.

The plan drawing you refer to shows a winding room about 11metres
long but the section B-B shows a winding room 18metres long.

The third drawing shows the winding room in sketch form only with
no definitive lines to measure against. Comparing the roof height
of the winding room in each elevation shows a difference of about
1m but the sketch form should not really be used to dimension off.
Hopefully the contractors have not attempted to do this.

I need you to provide the drawings that were referenced in the
planning application.

Some explanation is in order if the drawings published by the
council are at different revisions to those submitted in the
planning application.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

Yours faithfully,

Sheila

Dear Miss Naven

Thank you for your response. I can't contact Miss Chase because I
have been banned from contacting any council officer. We know from
the town hall protester who was repeatedly imprisoned in a tough
Manchester prison and then aquitted of a sneeze, that it is very
dangerous to disobey the edicts of this council. I don't know what
I have done; this ban has been in place since 2007; there would
appear to be no appeal process; the Council's Solicitor and
Monitoring Officer, Barry Khan, is fully aware of this situation as
are all the Executive councillors. I have in writing that I have
not been rude, offensive or vexatious, so this is an enigma wrapped
in a puzzle.

Yours sincerely,

Sheila Oliver

Dear FOI Officer,

My contention is that the 'winding room' establishes that the
building is in principle four stories and that when the college
chooses to increase student numbers, a future application to extend
the area of the fourth storey will be more acceptable as a result

If this were just a winding room to house the lift machinery there
would be no need to make it 14m long and provide access with a
flight of stairs of the same construction and capacity as the
flights below.

The planning department should resist attempts by developers to
present consecutive applications or even parallel applications for
what is logically a single cohesive proposal.

Contrary to your contention that the drawing revision did not
warrant publication, the winding room is presumably germane to
future expansion of the college.
_________________________________________________

Yours sincerely,

Sheila Oliver