Council have published my home address against my planning objection

sheramber

If the council has concerns  about a planning application it will be dealt with when the application is reviewed.

The fact that the council has published the application does not mean they are not aware of a potential problem.

ThumbRemote

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

i could be in Scotland raising and objection about something in Wales.  One doesnt have to have a direct connection to raise an objection to something - thank goodness!  The relevance of an objection should be determined by the Council, and they dont need to publish a home address to do that.

And how does anybody know whether the council have applied appropriate weight to such objections, if nobody else can tell whether the objector is next door or on the other side of the world?

Or whether the concerned voices are actually local constituents, or some lobby group with no connection to or knowledge of the area?

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

Anyone can object from anywhere. Imagine if groups such as Greenpeace, Amnesty International or WWF could only seek opinion from people who lived round the corner from where atrocities to animals, people or the environment etc was happening.  Ignorance, apathy, bribery ... and i could go on ..  We NEED people from outside our blinkerd bubbles, to inject proactivity, expertise, sageness etc.    

Everyone is entitled to make representations, but it is not a matter of complete irrelevance to the council in determining the application whether objections have come from parties with no particular connection or knowledge of the site, or whether they have come from local constituents.

You mention bribery - surely you can see why some transparency about who is making input into the decision-making process is important? Conversely, if objections are anonymous, surely it makes it even easier for them to "disappear"?

With your talk of 'weighting' and treating local constituents differently, you seem to have the impression that objections to planning applications are treated like a test of public opinion. 

They are not. 

Planning is based on a strict set of rules, which as far as possible uses objective facts. There is a guide from one council here: https://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/view_a_planning_application/how_to_comment_on_applications/guide_to_commenting.aspx

As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

leafy211

ThumbRemote said:

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

i could be in Scotland raising and objection about something in Wales.  One doesnt have to have a direct connection to raise an objection to something - thank goodness!  The relevance of an objection should be determined by the Council, and they dont need to publish a home address to do that.

And how does anybody know whether the council have applied appropriate weight to such objections, if nobody else can tell whether the objector is next door or on the other side of the world?

Or whether the concerned voices are actually local constituents, or some lobby group with no connection to or knowledge of the area?

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

Anyone can object from anywhere. Imagine if groups such as Greenpeace, Amnesty International or WWF could only seek opinion from people who lived round the corner from where atrocities to animals, people or the environment etc was happening.  Ignorance, apathy, bribery ... and i could go on ..  We NEED people from outside our blinkerd bubbles, to inject proactivity, expertise, sageness etc.    

Everyone is entitled to make representations, but it is not a matter of complete irrelevance to the council in determining the application whether objections have come from parties with no particular connection or knowledge of the site, or whether they have come from local constituents.

You mention bribery - surely you can see why some transparency about who is making input into the decision-making process is important? Conversely, if objections are anonymous, surely it makes it even easier for them to "disappear"?

With your talk of 'weighting' and treating local constituents differently, you seem to have the impression that objections to planning applications are treated like a test of public opinion. 

They are not. 

Planning is based on a strict set of rules, which as far as possible uses objective facts. There is a guide from one council here: https://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/view_a_planning_application/how_to_comment_on_applications/guide_to_commenting.aspx

As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

thank you thank you thank you for putting it so succinctly.  

killerferret666

This whole thread made me relive the trauma of when GPDR came in and everyone thought they had a right to anonymity with all details.  'Right to be forgotten' being another, when thats not always true either.

Anyway glad they removed it for you. I do think addresses are fine for transparency, as to get planning they have to have their address printed be a bit useless if that wasnt published.

Some of the objections nowadays are nuts. Read one the other day that complained about access with big trucks and dangers whilst the houses were being built...pretty obvious that one 😂

powerful_Rogue

ThumbRemote said:

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

i could be in Scotland raising and objection about something in Wales.  One doesnt have to have a direct connection to raise an objection to something - thank goodness!  The relevance of an objection should be determined by the Council, and they dont need to publish a home address to do that.

And how does anybody know whether the council have applied appropriate weight to such objections, if nobody else can tell whether the objector is next door or on the other side of the world?

Or whether the concerned voices are actually local constituents, or some lobby group with no connection to or knowledge of the area?

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

Anyone can object from anywhere. Imagine if groups such as Greenpeace, Amnesty International or WWF could only seek opinion from people who lived round the corner from where atrocities to animals, people or the environment etc was happening.  Ignorance, apathy, bribery ... and i could go on ..  We NEED people from outside our blinkerd bubbles, to inject proactivity, expertise, sageness etc.    

Everyone is entitled to make representations, but it is not a matter of complete irrelevance to the council in determining the application whether objections have come from parties with no particular connection or knowledge of the site, or whether they have come from local constituents.

You mention bribery - surely you can see why some transparency about who is making input into the decision-making process is important? Conversely, if objections are anonymous, surely it makes it even easier for them to "disappear"?

With your talk of 'weighting' and treating local constituents differently, you seem to have the impression that objections to planning applications are treated like a test of public opinion. 

They are not. 

Planning is based on a strict set of rules, which as far as possible uses objective facts. There is a guide from one council here: https://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/view_a_planning_application/how_to_comment_on_applications/guide_to_commenting.aspx

As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

Doesn't this section in the link you posted contradict the point you are trying to make?

The Council is legally obliged to take into account the representations received from neighbours and other interested parties when deciding all planning applications. The Council encourages local residents to have their say in planning matters. The Council is responsible for making the final decision on the application and for deciding how much "weight" representations have.

Undervalued

ThumbRemote said:

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

i could be in Scotland raising and objection about something in Wales.  One doesnt have to have a direct connection to raise an objection to something - thank goodness!  The relevance of an objection should be determined by the Council, and they dont need to publish a home address to do that.

And how does anybody know whether the council have applied appropriate weight to such objections, if nobody else can tell whether the objector is next door or on the other side of the world?

Or whether the concerned voices are actually local constituents, or some lobby group with no connection to or knowledge of the area?

user1977 said:

leafy211 said:

Anyone can object from anywhere. Imagine if groups such as Greenpeace, Amnesty International or WWF could only seek opinion from people who lived round the corner from where atrocities to animals, people or the environment etc was happening.  Ignorance, apathy, bribery ... and i could go on ..  We NEED people from outside our blinkerd bubbles, to inject proactivity, expertise, sageness etc.    

Everyone is entitled to make representations, but it is not a matter of complete irrelevance to the council in determining the application whether objections have come from parties with no particular connection or knowledge of the site, or whether they have come from local constituents.

You mention bribery - surely you can see why some transparency about who is making input into the decision-making process is important? Conversely, if objections are anonymous, surely it makes it even easier for them to "disappear"?

With your talk of 'weighting' and treating local constituents differently, you seem to have the impression that objections to planning applications are treated like a test of public opinion. 

They are not. 

Planning is based on a strict set of rules, which as far as possible uses objective facts. There is a guide from one council here: https://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/planning/view_a_planning_application/how_to_comment_on_applications/guide_to_commenting.aspx

As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

Maybe, that is a matter of opinion.

However, as several people have pointed out it is normal practice in many (most?) council areas. Certainly, where I live, it is made very clear that objections are not anonymous and that your full name and address will be visible.

I would be very surprised if all of these councils are getting it wrong in law.

I can't obviously comment on whether the OP was adequately warned on their council's system if indeed they are actually obliged to display a clear warning.

DullGreyGuy

ThumbRemote said:
As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

But the address is necessary to consider the factual accuracy of many types of objections... someone at the other end of the country, as you put it, would not be factually accurate to complain the new developement will overlook their garden, increase pressure on the local bus they use to commute each day which already they typically cant get on the first 2-3 that pass etc. If they are a few streets away instead the former is almost certainly not true but the later could be. The neighbouring property its possible that both are true.

leafy211

DullGreyGuy said:

ThumbRemote said:
As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

But the address is necessary to consider the factual accuracy of many types of objections... someone at the other end of the country, as you put it, would not be factually accurate to complain the new developement will overlook their garden, increase pressure on the local bus they use to commute each day which already they typically cant get on the first 2-3 that pass etc. If they are a few streets away instead the former is almost certainly not true but the later could be. The neighbouring property its possible that both are true.

One would assume the council would know the facts, or find them out if they dont,  if they are making these extremely important decisions around planning applications.  Its their duty and what they are paid to do.

Jenni_D

DullGreyGuy said:

ThumbRemote said:
As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

But the address is necessary to consider the factual accuracy of many types of objections... someone at the other end of the country, as you put it, would not be factually accurate to complain the new developement will overlook their garden, increase pressure on the local bus they use to commute each day which already they typically cant get on the first 2-3 that pass etc. If they are a few streets away instead the former is almost certainly not true but the later could be. The neighbouring property its possible that both are true.

I don't think the OP is complaining about the Council requiring their address as part of their comment submission - they're complaining about their addressed being published. Of course the Council needs the relevant facts in support of a submission, but they don't need to tell the world who made any such submission.

shiraz99

Jenni_D said:

DullGreyGuy said:

ThumbRemote said:
As a result of this objective nature, it actually makes no difference where a comment comes from - a comment from the immediate neighbour is treated just the same as a comment from someone at the other end of the country. The comment is simply judged on its factual merits. There is no reason whatsoever to publish the details of who has made the comments - a comment is either both factually accurate and relevant and is taken into account, the source has no bearing on it. 

But the address is necessary to consider the factual accuracy of many types of objections... someone at the other end of the country, as you put it, would not be factually accurate to complain the new developement will overlook their garden, increase pressure on the local bus they use to commute each day which already they typically cant get on the first 2-3 that pass etc. If they are a few streets away instead the former is almost certainly not true but the later could be. The neighbouring property its possible that both are true.

I don't think the OP is complaining about the Council requiring their address as part of their comment submission - they're complaining about their addressed being published. Of course the Council needs the relevant facts in support of a submission, but they don't need to tell the world who made any such submission.

They do if they want to ensure the process is transparent to all.