Glimmer of Hope For Chiropractor in Battle For Burchatt’s Barn

Published on: 19 Jul, 2019
Updated on: 18 Jul, 2019

Burchatts Barn – Photo Mandy Millyard

From John Redpath

In response to: Burchatt’s Barn Chiropractic Planning Appeal Claims ‘Abuse Of Power’

I have every sympathy for Annie Colman and Philip Hehir who have been run through the mill in their attempt to secure Burchatt’s Farm Barn for use by their chiropractic business. Their livelihood is at risk alongside the valuable service they provide to their clients.

Blame for this has been liberally scattered at the local community, the Guildford Shakespeare Company, an alderman, councillors and even my family. These are all distractions from those who should truly be held responsible for the cause of this dilemma.

The previous elected council members failed to ensure correct process in offering the Barn for tender without a proper public consultation or, indeed, considering why the building was failing in the first place. Had they consulted the public properly the council would have found how popular this venue is.

The only reason the Barn was not successfully used by the community was due to the extortionate charges levied by the council. These became ridiculously high, with weekend rates of typically £145 per hour due, largely, to the borough council overhead costs that had to be factored in.

Had the Barn been handed to a trust to run, then these overheads could have disappeared and quite likely halved GBC’s estimated annual running costs (£70K). The Spike, for instance, a much bigger and more complex Grade II-listed Guildford building, costs typically £35-40K a year to run and thrives by being run independently and therefore able to offer affordable hire charges.

My daughter, Maddy, and I were elected as borough councillors not because of the Barn debacle but because it typified what had become so wrong with the previous political administration. It made us both so much more determined to succeed. All my children had their christening parties at the Barn and my father celebrated his 90th birthday there. It’s a fantastic community-use venue that only needs good management.

The second cause for the present situation may possibly be due to advice from their agent?

Before even applying for planning permission shouldn’t they have been advised to get a binding agreement with GBC subject only to obtaining the necessary planning consent?

Further, before allowing them to commit considerably more on the present appeal, shouldn’t they have been advised to check with the (now newly elected) council that they were still prepared to lease the building should the appeal succeed?

One can only assume they either weren’t given this advice or didn’t accept it. The result was an elaborate 174-plus-page appeal document, with much of its contents fanciful and irrelevant to the appeal process. Claims suggesting persecution, harassment and bullying have no place in a proper planning appeal.

I have watched the webcast of the planning meeting again and the rejection by the council was for solid planning reasons and the matter was properly debated and voted on as I am sure the reader will agree should they care to watch it?

It’s still subject to confirmation, but I have heard today (July 18) that the present owner of the property the chiropractors work from no longer wants to sell it. If this is the case, then what a fantastic outcome this would make in helping to end the practitioners’ worries about the immediate future of their business. No need for them to move at all and the chance of re-entering into a long and secure tenure with the building’s owner.

I write this as a new R4GV borough councillor but the contents are my own thoughts and opinions and not those of Residents for Guildford and Villages group (R4GV) or Guildford Borough Council.

Responses to Glimmer of Hope For Chiropractor in Battle For Burchatt’s Barn

Paul Bishop Reply

July 19, 2019 at 2:58 pm

Frankly, Annie Colman and Philip Hehir are better off cutting their losses and finding somewhere else. This whole pathetic debacle has become such a political football that both new and old councillors should be ashamed of how this has been handled and how it got to this situation. No one comes out of this looking good.

It’s just another example of how many in the borough are more intent at putting their efforts into frustrating a process rather than coming up with a credible plan or alternative themselves.

I really hope in 12 months time we don’t look back and see this building still sitting empty, costing taxpayers money, not being available for public use or not housing a worthy business. At the moment, we may as well knock the place down for all the benefit it is giving the borough whilst this argumentative blame game continues.
Gordon Bridger Reply

July 19, 2019 at 7:20 pm

Well done John Redpath.

This appeal is misdirected and an expensive folly as it claims that the Planning Committee decision to vote down the request was political. The Planning Committee understood the issues and have always behaved impeccably.
Adam Aaronson Reply

July 19, 2019 at 9:25 pm

John Redpath presents a very balanced view of the background to the Burchatt’s Barn planning appeal. I agree with him that it must be very stressful for the individuals concerned, who are at risk of losing their livelihood and I sympathise with them.

It is generally known around Guildford that planning issues are rarely straightforward, so I find it quite worrying that Annie Colman and Philip Hehir do not seem to have been clearly advised from the outset as to the risk that this commercial property transaction would be likely to involve.

Anybody considering entering into a commercial property lease should be aware, or at least be advised by their planning consultants, commercial agents or solicitors that before making an offer, the key questions they should be asking include:
1.“What is the user?”
2.“Do we need change of use?”
3.“How likely are we to get change of use?”
4.“What is the likelihood that there will be local opposition?”

I wonder whether the prospective tenant applied for pre-app advice from the planning department and if so what did this say? If they didn’t apply for pre-app advice, why didn’t they?