Planning Nightmare

[Equus]

princeperch said:

I suspect when they have received a few letters off you they will work out who you are.

Letters can come from all sorts of sources.

Credit me with at least modest intelligence (and quite a large number of contacts in the Planning profession).

[Equus]

AC43 said:

But I always do things by the book and am astonished but what the planners DO let through. People ripping out front gardens and marbling the drive. People marbling the front of their house (!). People slapping pale oak Travlodge doors on 30's or Victorian houses. Painting them black, adding blue downlights. i could go on and on. How the fk is any of that in any way acceptable??

Most of that, of course, is Permitted Development in most circumstances, so they actually don't have any control over it, even if they wanted to.

[AC43]

Equus said:

AC43 said:

But I always do things by the book and am astonished but what the planners DO let through. People ripping out front gardens and marbling the drive. People marbling the front of their house (!). People slapping pale oak Travlodge doors on 30's or Victorian houses. Painting them black, adding blue downlights. i could go on and on. How the fk is any of that in any way acceptable??

Most of that, of course, is Permitted Development in most circumstances, so they actually don't have any control over it, even if they wanted to.

Fair enough I was just having a rant.

I just found the planners impossible to communicate with this time round and I found their logic inpenetrable.

When they had more people you could talk things over onsite a bit more so that I could understand what was and wasn't acceptable at any given point in time and more to the point the architect could design something that would actually pass.

It took three cycles to get there and cost me 6 month's extra (London) rent plus all the additional fees for two extra sets of drawings.

Really all I was doing was a rear extension, loft and couple of in-fills. Just like scores of properties with half a mile.

It was a tortuous process and I wouldn't use the words "communicative"," transparent", "consistent" or "accountable" in relation to the planning folks.

Shame, because three times in the past, this part of the process was very straightforward. Even though you have to wait three bloody months. EVERY time......sigh.

[blueg33]

AC43 said:

Fair enough I was just having a rant.

I just found the planners impossible to communicate with this time round and I found their logic inpenetrable.

When they had more people you could talk things over onsite a bit more so that I could understand what was and wasn't acceptable at any given point in time and more to the point the architect could design something that would actually pass.

It took three cycles to get there and cost me 6 month's extra (London) rent plus all the additional fees for two extra sets of drawings.

Really all I was doing was a rear extension, loft and couple of in-fills. Just like scores of properties with half a mile.

It was a tortuous process and I wouldn't use the words "communicative"," transparent", "consistent" or "accountable" in relation to the planning folks.

Shame, because three times in the past, this part of the process was very straightforward. Even though you have to wait three bloody months. EVERY time......sigh.

Try doing it when your livelihood depends on it. When your job depends on meeting targets to get plots built and sold and planning fk about for months, then add so many pre-commencement conditions on items that were detailed in the application that its takes a further 9 months before you can even put a spade in the ground. Then you get accused by politicians and the media of land banking because you have consents you haven't started.......

And from the consent you have £10m tied up. And all these things cause cost, which goes into the price of a house that the tax payer pays when he buys the house.

[Equus]

AC43 said:

I just found the planners impossible to communicate with this time round and I found their logic inpenetrable.
...It was a tortuous process and I wouldn't use the words "communicative"," transparent", "consistent" or "accountable" in relation to the planning folks.

That's how/why I make a living, of course.

There is actually a logic to it, once you understand the legislation and national policy that underpins it all, but as with much of the UK legal and political system, yes, it's pretty arcane.

The problem comes, as we've seen on this thread, when you get politically elected representatives dabbling in it when they don't understand it properly.... or worse, when they lack the integrity to administer it honestly.

[popeyewhite]

GreatGranny said:

This is why we moved out of a village last year.

God, there were some absolute wierdos living there.

Too many people with nothing to do but worry/object about what other people are doing.

We are now in the nearby town which still has it's fair share of wierdos but the concentration if much lower :-)

I would move back to a city if it wasn't for the kids and schooling.

An interesting post from page one of the thread. I wonder if GG has considered the villagers think him an absolute weirdo? There are reasons people choose to live an urban life, and reasons people chose to take a more relaxed lifestlyle. This might include gossiping, going to church, doing the WI, snooping on neighbours etc etc - someone from a city might see this as small-minded and interfering - but it is village life.

[Turkish91]

Equus said:

He's actually quite close to me, so I've decided to attend their Planning Committee meetings in future (they're usually good entertainment, regardless).

Needless to say, if I spot any deviation from planning law or council committee procedure, from any of their members, I'll be onto it. Given some of the guff he's come out with on here, in regard to Planning matters, I don't expect it will take me long.

Their next meeting is Monday night, as it happens.

This is brilliant

[Equus]

Escort3500 said:

Keep us posted Equus

Well, no sign of Councillor Colin at this evening's Huntingdonshire Planning meeting... just an empty chair with his name on the table in front of it.

I was a wee bit late getting there and I missed the 'apologies' for absences at the beginning, so I don't know what if any excuse was given, but I can only imagine that he had some other pressing engagement.

Worth attending, though, as the Planner made reference to an appeal decision at the end that is of direct interest to me.

Only a short agenda, so a little lacking in other amusements, apart from the Member who had to ask whether Flood Zone 1 should be a concern to him on a residential application, and the ex-policeman public objector who spent his 3-minute speaking slot telling us about all the detail concerns he had with the indicative drawings on an Outline application, and how much anti-social behaviour there was in the area because his force had had to attend an armed siege there at some time in the distant past... I felt a wee bit sorry for him that he had wasted his evening. They really should give public speakers as least some basic advice to prevent them from squandering their opportunity to speak on stuff that's completely irrelevant.

Next meeting is in my diary for 17th February, if Councillor Colin hasn't been suspended by then.

[Escort3500]

Thanks for the update.

It’s surely no coincidence that one of the characters on The Fast Show was called Colin. I suspect there may be other similarities to our planning hero too...



As regards member knowledge, in my LPA days we used to run a series of training events for new members and periodic updates on various planning topics - the devt plan process, material planning considerations in decision taking, design, conservation, GB etc. They were participative and generally well received events, but it was quite disheartening how it was all quickly forgotten come committee time, especially if the public gallery was full and members could play to the audience. Overruling officer recommendations on flimsy and spurious grounds was fairly commonplace, leading to appeals and (often) costs awards. We also produced a leaflet on public speaking at committee, but this was invariably ignored and 3 minutes was wasted, like your ex-copper guy.

Anyhow, back on topic, do update us after the next meeting Equus. Will our hero make an appearance I wonder

[anonymous-user]

Did anyone ever find out which application Colin changed his vote to approve on just because of the attitude of the Parish Council objector?

I wonder if Colin has used the defence of his making it all up to look important on a forum.

[Equus]

Escort3500 said:

As regards member knowledge, in my LPA days we used to run a series of training events for new members and periodic updates on various planning topics...

Yes, most do, and it's clear that Huntingdonshire are among them - the Officer last night was reminding members of a session they have coming up.

I do wonder if it was basic enough, though; he said it would be to review recent appeal decisions, which by implication could be quite complex and subtle stuff. Whereas in this case, maybe they need to be concentrating on the basics... like making decisions on the grounds of material Planning issues, not personal whim and prejudice, and what Flood Zones 1, 2 and 3 mean.

V6 Pushfit said:

Did anyone ever find out which application Colin changed his vote to approve on just because of the attitude of the Parish Council objector?

No, and neither was it possible to find out which of the other Committee Members did the same, in his allegation.

[Escort3500]

Equus said:

Escort3500 said:

As regards member knowledge, in my LPA days we used to run a series of training events for new members and periodic updates on various planning topics...

Yes, most do, and it's clear that Huntingdonshire are among them - the Officer last night was reminding members of a session they have coming up.

I do wonder if it was basic enough, though; he said it would be to review recent appeal decisions, which by implication could be quite complex and subtle stuff. Whereas in this case, maybe they need to be concentrating on the basics... like making decisions on the grounds of material Planning issues, not personal whim and prejudice, and what Flood Zones 1, 2 and 3 mean.

V6 Pushfit said:

Did anyone ever find out which application Colin changed his vote to approve on just because of the attitude of the Parish Council objector?

No, and neither was it possible to find out which of the other Committee Members did the same, in his allegation.

Yes, our seminars concentrated on the basics. The complexities and nuances of more detailed stuff would have been lost on them. We did one on the Nolan report for members, but it had little effect. They still made utterly stupid and reckless decisions on many occasions

[V8RX7]

Burn the witch !


I think a few need to take a step back.

[blueg33]

Whereas I think that planning committee members need to be professional and make decisions based on the application in front of them tested against policy.

That is what they are supposed to do, that is their job - not making planning decisions because they don't like someone..

To be found to have acted inappropriately in public office, but have the arrogance to apparently "not give a st" and carry on is unprofessional

[Escort3500]

V8RX7 said:

Burn the witch !


I think a few need to take a step back.

So what’s your take on Colin’s approach to his role then?

[Equus]

V8RX7 said:

Burn the witch !

I think a few need to take a step back.

In fairness, I'm usually the one on here who is defending the Planning system, arguing that by and large it's a reasonable attempt at dealing equivocally with a very complex and often conflicting set of considerations, and for the most part is administered honestly and conscientiously by people doing their level best to make decisions fairly and without prejudice.

I'm usually the one telling people that most of the public perception of a corrupt and venal system is utter nonsense, and that real malpractice is, in fact, vanishingly rare.

Despite this, I think we need to recognise that 'Joe Public', mainly because he doesn't understand the complexities of the underlying legislation and processes, has convinced himself that it works on funny handshakes, brown envelopes, and who knows who down at the golf club.

Overwhelmingly, it really doesn't, but that makes it all the more important that where it comes to light that there has been a thankfully very rare abuse of public office (which as I've mentioned previously, is a criminal offence carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment), the perpetrators must have the book thrown at them in no uncertain terms. Public confidence in the system demands it.

The slightest proof of impropriety should mean instant and permanent exclusion from all public office, IMO, so in that regard Colin would be getting off lightly, merely to be removed from the Planning Committee, as has been recommended.

[anonymous-user]

V8RX7 said:

Burn the witch !


I think a few need to take a step back.

So your neighbour decides to build a monstrosity of an extension, both awful to look at and impact your life, you have been battling them for 6 months on it and the planning commitee are likely to reject, your missus at a meeting loses her rag a bit and they decide based on that to approve it

You'd step back a bit?

[V8RX7]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

After I'd reported someone for a throwaway remark, that most of us have probably been guilty of, I'd have stopped.

I wouldn't have gone on about it and I certainly wouldn't be fanning the flames

Because I don't agree with bullying and that's what this has become IMO

[ben5575]

I think claims of bullying would be justified had he not been found in breech by an independent review, recommended that he step down from the planning committee, arrogantly refused to do so, then tried to blame others for the obvious expense (including Barristers advice) to the taxpayer rather than accepting responsibility.

There are very real world consequences for his actions, which is reflected by the rules that govern such behaviour. This is not internet bullying.

Edited by ben5575 on Tuesday 21st January 17:18

[dmsims]

V8RX7 said:

Because I don't agree with bullying and that's what this has become IMO

This is comedy gold