Response 4109278

Response to request for information

Reference

4109278

Response date

6 October 2026

Request

I am writing to make a request for information relating to correspondence recently issued by Rushcliffe Borough Council concerning planning application 20/03244/OUT – Land East of Gamston and North of Tollerton.

I received two substantially identical consultation letters relating to further environmental information submitted under Regulation 25 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017. 

The first letter is dated 17 September 2026, with a consultation deadline of 17 October 2026.

The second letter is dated 18 September 2026, with a consultation deadline of 18 October 2026.

Please provide the following information:

1. The total number of physical letters issued as part of the mailing dated 17 September 2026.
2. The total number of physical letters issued as part of the mailing dated 18 September 2026.
3. Confirmation of whether substantially the same recipients/addresses were included in both mailings.
4. The reason why a second letter was issued on 18 September, one day after the letter dated 17 September.
5. Confirmation of what error, amendment or other reason necessitated the second mailing.
6. The total cost to the Council of producing and distributing the 17 September mailing, including, where available:
   • printing;
   • paper;
   • envelopes;
   • fulfilment/enclosing;
   • postage; and
   • any charges made by an external or hybrid-mail provider.
7. The equivalent total cost for the mailing dated 18 September 2026.
8. If individual cost components are not recorded separately, please provide the total charge/invoice cost attributable to each mailing.
9. The name of the external supplier, hybrid-mail provider or other organisation used to print, fulfil and/or post these letters.
10. The postal service/class used for the letters (for example Royal Mail Second Class, Business Mail or another bulk-mail service).
11. The geographical area or criteria used to determine which properties received these consultation letters, and, if held, the number of recipient addresses broken down by locality, postcode sector or other geographical grouping.

I would prefer the information electronically by email.

If any of the requested information is not held in precisely the form requested, please provide the closest recorded information that the Council does hold rather than treating that part of the request as unanswered.

Response

1. The total number of physical letters issued as part of the mailing dated 17 September 2026. 564.
2. The total number of physical letters issued as part of the mailing dated 18 September 2026. 944.
3. Confirmation of whether substantially the same recipients/addresses were included in both mailings. No, although all 564 letters issued on the 17th would have been reissued on the 18th the mailings were different overall in recipients and addresses. 
4. The reason why a second letter was issued on 18 September, one day after the letter dated 17 September. The bulk mail merge which generates consultation letters crashed partway through generating the mailshot on the 17th. Owing to the use of an external hybrid-mail provider it was not possible to determine how many, or which, letters had already been generated at the point that the system crashed and whilst efforts were made to cancel the partly transmitted mail run this cancellation did not succeed. It was necessary to re-run the whole mail run the following day to ensure no statutory consultation notifications were missed and avoid delay in issuing consultation letters. 
5. Confirmation of what error, amendment or other reason necessitated the second mailing. Software crash as set out at point 4 above. 
6. The total cost to the Council of producing and distributing the 17 September mailing. Please see Question 8. 
7. The equivalent total cost for the mailing dated 18 September 2026. Please see Question 8. 
8. If individual cost components are not recorded separately, please provide the total charge/invoice cost attributable to each mailing. Information in respect of individual costs is not held. We have only included spending as published on the expenditure over £500 reports. This is available on our website under Expenditure Over £500 . There is no 'standard price' per letter which we can use to calculate the costs of either mail run, our external provider obtains preferential prices based on scale and the cost of letters varies depending on how much mail the council issues in each billing cycle.
9. The name of the external supplier, hybrid-mail provider or other organisation used to print, fulfil and/or post these letters. Nottinghamshire County Council.
10. The postal service/class used for the letters (for example Royal Mail Second Class, Business Mail or another bulk-mail service). Royal Mail (Second Class).
11. The geographical area or criteria used to determine which properties received these consultation letters, and, if held, the number of recipient addresses broken down by locality, postcode sector or other geographical grouping. Consultations as set out in the Development Management Procedure Order, being any property adjoining the site, any statutory consultee, the Town Council, and anyone having previously submitted comments in respect of earlier consultations on this application. There is no list breaking down recipients as requested.