Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 39....``but we make up our own minds``.......... that's the problem......
See # 28...the planning and scrutiny members mentioned were Mr Walkden and the Chairman of the Council......
...other contributions were equally inane .........
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Keith, please put away the wooden spoon. Are you shocked by a councillor making an honest post? Anyway, all that information is already in the public domain.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 652- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 595
Post 18
(My understanding is that the Chemist who will be responsible for this Pharmacy has a deadline, or he loses the licence and Dr. Premnath is helping to facilitate the use of the Pharmacy as expediciously as possible.)
Dr Premnath is still going against planning by even sighting the portacabin, this is part of the planning application, you cannot do as you like, even if you have a deadline to meet.
Dr Premnath is well educated and high up in the PCT, so should know right from wrong
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
I agree Sheila and that is what I have written to the Planning Officers about. By siting the porta-cabin there, he is making an assumption that he'll automatically be given permission - and that isn't the case.
Roger
Terry Nunn
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,316
Unfortunately, it happens all the time. Brighthouse knocked three shops into one and applied after, work has started already in converting the Kingfisher into a bookies, the list is endless.
Is there no recourse in law? Cannot the these people be fined for acting "illegally"?
Terry
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
I think there should be some sort of penalty/fine against them, but this is a national policy Terry so nothing is done; it is being evidenced more and more, which to my mind, is very wrong. Sometimes (mostly it seems) the retrospective PP is given, but not always.
Roger
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
If PP applications took a few days to process I would agree that there is no case for acting first and applying second. But we have all seen how long councils take with these things and I can't find it in myself to blame the developers. How many projects collapse because of official thumb-sucking, I wonder?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Most developers don't do this Peter, it's mostly individuals - although there are always the exceptions, like Brighthouse.
I also agree that the process takes too long and each day costs the developer more and more money. We need to encourage developers to come here, not put obstacles in their way - and then say no. I know we cannot (and do not) give them carte blanche to do as they wish - close(r) working between developers and officers always helps.
Roger
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
There is quite a can of worms opening up here,
Had the comments been made by a labour person I would be warning in the same way.
Whilst as roger says his opinion is these are facts, I suspect if planning officers were aware of these comments they would advise that you didn't speak/vote at the planning meeting.
Of course as you know Roger that choice is yours.
With regard to applications in general, we are facing problems now with the way these things are handled, whilst no one wants to see developers turned away(if what they propose is acceptable to those that have live there) we also have to make sure
(as has not happened in previous years or now) that the face of the ward is not affected by these changes in a way that affects the make up.
Planning applications may take a long time, but certainly not much of that is about objections thats usually just the long procedure it all goes through.
Just to get back to this application, this guy is clearly sticking one finger up to the council(planning) and do we just turn a blind eye(i say no)
I applaud roger for contacting the planning dept, and would be happy for the officers reply, but also what will be done to correct this.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 652- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 595
If this sort of thing is a national problem, then it should be brought up nationaly in the national press, if you want something bad enough, it is worth waiting for, and getting it right, respecting peoples right to complain and object is also a need, after all, it is the people that live in the area and will be affected by this
Terry Nunn- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,316
As an aside and just to bring a little levity to this topic, I mentioned the Kingfisher. It seems to be be ideal place for a bookies - just across the road from the Working Men's Club. I can see a trail of the unemployed now making their way across the road accompanied by the obligatory whippet or lurcher!
Terry
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Roger.
Having gone through the planning process only once for moving the statue. Apart from setting the date for my application to be heard, the filling in of the forms and compiling the paper work, as far as I could see, could have been produced & processed in less than a week, condensing everything in time that's is.
So taking over 1 year to obtain PP, the delay is due to what?
Not enough staff, back log of applications or is it just, well it always taken that long, why shorten the process?
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 652- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 595
Today portacabin being all fitted out ready for this new pharmacy, this person is clearly flouting the law, he is telling us that he will get planning consent, if he dosn't he will do it anyway, why do we have planning rules if they can be overode by the individual,why should we pay to have plans passed, when clearly it looks as though you can do as you like, is the council powerless to do anything about this kind of behaviour, it is disgusting and shameful if he is allowed to get away with this, instead of a pharmacy, why does he not concentrate on making a car park for his surgery, and taking the congestion of the Folkestone Road, which this surgery is now causing
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 5........is the picture getting clearer people ?.....
Guest 652- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 595
Have just written to the Daily mail, to see if they will take this up, something has to be done
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i went past this morning it is massive!!
they seem to be having/had problems there, first of all the opening was delayed due to not having phones, then recently their computer system went down - all appointments cancelled i was told.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
I hope nobody is criticising DDC for taking their time over things, after all they're doing their best.
I've told you before, they're the problem not the solution, why can't they just meet up and decide one way or another, its not rocket science.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
been banging on for years on here about planning officers and applicants getting together thrashing out the rules of what can be done as well as can't be done.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
Its symptomatic of whats going on Howard, it seems some go ahead without permission, others give up be cause DDC dither for too long, its a shambles.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
may be a vist to the quacks might help.