Planning - Legal advice regarded urgently.
Discussion
Devil2575 said:
I wonder how much this process costs the country?
...everyone objects to anything being built near to them.
Ain't democracy a bh? ...everyone objects to anything being built near to them.
Ironically, in China the planning system is more personally orientated than here.
As it happens, in the UK, the Govt can force people out of their houses with a compulsory purchase order.
In China, no such thing exists. What can actually happen is that the odd awkward sod will turn down five times the value of their property on principle, and roads etc get diverted around them!
Compared to China, our planning system is positively rapid!
Effectively, the whole planning system is based around accepting the needs of individuals and society, and drawing the line somewhere in between with a set of rules.
Edited by JustinP1 on Friday 19th September 17:11
JustinP1 said:
Ain't democracy a bh?
Ironically, in China the planning system is more personally orientated than here.
As it happens, in the UK, the Govt can force people out of their houses with a compulsory purchase order.
In China, no such thing exists. What can actually happen is that the odd awkward sod will turn down five times the value of their property on principle, and roads etc get diverted around them!
Compared to China, our planning system is positively rapid!
What happens in China is that people get bullied out of their homes.Ironically, in China the planning system is more personally orientated than here.
As it happens, in the UK, the Govt can force people out of their houses with a compulsory purchase order.
In China, no such thing exists. What can actually happen is that the odd awkward sod will turn down five times the value of their property on principle, and roads etc get diverted around them!
Compared to China, our planning system is positively rapid!
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/china-halt-imminent...
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-19894292
The rate at which China is developing according to a friend of mine who's spent some time over there makes us look pedestrian.
I agree, the speed of development is fast. That is where the rights of society meets with that of an individual:
Here's an example:
Tell me that if this was Olympic Park a few years ago, or a regeneration site in Liverpool for example, that in the UK we'd leave those buildings there that long?
Here's an example:
Tell me that if this was Olympic Park a few years ago, or a regeneration site in Liverpool for example, that in the UK we'd leave those buildings there that long?
Edited by JustinP1 on Friday 19th September 17:42
Based on my own experience;
Yes, it's not unusual for an Authority to develop a relationship or partnership with a private company who provides a service on behalf of the Authority. This is what they're being driven towards (Privatisation) by the current Government, I'm not saying this is the right way forward though.
However, the Planners (Case Officer) will not allow their decision to be influenced by such a relationship. Any approval (or recommendation that it be approved at Planning Committee) will be based on the proposal meeting the relevant planning guidance.
The LPA is there to protect the general Public's interests. Their job isn't to rubber stamp planning applications, it's to pick holes in any argument for development put forward and they look for reasons to have the application amended or reasons to refuse a proposal.
@ The OP, have you viewed the Planning file and if you believe that the proposal will give rise to anti social behaviour, have you checked whether the Police have been consulted for comment?
Yes, it's not unusual for an Authority to develop a relationship or partnership with a private company who provides a service on behalf of the Authority. This is what they're being driven towards (Privatisation) by the current Government, I'm not saying this is the right way forward though.
However, the Planners (Case Officer) will not allow their decision to be influenced by such a relationship. Any approval (or recommendation that it be approved at Planning Committee) will be based on the proposal meeting the relevant planning guidance.
The LPA is there to protect the general Public's interests. Their job isn't to rubber stamp planning applications, it's to pick holes in any argument for development put forward and they look for reasons to have the application amended or reasons to refuse a proposal.
@ The OP, have you viewed the Planning file and if you believe that the proposal will give rise to anti social behaviour, have you checked whether the Police have been consulted for comment?
I am a developer of housing for people with learning disabilities etc
Firstly - I am 99% sure that this isnt one of my applications.
Secondly, without propoer details of the existing use and the planning application it is very hard to make a judgement
In 30 years of making planning applications, I can state that I have not seen a single case where councillors are swayed by £ (excluding s106 agreements). They are swayed by votes and public opinion.
The most a developer will do is lobby the Councillors and the liklihod is that the officer will remain impartial.
Very often residents get their knickers in a twist about this type of development and the fears are usually unfounded but the developer needs to properly inform the community through a well organised consultation process
If you really think that the Council has run roough shod over the planning regulations and particularly process, then you have 6 weeks from the decision to make an appeal to the High Court challenging the decision
Firstly - I am 99% sure that this isnt one of my applications.
Secondly, without propoer details of the existing use and the planning application it is very hard to make a judgement
In 30 years of making planning applications, I can state that I have not seen a single case where councillors are swayed by £ (excluding s106 agreements). They are swayed by votes and public opinion.
The most a developer will do is lobby the Councillors and the liklihod is that the officer will remain impartial.
Very often residents get their knickers in a twist about this type of development and the fears are usually unfounded but the developer needs to properly inform the community through a well organised consultation process
If you really think that the Council has run roough shod over the planning regulations and particularly process, then you have 6 weeks from the decision to make an appeal to the High Court challenging the decision
blueg33 said:
surveyor said:
blueg33 said:
In 30 years of making planning applications, I can state that I have not seen a single case where councillors are swayed by £
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2002/mar/13/uknewsI'm sure you have......
blueg33 said:
It worked this time.
That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
I don't think so...Much more recent than that. Mid 90's with prosecution in the 00's.That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
surveyor said:
blueg33 said:
It worked this time.
That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
I don't think so...Much more recent than that. Mid 90's with prosecution in the 00's.That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
Still very rare, and Doncaster is a special case, I have done a number of developments there, it is safe to say that the way the Council is run is unique.
Still I got consents easily in donny without any illegal acts
blueg33 said:
surveyor said:
blueg33 said:
It worked this time.
That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
I don't think so...Much more recent than that. Mid 90's with prosecution in the 00's.That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
Still very rare, and Doncaster is a special case, I have done a number of developments there, it is safe to say that the way the Council is run is unique.
Still I got consents easily in donny without any illegal acts
blueg33 said:
surveyor said:
blueg33 said:
It worked this time.
That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
I don't think so...Much more recent than that. Mid 90's with prosecution in the 00's.That scandal was from the 1970's.
Whilst there may be the odd corrupt councillor, it must be really very rare. I have a contentious application in at the moment, we are lobbying councillors, no-one has asked for £, all they ask for is clear info
Still very rare, and Doncaster is a special case, I have done a number of developments there, it is safe to say that the way the Council is run is unique.
Still I got consents easily in donny without any illegal acts
Mind you, I don't think it is generally corrupt, just woeful.
Back to the OP just for a minute. (30 years as a planning lawyer so know something about this)
The issue about lack of consultation is a non starter. It only has some legs once the permission has been granted,but since the OP and presumably everyone else in the village knows about this application now, everyone can make representations about it.
The claim of collusion/bias doesn't work without evidence. A very high standard of proof is required for the courts to strike down a decision on this basis and there is nothing in this claim without further evidence.
I agree Donny was a special case. One of my developers never got permission there. He didn't know about the brown envelope requirement, and wouldn't have taken part if he did.
As has been said before, focus on the issues. What problems will this cause to the community in terms of noise ,traffic,disturbance etc? House value irrelevant. If LPA grant consent then Judicial review is the only route, but that is a matter of law,not planning merit. If there was bias then courts would quash decision but it would have to be in the Donny category rather than some loose association with the developer.
HTH
The issue about lack of consultation is a non starter. It only has some legs once the permission has been granted,but since the OP and presumably everyone else in the village knows about this application now, everyone can make representations about it.
The claim of collusion/bias doesn't work without evidence. A very high standard of proof is required for the courts to strike down a decision on this basis and there is nothing in this claim without further evidence.
I agree Donny was a special case. One of my developers never got permission there. He didn't know about the brown envelope requirement, and wouldn't have taken part if he did.
As has been said before, focus on the issues. What problems will this cause to the community in terms of noise ,traffic,disturbance etc? House value irrelevant. If LPA grant consent then Judicial review is the only route, but that is a matter of law,not planning merit. If there was bias then courts would quash decision but it would have to be in the Donny category rather than some loose association with the developer.
HTH
Lakeland9 said:
Back to the OP just for a minute. (30 years as a planning lawyer so know something about this)
The issue about lack of consultation is a non starter. It only has some legs once the permission has been granted,but since the OP and presumably everyone else in the village knows about this application now, everyone can make representations about it.
The claim of collusion/bias doesn't work without evidence. A very high standard of proof is required for the courts to strike down a decision on this basis and there is nothing in this claim without further evidence.
I agree Donny was a special case. One of my developers never got permission there. He didn't know about the brown envelope requirement, and wouldn't have taken part if he did.
As has been said before, focus on the issues. What problems will this cause to the community in terms of noise ,traffic,disturbance etc? House value irrelevant. If LPA grant consent then Judicial review is the only route, but that is a matter of law,not planning merit. If there was bias then courts would quash decision but it would have to be in the Donny category rather than some loose association with the developer.
HTH
^^^The issue about lack of consultation is a non starter. It only has some legs once the permission has been granted,but since the OP and presumably everyone else in the village knows about this application now, everyone can make representations about it.
The claim of collusion/bias doesn't work without evidence. A very high standard of proof is required for the courts to strike down a decision on this basis and there is nothing in this claim without further evidence.
I agree Donny was a special case. One of my developers never got permission there. He didn't know about the brown envelope requirement, and wouldn't have taken part if he did.
As has been said before, focus on the issues. What problems will this cause to the community in terms of noise ,traffic,disturbance etc? House value irrelevant. If LPA grant consent then Judicial review is the only route, but that is a matter of law,not planning merit. If there was bias then courts would quash decision but it would have to be in the Donny category rather than some loose association with the developer.
HTH
This is all correct
As a developer of public sector infrasturucture we have many JV's with Council's, put the planning process is not swayed by that. Developers generally influence the planning process by doing it properly and having experience and skill set to deal with the issues
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff