Fighting Planning Decision

Holmbury

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

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?

Yes, we have checked and cannot find anything relating revised scheme of delegation. Have emailed the Council and asked for a copy showing this today. We have not had a response from that or from the original email sent on Monday.

da_rule

Holmbury wrote: »

Yes, we have checked and cannot find anything relating revised scheme of delegation. Have emailed the Council and asked for a copy showing this today. We have not had a response from that or from the original email sent on Monday.

It may not be mentioned specifically, it may form part of their constitution so look for mentions to adopting new constitutional clauses etc as well.

moneyistooshorttomention

Holmbury wrote: »

Yes, we have checked and cannot find anything relating revised scheme of delegation. Have emailed the Council and asked for a copy showing this today. We have not had a response from that or from the original email sent on Monday.

Be prepared for "deliberate inefficiency". It's a common tactic....:cool:.

I've long since come to the conclusion that missing information/delayed information isn't "one of those things" - it's a deliberate tactic....:mad:

Holmbury

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Be prepared for "deliberate inefficiency". It's a common tactic....:cool:.

I've long since come to the conclusion that missing information/delayed information isn't "one of those things" - it's a deliberate tactic....:mad:

Absolutely.... all I did today was ask them to confirm receipt of the emails ~ zilch. Shouldn't expect anything else I suppose.! Common courtesy doesn't come into it.

Doozergirl

Holmbury wrote: »

Absolutely.... all I did today was ask them to confirm receipt of the emails ~ zilch. Shouldn't expect anything else I suppose.! Common courtesy doesn't come into it.

Oh, please. Don't be influenced by people like that. This is the public sector in 2017. I doubt they have time for common courtesy when putting out fires.

You expect nothing, guess what you get? Nothing.

This ship simply gone too far to turn it round and your (and other's) focus on process does not and will not help. !!!! happens. It isn't a conspiracy.

If you want some real information, speak to a planning consultant and not to people whose planning knowledge extends to being able to search online for an application.

Fuzzyness

Doozergirl wrote: »

Oh, please. Don't be influenced by people like that. This is the public sector in 2017. I doubt they have time for common courtesy when putting out fires.

You expect nothing, guess what you get? Nothing.

This ship simply gone too far to turn it round and your (and other's) focus on process does not and will not help. !!!! happens. It isn't a conspiracy.

If you want some real information, speak to a planning consultant and not to people whose planning knowledge extends to being able to search online for an application.

a planning consultant will tell them the same thing you have. although if they had used one in the first place they may have stood a better chance of objecting to the proposal. ce la vie.

moneyistooshorttomention

Holmbury wrote: »

Absolutely.... all I did today was ask them to confirm receipt of the emails ~ zilch. Shouldn't expect anything else I suppose.! Common courtesy doesn't come into it.

There is a thing one can set up on email account that shows when the email has been received and opened I believe.

You could set this up - and then re-send the email. That would give you some sort of proof they have got it.

davidmcn

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

There is a thing one can set up on email account that shows when the email has been received and opened I believe.

It might give you evidence that it reached the council's mail server (and possibly, if they're using the correct sort of mail client and have set it up in a way which permits it, that the recipient has opened the email). But it doesn't give you much evidence that the correct person has or hasn't actually read your email.

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

EDIT: and no...OP isnt over-reacting - we all have to fight the planners on a case by case set-up - as the pressure is absolutely enormous to squeeze in lots of extra buildings there honestly isnt the room for in any realistic way of looking at things. We can all only fight our own corner.

Sounds like there's already a redundant agricultural building there and that this might be an application under Class Q, in which case they'll be bound by the regulations pertaining to that.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/596/schedule/2/part/3/crossheading/class-q-agricultural-buildings-to-dwellinghouses/made

Rodders53

Even had this gone to Committee and been rejected (with the Planners recommending approval as would be likely the case here) the developer would appeal.

That would almost certainly be passed, if with some conditions.

A similar-ish development near me has just had this happen and the Inspector has even removed one Condition the Council Planners had proposed ... {to prevent garages being converted into dwelling space, so reducing any off road parking in the future.}