Planning Nightmare

Author
Discussion

mnh

80 posts

192 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
ColinM50 said:
So if someone calls you a lying thieving corrupt scrote, that's OK is it? And would'nt affect the way you deal with them?

You misread what I said. I said that on balance I was leaning towards rejecting the application but was so incensed by being called corrupt, that I changed my mind and voted for it. Maybe in retrospect I shouldn't have let her insults affect my decision, but I bet you would too. Oh and to be clear I'm one of 22 councillors on this committee
Highlights everything that is wrong with the planning system. The fact that this councillor doesn't see the problem with his own actions speaks volumes.

Hard-Drive

4,076 posts

228 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
Just rise above it. I had a local Tory councillor ranting on Twitter about my plans, and literally ranting at various meetings. He over stepped the mark and was asked to leave one meeting, and then ended up making racist comments about Siddiq Khan and was essentially given a big slapped wrist from his party. Neighbours were up in arms and writing letters under the banner of a "residents' association" when no such thing existed, and membership seemed to be "selective".

When it does get through, chances are it will all be forgotten about and your "enemies" will just get onto the next big thing and enjoying the wonder of Brexit. Just rise above it.

A friend was doing a self build...neighbours were putting signs on lamp posts saying that the blood of the children killed by construction traffic would be on his hands, and one objection was based around the fact that he's need a telephone line, on which icicles will form, and then they will fall off and kill someone.

Seriously...what the actual fk...just laugh and rise above it.

blueg33

35,580 posts

223 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
mnh said:
ColinM50 said:
So if someone calls you a lying thieving corrupt scrote, that's OK is it? And would'nt affect the way you deal with them?

You misread what I said. I said that on balance I was leaning towards rejecting the application but was so incensed by being called corrupt, that I changed my mind and voted for it. Maybe in retrospect I shouldn't have let her insults affect my decision, but I bet you would too. Oh and to be clear I'm one of 22 councillors on this committee
Highlights everything that is wrong with the planning system. The fact that this councillor doesn't see the problem with his own actions speaks volumes.
Indeed

blueg33

35,580 posts

223 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
V6 Pushfit said:
blueg33 said:
The reason you don't let that sway your decision is because it means you have a good chance of making the wrong decision for the wrong reasons.

This is why I am anti the whole "Planning Committee" structure in the UK.

Politicians should set the policies.

Professional Planning Experts should test the applications against the policies.

The above what happens when applications go to appeal, if it happened at a local level then then system would be slicker, more predictable and better at delivering the homes etc that we need.
So T&C Planning gets auctioned off, Atkins/Centrica/Virgin buy it. UK Planning gets done by companies with little or no accountability?
I see brown envelopes.
Thats not what I meant. I meant planning professionals such as planning officesr who have the skill and knowlege to test applications against the policies. Basically the way it works with delegated approvals. Bringing politicians into decision making just means you get loads of spurious decisions.

Policy making is for politicians, policy implementation is for the council's professionals.

mcdjl

5,438 posts

194 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
Equus said:
ColinM50 said:
I sit on our district council's development management committee as well as our town's council planning committee which is a consultee to the district council. One avenue that gets all planning committee members backs up is when an objector accuses us of taking backhanders. We had one recently where it was touch and go whether we'd approve or reject a planning application and I know from discussions after the vote, that I, and at least two other councillors, were on the verge of rejecting the application. Until we had a very well spoken parish councillor as an objector call us all a bunch of lying effers, yes she used that word, she accused us of all being bent and on the take in those wrods. At that point I know three of us voted for it more out of outrage than anything else.

Now I'm not for one moment that you persuade a friend to be an objector and abuse the planners but it might work. Not ethical but.................

You should also bear in mind that an awful lot of planning (and other) councillors are just ordinary people with no particular expertise but just want to do what's right for their community. I'd say to anybody in the OP's position to find out which planning officer is, or will be, handling his application and go and see him/her and ask their opinion of what they'd find acceptable before a decision is made.
paulrockliffe said:
It's all OK, they don't take bribes, they just make decisions based on emotion rather than fact and the law.

Staggering.
blueg33 said:
I am sorry but this post just demonstrates the problem. Don’t base your decision on the personality of an objector, FFS, test the application against the policies like you are supposed to. I can’t believe that you are prepared to admit on an open forum that you voted on an application because you didn’t like an objector.

There is no defence for what you did.
Ilovejapcrap said:
WTF
As above; this is absolutely outrageous, and exactly the sort of thing that gets Planning Committees a bad name.

I will take the matter up with the Chief Exec of Huntingdonshire Council.
If he'd said 'i was undecided on which way to vote but an abusive opponent settled me for it' would you have the same objections? He was 'on the verge of rejecting it' which equally means he was on the verge of accepting it surely? While i'd love to say that emotion shouldn't play a part in such things we all know it can and anyone whos never done something in the heat of the moment they've looked back on and thought better of is a better person than me!

mnh

80 posts

192 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
mcdjl said:
If he'd said 'i was undecided on which way to vote but an abusive opponent settled me for it' would you have the same objections? He was 'on the verge of rejecting it' which equally means he was on the verge of accepting it surely? While i'd love to say that emotion shouldn't play a part in such things we all know it can and anyone whos never done something in the heat of the moment they've looked back on and thought better of is a better person than me!
The fact is that this Councillor has chose to put himself forward to be elected to public office. Such positions demand a certain standard of conduct (i.e. the Nolan Principles). If you can't adhere to those standards, you shouldn't be in that position.

I'm not at all surprised as I see this type of behaviour from Councillors at most committee meetings I attend.

What should be surprising is the fact he is not even aware he is failing in his duty and is willing to publicise that failing so openly. I'd report him and hope he is removed from the role but it would be futile as he'd only be replaced by another idiot with grand delusions of their own importance who can't be bothered to learn even basic planning rules.

Sorry to the OP for the thread hijack.

Flibble

6,470 posts

180 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
mnh said:
ColinM50 said:
So if someone calls you a lying thieving corrupt scrote, that's OK is it? And would'nt affect the way you deal with them?

You misread what I said. I said that on balance I was leaning towards rejecting the application but was so incensed by being called corrupt, that I changed my mind and voted for it. Maybe in retrospect I shouldn't have let her insults affect my decision, but I bet you would too. Oh and to be clear I'm one of 22 councillors on this committee
Highlights everything that is wrong with the planning system. The fact that this councillor doesn't see the problem with his own actions speaks volumes.
Standard for local government surely? Integrity and even handedness are in short supply there.

paulrockliffe

15,639 posts

226 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
The other thing of course is that if you've followed Colin on here over the last few years you'll know he's stopped posting planning advice because every time he did it was complete rubbish.

He knows he doesn't understand the planning system or it's rules, yet still happily sits on his Committee prejudicing the planning process with his ignorance. Now not only does he not know what he's doing to a high enough standard, he's happy to admit that he doesn't even try to act within the rules anyway if you rub him up the wrong way.

It's one of the most shocking things I've read on here over the many years I've been around. Most of the daft stuff you can write off as the person just being a bit of a dick, but this is so far beyond that.

mikeiow

5,287 posts

129 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
<snip>

Politicians should set the policies.

<snip>
The trouble here, as we have seen over recent years, is that the politicians can then go 100% against all local views, ignore planning decisions and entirely override them. Eric F**** Pickles did that to our area. I'm firmly of the opinion that I trust politicians as far as I can comfortably spit a rat ((c) Terry Pratchett!).
Okay, I agree with your sentiment: I see you added "Policy making is for politicians, policy implementation is for the council's professionals", but it does mightily p*** me off when those politicians (who, like all of us, are also fallible humans!) ride totally roughshod over local councils (parish, county!): makes me firmly believe the politicians are in the pockets of big developers.

Equus said:
ColinM50 said:
So if someone calls you a lying thieving corrupt scrote, that's OK is it? And would'nt affect the way you deal with them?
If you're acting in a position of public responsibility and trust, yes, absolutely, and no, it wouldn't.

Your Officers deal with this level of abuse and innuendo on a daily basis. They do so professionally, with very little thanks from anyone.

But we're not talking about the way you dealt with them: we're talking about the way you dealt with an application, that it was your public duty to deal with impartially and on the basis of material considerations only.

As blueg33 said, there is no excuse for what you did. You are not fit to hold the office you put yourself forward to be elected to.
I've got a STACK of respect for Equus here, but I have to say, not all decisions are black & white, & if it hangs on a knife-edge & one party takes that action against me as a decision maker, I know which side my vote would fall. None of us are perfect, & I guess many of you will be relieved to hear I hold no public office or influence (& have no plans to), eh!


ColinM50

2,630 posts

174 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
Well, we had an interesting example of that last year. A householder wanted to build a two storey extension on the back and side of their house and a neighbour objected saying it would cut off their view from their garden. The neighbour got really abusive and agitated and threatened all sorts of things, so the builder they were going to use mocked up a "wall" out of cardboard and put it where the extension was going to be so the neighbour could see how intrusive it would be.

She apologised and withdrew her objection when she realised that 3.5 metres from the boundary fence wasn't the 3.5 inches she thought the plans said.

tim0409

4,355 posts

158 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
This thread makes for interesting reading; I was deputy chair of the planning committee in a Scottish local authority and over five years I experienced some pretty unpalatable individuals, both applicants and objectors, but I never let that influence my decision making process. Planning was without doubt the most contentious area I had to deal with, and yes the "bung" accusations were both tiresome and obviously untrue (as they were for all the committee whom I got to know well; I frequently disagreed with their decisions but they were at least [mostly] diligent/honest in arriving at them). It's human nature to be impacted by the way somebody conducts themselves, but ultimately that needs to be kept out of the decision making process.

Over the course of a five year term you are clearly going to upset a significant number of people with your decisions (and being "accessible" in the community compounds that; I've lost count of the times I've been buttonholed in the street over a planning issue) but that comes with any elected office. My wife used to ask how I dealt with it; my response was that I had taken the trouble to learn planning law, carefully read all the papers in the application including the objections, and then fully explained my decision in committee, citing the relevant policies, which meant that any subsequent abuse/accusations etc. meant very little to me as I had a clear conscience, and that I had done my best. That said, the majority of objectors/applicants were fine over time as at least they could see that they had had a fair hearing.

I wish the general public understood the role of a councillor a bit better, particularly the power/impact they can have, and diligently assessed who would be the best candidate come elections; there are undoubtedly some fairly dubious characters attracted to the role, but if the general public actually voted for the best candidate, rather than solely along party lines, that would be a start!

Edited by tim0409 on Tuesday 29th January 15:03

Equus

16,770 posts

100 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
paulrockliffe said:
The other thing of course is that if you've followed Colin on here over the last few years you'll know he's stopped posting planning advice because every time he did it was complete rubbish.
Possibly contrary to the way I come across on here, I'm actually pretty laid-back, and as such am quite tolerant of plain incompetence, particularly if it's well-intentioned. I'm more likely to laugh at it than be annoyed by it...

paulrockliffe said:
It's one of the most shocking things I've read on here over the many years I've been around. Most of the daft stuff you can write off as the person just being a bit of a dick, but this is so far beyond that.
...But yes, this is WAY beyond the pale.

In case anyone (including Colin) is in doubt of the seriousness of this admission, Misconduct in Public Office is a criminal offence carrying a maximum penalty of LIFE imprisonment, and whilst I'm not a lawyer, I'd say that knowingly taking a democratic and legally enforceable decision on the grounds of personal malice almost certainly falls within the scope of that offence.

blueg33

35,580 posts

223 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
mikeiow said:
blueg33 said:
<snip>

Politicians should set the policies.

<snip>
The trouble here, as we have seen over recent years, is that the politicians can then go 100% against all local views, ignore planning decisions and entirely override them. Eric F**** Pickles did that to our area. I'm firmly of the opinion that I trust politicians as far as I can comfortably spit a rat ((c) Terry Pratchett!).
Okay, I agree with your sentiment: I see you added "Policy making is for politicians, policy implementation is for the council's professionals", but it does mightily p*** me off when those politicians (who, like all of us, are also fallible humans!) ride totally roughshod over local councils (parish, county!): makes me firmly believe the politicians are in the pockets of big developers.
Theoretically, if the policies are contrary to what most people want, the politicians setting the policy would soon be out of power. That way the policies would be more visible to the public, rather than crappy decision being missed by most people because they happen in the planning committee room, a place where most of the public have never ventured.

Its a poor analogy, but as an example. Politicians decide that there is a policy that says companies pay Tax. They don't then go and collect that tax, or even decide which companies pay what amount. They create the rules and expect their professional staff to implement the tax collection.


Equus

16,770 posts

100 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
Its a poor analogy, but as an example. Politicians decide that there is a policy that says companies pay Tax. They don't then go and collect that tax, or even decide which companies pay what amount. They create the rules and expect their professional staff to implement the tax collection.
That's both fair comment and a fair analogy.

It would require an overhaul of the Planning system and legislation, but perhaps the compromise would be that all actual decisions were taken by professional Officers, and that democratically elected Planning Committees were neutered to the point where their powers limited them to referring decisions they were unhappy with to a body at the level of the Planning Inspectorate, who could either ratify or overturn the Officer Delegated decision?

JJ 170

269 posts

216 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
First hand experience of this when i built my house

Its a commercial transaction, humans are designed to protect their nest. theyll get over it !

take it to appeal and win, dont let time run away with you.


blueg33

35,580 posts

223 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
Equus said:
blueg33 said:
Its a poor analogy, but as an example. Politicians decide that there is a policy that says companies pay Tax. They don't then go and collect that tax, or even decide which companies pay what amount. They create the rules and expect their professional staff to implement the tax collection.
That's both fair comment and a fair analogy.

It would require an overhaul of the Planning system and legislation, but perhaps the compromise would be that all actual decisions were taken by professional Officers, and that democratically elected Planning Committees were neutered to the point where their powers limited them to referring decisions they were unhappy with to a body at the level of the Planning Inspectorate, who could either ratify or overturn the Officer Delegated decision?
Good idea.

Highway Star

3,573 posts

230 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
tim0409 said:
This thread makes for interesting reading; I was deputy chair of the planning committee in a Scottish local authority and over five years I experienced some pretty unpalatable individuals, both applicants and objectors, but I never let that influence my decision making process. Planning was without doubt the most contentious area I had to deal with, and yes the "bung" accusations were both tiresome and obviously untrue (as they were for all the committee whom I got to know well; I frequently disagreed with their decisions but they were at least [mostly] diligent/honest in arriving at them). It's human nature to be impacted by the way somebody conducts themselves, but ultimately that needs to be kept out of the decision making process.

Over the course of a five year term you are clearly going to upset a significant number of people with your decisions (and being "accessible" in the community compounds that; I've lost count of the times I've been buttonholed in the street over a planning issue) but that comes with any elected office. My wife used to ask how I dealt with it; my response was that I had taken the trouble to learn planning law, carefully read all the papers in the application including the objections, and then fully explained my decision in committee, citing the relevant policies, which meant that any subsequent abuse/accusations etc. meant very little to me as I had a clear conscience, and that I had done my best. That said, the majority of objectors/applicants were fine over time as at least they could see that they had had a fair hearing.

I wish the general public understood the role of a councillor a bit better, particularly the power/impact they can have, and diligently assessed who would be the best candidate come elections; there are undoubtedly some fairly dubious characters attracted to the role, but if the general public actually voted for the best candidate, rather than solely along party lines, that would be a start!

Edited by tim0409 on Tuesday 29th January 15:03
I wish there were more like you on some of the Committees down here; who speak sense and come across as thoughtful and balanced!

I too cannot believe Colin's admission on a public forum.

dmsims

6,450 posts

266 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
Fascinating reading

Imagine going to see a consultant at the Hospital and they invited lay people into the consultation to decide on your treatment

If ever there was a case for AI..........

elanfan

5,516 posts

226 months

Tuesday 29th January 2019
quotequote all
Equis - if you indeed make formal complaint to the council will you please keep us informed of how the complaint is received, progress and outcome.

I fear Colin that you’ve brought this on yourself and you need to face the consequences I’m afraid.

48k

12,981 posts

147 months

Wednesday 30th January 2019
quotequote all
ColinM50 said:
I sit on our district council's development management committee as well as our town's council planning committee which is a consultee to the district council. One avenue that gets all planning committee members backs up is when an objector accuses us of taking backhanders. We had one recently where it was touch and go whether we'd approve or reject a planning application and I know from discussions after the vote, that I, and at least two other councillors, were on the verge of rejecting the application. Until we had a very well spoken parish councillor as an objector call us all a bunch of lying effers, yes she used that word, she accused us of all being bent and on the take in those wrods. At that point I know three of us voted for it more out of outrage than anything else.

Now I'm not for one moment that you persuade a friend to be an objector and abuse the planners but it might work. Not ethical but.................
Staggering. I am genuinely shocked by this.

Fully expect this thread to mysteriously vanish shortly...