Planning saga is baffling

Sir, – Knowing a wee bit about local planning, while also being a practical thinker, I realise that procedures must be followed when local planning applications and decisions are made.

The Halley debacle, however, has me somewhat confused.

It was well known it was a listed building and anything that altered its status would require listed building consent (LBC).

An application to demolish was approved because the planners agreed with the applicant that it was in an unsafe condition.

Now this is where weaknesses appear in the system.

The application to demolish was approved before a LBC application had been made even though both parties, the planners and presumably the applicant, knew that an LBC was required before demolition could proceed.

Why was planning consent to demolish not withheld until an LBC had been applied for and approved?

I understand that the original notice of approval to demolish reminded the successful applicant that other permissions may be required.

Why was the notice not specific in drawing attention to the fact that an LBC was now required before the approved application could be released?

In the meantime, and because the building has been formally declared unsafe, the owner of the property removed the risk to the public, and indeed itself, by carrying out the approved demolition even though it was aware that an LBC was required.

While I understand the decision of the development committee on Monday night to refer the matter to the procurator fiscal, it does however cause me to wonder whether the pot is calling the kettle black.

I also wonder who would have been liable had some person entered the premises after approval to demolish had been given and been killed by falling masonry while LBC was being considered.

John J Watson. 39 Elie Avenue, Broughty Ferry.