Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
well in the interests of the planning dept being seen to be unbiased and fair i hope this guy loses in his bid in this application
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
The fact that the Portacabin is now open before a decision has been made, should make no difference to any decision; planning decisions cannot be made on this basis - he has not breached any planning laws as I have already stated - on information from planning officers and the enforcement officer.
If decisions were made as per your recommendation Keith, we would be removed from the planning committee.
Roger
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
The whole planning regime is a horse's arse and needs badly to be brought into the 20th century.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Or even the 21st. Peter.
Roger
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Are # 262 ...and # 264 ...connected in any way ?
# 263.....agree.....perhaps we should lodge a complaint ?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
all very obtuse reg.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#264, one step at a time Roger.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Peter
agree mate, whilst officers may well have convinced you roger no rules have been broken, he is fully aware he has an application in, which may well come before the planning commitee in jan, to operate before approval cannot be correct
if it is then theres something wrong with the present system and we should be looking to change it.
Whilst officers have a view they can be challenged
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
We challenge the Planning Officers recommendations at every Planning Committee meeting Keith - we make the decisions.
The Pharmacist is aware of the risks he is taking by putting the Porta-cabin there before a decision is made; if it is a yes, it will stay there, if it's a no, it will have to be moved.
Roger
Guest 782- Registered: 4 Oct 2012
- Posts: 357
Roger the issue would go away if the planning department dealt with matters within its own published timeframe. The actual building should have been determined by 29 Nov and the portakabin by 7 December. There are a whole load of pratelling and mostly ignorant and irrelevant objections which will force it to committee.
I have a application that should have been determined by 21st July, one of the planning committee councillors has, I understand, been waiting nearly 2 years for his permission!
I suggested before that as there are no planning reasons why the first application for the building should not be passed, then the portakabin can stay without needing approval because it is a temporary structure for a project with permission.
This whole thing is really rather silly! The planning department do not help themselves or the reputation of the council by continuing to be slow and every slightly not fit for purpose, this is such a non story!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
would it be a non story if it was plonked down your road simon?
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
The irritating thing is if planning is refused I expect it will go to appeal and the doubt will be prolonged for another couple of months or so.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 782- Registered: 4 Oct 2012
- Posts: 357
Would be far more convenient for than having to to Lydden, yes let's have one. But the point is about planning departments and their inability to do the job on time really
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
simon
inability to do the job (planning dept)
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Out of interest did this go anywhere?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
still standing alone in all its beauty.
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
To planning committee this month.
Agenda published & recommendations available online.
Watty
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
shiela
get your hard hat on
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
It is due to be discussed and voted on this Thursday.
Also being discussed is the demolition of 139/141 Folkestone Road, where there'll be a pharmacy and convenience store on the ground floor and various health-related consultation and treatment rooms above.
Why should Sheila be wearing a hard-hat, Keith ?
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
speaks for itself roger
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS