To misplace one objection is acceptable: to misplace so many is unforgivable; especially when this application is so controversial having attracted over 700 objections.
Please, Miss Shearing, do sort this out promptly and ensure the Committee is fully aware of the level of concern.
Dear Ms Shearing,Re mislabelling of Public Comments and thus under-representation of Objections to this application on the RBKC website.I am writing to you on behalf of the Hillgate Village Residents’ Association in advance of tomorrow’s planning committee meeting to ask why many recent Public Comments, listed on your website under documents for this planning application, are labelled as “General Comment” rather than “Objection”? Specifically the following are objections and need to be labelled as such:1. 15 Mar Rosemary Plant2. 15 Mar 83 Campden Hill Towers – in fact miss-labelled as Support!3. 15 Mar Dr Dan Plant4. 15 Mar 14 Ladbroke Terrace5. 15 Mar Aude Grasset6. 15 Mar Gilvray Peck7. 15 Mar 27 Powis Gardens8. 15 Mar Mrs Millett9. 14 Mar 30e Linden Gardens10. 14 Mar 22 Acfold Road11. 10 Mar 4a Pembridge Gardens – miss-labelled as Support!12. 10 Mar 36 Royal Crescent Mews – miss-labelled as Support!13. 9 Mar Chepstow Crescent14. 7 Mar Desmond Higgins15. 2 Mar 58 Westbourne Park VillasI have not had time to go back beyond the beginning of this month. We would thus request your urgent attention to label these properly as Objections and to check all “General Comment” so that public opinion is fully and properly represented.Many thanks in advance for your assistance and we look forward to hearing from you.Yours sincerely,