i believe it is this

RM/COL/04/1951

http://www.planning.colchester.gov.uk/WAM/findCaseFi...

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990

TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE) ORDER 1995

In pursuance of the powers exercised by it as District Planning Authority this Council, having considered your OUTLINE application to carry out the development detailed below in accordance with the plan(s) accompanying the said application DOES HEREBY GIVE NOTICE of its decision to GRANT PERMISSION for the said development subject to any further condition(s) set out below.

APPLICATION NO: O/COL/01/0009 APPLICATION DATE: 4th December 2000

50. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1995, (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order), details of the design, location and materials for any above ground structures required by any of the statutory undertakers shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, before any such structures are constructed.

Reason 1. In order to ensure that these structures are acceptable townscape elements.

Looking at all the replies, and the amount of work you have put in to get this far, you can see why Openreach have just given up and walked away from this cabinet. With 60000 cabinets to do this one is now at the back of the queue along with South Kensington's 108.

The last refusal basically says they don't want another cabinet near to the existing one. Tough on anyone on the estate wanting superfast braodband.

If you haven't done this at the last election I suggest that you change your councillors at the first opportunity!

You could try getting a hunderd or so people on a petition to say this will enhance the area and presenting this to the planning committee via your councillor, as this is more than the normal voting majority of a council ward this will at least make the concillor take notice!

If you can get them to change their minds you will then have to ask Openreach nicely to try again, They should be amenable if the council has publically agreed to the provision in principle. Then get as many people as possible to support the next application.

thanks for all the replies

yes that looks like the basic plan

ive got a local rag photographer coming tomorrow for pics, hopefully they will publish a story.

also my local councillor has agreed to print something for all the 283 dwellings it affects to petition the council. everyone Ive spoken to on the estate is clearly in favour. Ive spoken to the nieghbours closest to the proposed site, and they have no objections.

If i can get the council to agree to it, which Im working on with the councillor, Morrison Utilities (working on behalf of BT) the guy there in charge of planning applications said he will do his best to get BT to give approval to go ahead. the guy has been helpful far beyond what he needs to, so respect to him.

its the council that are the problem, still trying to find a way ahead with them.

Ive now made it a formal complaint to the council, the manager in planning dealing with it has 5 working days from today to reply in writing to me.

fingers crossed we can find a solution to this.......

Watching this with interest. I am also in Colchester (Braiswick). Our FTTC cab finally went live in May this year after being delayed several times so I understand how frustrating this is - best of luck with your battle!

From what don0301 has said, it seems to be the council officers more than the councillors. One councillors has offered to assist. If you ever attend a planning committee meeting the councillors will in general accept the recommendations of the council staff. Quite often it is farcical!..

In reply to a post by MHC:

That sounds incredibly fishy ... BT have STATUTORY powers from central government and I do not believe the local authority has any rights remove them.

Maybe the estate was built in a pre-existing conservation area? At 283 residents it could have been a large derelict site within the area.

Unlikely, but feasible, and would explain the ability to impose restrictions.

this site was an army barracks before

i believe the conservation order was placed in 2004, it covers the park (MOD owned) opposite but for some bizarre reason, instead of running the boundary along the main road, they ran it partially through this new estate...

found out today the 2 planning applications didnt go to the planning committee. they were delegated.

still not had response from the planning department to my questions.

photographer here today for pictures. reporter told me the story will go into both local papers.