Another planning-objection-help-needed please UPDATE

planning_officer

Oblivion wrote: »

And I sincerely wish you good luck ... and that is quite simply what the current planning system boils down to ... a lottery needing loads of LUCK.

Utter rubbish. Base your statements on facts please. Give us some examples?

Oblivion wrote: »

Luck, that you'll get a local council planning officer that is giving more thought to your objections than he is to his future pension or to the back-hander he's about to get from the applicant's agent who is an an ex-council planning department employee and retains connections with the current planning department (real world scenario in our case and now sub judice).

Please don't tarnish the entire system with what I assume are your own experiences - if your comments are not based on experiences, then may I politely suggest that you don't express 'made up' views here. As an LPA planner, your comments offend me, as in my years of experience, I have never come across any of the crass slurs you quote above. And even if I ever did, I certainly would not be party to them.

Oblivion wrote: »

Luck, that if it goes to appeal and you are lucky enough to get an officer assigned to the case who isn't intimidated by the government's edicts on new build at any cost to the environment

Where exactly is this government statement highlighted in bold? Answer = nowhere. As I said above, you obviously haven't read PPS1, PPS3, PPG2, PPS7 etc - all of them expressly refer to protecting people's quality of life and the beauty of the countryside/environment. In fact, PPS3 (Government advice on housing issues) specifically states that new housing should not be at the expense of amenity. Furthermore, Government policies are increasingly singing the praises of good design - just compare PPS1 with it's predecessor, PPG1, and you'll find plenty more references to the issues you claim don't exist in the more recent document than the former.

Oblivion wrote: »

Very, very good luck in your encounter with a totally corrupt system.

Again, complete and utter drivel. Facts please - where are your examples?

After your last post, I cannot believe that you are an ex-Council leader - you speak in a far too unprofessional tone. My guess is that you have never been employed in a professional planning capacity and probably never even in local government - I think someone has just built something near you that you don't like... and perhaps it was granted on appeal... am I getting warm?

Oblivion

planning_officer wrote: »

... am I getting warm?

No, but you are getting very silly.

I am old enough and wise enough to know that attempting to argue against someone who is trying to defend his chosen profession is an exercise in utter futility. So you can bluster all you like but you'll get no further response from me on the subject.

Dave.

Strapped

Oblivion wrote: »

No, but you are getting very silly.

I am old enough and wise enough to know that attempting to argue against someone who is trying to defend his chosen profession is an exercise in utter futility. So you can bluster all you like but you'll get no further response from me on the subject.

Dave.

_party_




...;)

planning_officer

Oblivion wrote: »

No, but you are getting very silly.

I am old enough and wise enough to know that attempting to argue against someone who is trying to defend his chosen profession is an exercise in utter futility. So you can bluster all you like but you'll get no further response from me on the subject.

Dave.

lol - shame as I like arguing with those who obviously know nothing about what they are arguing about... ;-)

Never mind, we agree to disagree. Like you, I have no wish to continue this futile debate - the only difference between us is that I see every day the results of the planning system, whereas you don't. It's not perfect, but then what system is? Nevertheless it's nowhere near as bad as you are trying to make it sound. And I'm glad we have no more crass and ill-founded generalisations on the subject, as per above.

Strapped

Well, the application has today been withdrawn :beer:

I realise that this is only "winning the battle but not the whole war" as they will undoubtably put in another application later. (And have continued clearing the site, cutting down MORE trees that don't necessarily belong to them :rolleyes: ). And, unsurprisingly, they are pointedly not talking to us (which I can happily live with as the price of them not building that monstrocity).

Thanks to everyone for your advice, particularly about contacting our district councillor who was a real star and kept us informed about what was happening. Apparently the planning officer made a site visit and decided straight away that there were too many concerns for her to grant PP, so she went back to our neighbours and told them to either withdraw the application or it would be turned down. I'm slightly miffed about that, as I don't understand why they allow them the option of withdrawing the application - obviously, we'd prefer that it had been officially refused, so that there was a record of the planning officer's decision and reasons, but apparently that's just the way they do it. (I guess it saves the council admin for one thing )

Anyway, ding ding, ready for round 2...:D

planning_officer

Strapped wrote: »

the planning officer made a site visit and decided straight away that there were too many concerns for her to grant PP, so she went back to our neighbours and told them to either withdraw the application or it would be turned down.

I know some councils do this, and I'm never quite sure why - yes, maybe to do with less work. At least, from your point of view, as it's been withdrawn then there's nothing for them to appeal so you don't have to worry about an appeal!

Glad there were potential objections though!

Debt_Free_Chick

Honestly, it doesn't matter if it was withdrawn or refused. Further applications can still be made - they could have had a refusal and then submitted different plans.

The Planning Officer is there to ensure "the right development" so it's a waste of their time (and Council Taxpayers' money) to have the PO tied up in the planning process, for an application which is so obviously wrong, on a site visit.

This is why - all too often - we suggest an informal chat with the PO before you make an application. The PO will usually tell you, immediately, if you've "got no chance".

Strapped

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

Honestly, it doesn't matter if it was withdrawn or refused. Further applications can still be made - they could have had a refusal and then submitted different plans.

The Planning Officer is there to ensure "the right development" so it's a waste of their time (and Council Taxpayers' money) to have the PO tied up in the planning process, for an application which is so obviously wrong, on a site visit.

This is why - all too often - we suggest an informal chat with the PO before you make an application. The PO will usually tell you, immediately, if you've "got no chance".

I wish our neighbours had taken some advice first!