Fighting Planning Decision

da_rule

If they have changed the scheme of delegation and this has been retrospectively applied to decisions made before the new scheme was introduced this could be a breach of process. The scheme that was in place at the close of the consultation period etc (or what ever date should be regarded as the appropriate date) may be the one that should be used.

Of course, it could be that the councillor and the person writing the letter didn't realise the scheme had changed and were still using an old one.

The LGO say that they are very unlikely to overturn a planning decision when there are remedies available that will cost less to the public purse.

Holmbury

We are opposed to it because it is overdevelopment of a rural site. It has planning condition in place to used as agricultural storage only and already has been altered so in breach. It is completely overlooking one property (ours) and others to a lesser degree. We will loose all privacy. We are not just disgruntled objectioners!!.
We have emails between our councillor and the case officer discussing the fact that is was going to committee and when that was likely to be and even informing us what we needed to do to speak.... we had everything in hand with representation. We are waiting responses (since Monday) before we can go any further.

da_rule

There's an example on the LGO website where someone was given planning for a balcony overlooking a house. The person being overlooked was given an apology and the LGO recommended that the local authority plant a tree on her land to prevent her being overlooked.

da_rule

da_rule wrote: »

There's an example on the LGO website where someone was given planning for a balcony overlooking a house. The person being overlooked was given an apology and the LGO recommended that the local authority plant a tree on her land to prevent her being overlooked.

And the same for a development of 20 low-rise flats (this time a row of established trees to act as a screen).

Holmbury

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Have you checked the details of that "scheme of delegation"?

My first thought would be wanting to see "chapter and verse" for that in writing and the date this change was made. Just to check I was being told the truth about that or whether there were any useful "technicalities" they hadn't complied with.

Thank You ~At the same time as requesting a response to and confirmation that they received our email to local Council from Monday (no response), I have also asked for this today as we went through the minutes of the said meeting online and could not find any reference to it..... according to the covering letter with the decision it was decided at a meeting which was held a couple of days after emails received informing us that the decision was going to committe......it will be very interesting to read...........

da_rule

If it has been decided under delegated powers then it may not be mentioned at all in a meeting. Schemes of delegation allow officers (employees) of the council to take decisions that fall within the scheme (based on value of the transaction, number of objections etc).

Holmbury

da_rule wrote: »

If they have changed the scheme of delegation and this has been retrospectively applied to decisions made before the new scheme was introduced this could be a breach of process. The scheme that was in place at the close of the consultation period etc (or what ever date should be regarded as the appropriate date) may be the one that should be used.

Of course, it could be that the councillor and the person writing the letter didn't realise the scheme had changed and were still using an old one.

The LGO say that they are very unlikely to overturn a planning decision when there are remedies available that will cost less to the public purse.

Thank You ~ all I can say at present is received an email from Councillor on 6th Dec attached to one from Case Officer from 5th dec stating would appear on next Committe agenda, the change of scheme of delegation was apparantly agreed at a meeting on the 7th December (at which our councillor was present). We responded on the same day we received the decision (Monday) and so far have not had any response. Glad we found this forum though, it has helped bring the BP down a bit!!!

Holmbury

da_rule wrote: »

If it has been decided under delegated powers then it may not be mentioned at all in a meeting. Schemes of delegation allow officers (employees) of the council to take decisions that fall within the scheme (based on value of the transaction, number of objections etc).

Thanks ~ on the covering letter we had with the decision it states: 'At the most recent Council meeting held on *** so assuming it was (never assume!!)

moneyistooshorttomention

Holmbury wrote: »

Thank You ~ all I can say at present is received an email from Councillor on 6th Dec attached to one from Case Officer from 5th dec stating would appear on next Committe agenda, the change of scheme of delegation was apparantly agreed at a meeting on the 7th December (at which our councillor was present). We responded on the same day we received the decision (Monday) and so far have not had any response. Glad we found this forum though, it has helped bring the BP down a bit!!!

You do know I guess that Councils should have the minutes of their meetings up on line for the public to read on their website?

Doesnt mean to say they necessarily all do and I think there are the odd instances where they are in theory (but not in practice) - ie not done in English.

I guess you have checked that?

Doozergirl

Holmbury wrote: »

We are opposed to it because it is overdevelopment on a rural site. It has a planning condition in place to be used as agricultural storage only. It has already had some alterations and therefore in breach. It is completely overlooking one property ours) and partly others. It will take away all privacy. We are not just disgruntled objectioners!! It will have a huge impact on our day to day lives. We actually feel like moving away at this moment in time but doubt will now sell our property..... if we do I'm sure at a loss.

So, brownfield land in the countryside? Number one target for this government's proposed building of 1 million new homes by 2020.

If a development is in breach of planning, it doesn't stand forever. The planners can change it if they see fit. If they have now put in a planning application for something different, then the current breach isn't really applicable to future development.

Have you checked your council's supplementary planning guidance for acceptable distances between dwellings to reduce overlooking? Do they breach this? If you don't own the view, then there is always a risk of new neighbours. You will feel that your privacy is breached, but planning legislation may not.

The technicality of a certain number of objections pushing it to committee is never going to be a reason to overturn. Are you even sure that you have solid planning reasons of why it should have be rejected? You may have articulated your objection slightly better than your post, but in that case, your complaint really will have been considered by the planning officer. Planning consultants are far from cheap, but perhaps an hour with one should be a consideration. The last one I used was £175 an hour but litigation solicitors cost more than that!

Fact is, most planning committee decisions side with the planning officers. Every planner in my area takes development in the countryside extremely seriously and would never give permission lightly. The planning committee have to give valid planning reason to overturn an officer's recommendation of approval. And even then, the applicant can appeal to the secretary of state to have the decision overturned.

I can't see this resolving in any meaningful way to you. I have been on the other side as a persistent applicant who wasn't given full information about how to get my own side heard at planning committee. We had a delegated refusal upheld at appeal but persistence does pay off when it comes to planning. I played the game, got it to committee with the Head of Planning's recommendation to refuse. I got it passed unanimously by the voting committee because they were able to utilise common sense. Permitted development rights removed but even the planning officer said we can apply to have that planning restriction lifted - and he would grant it!

As an applicant, you have the benefit of being able to go again and again and again. As an objector, you can only respond. If your planners think that nine houses is acceptable, how many houses do you really think you could have reduced it to? Because that was your best hope.