Planning Decision

[SiBoyle]

Afternoon,

 

My decision date for Planning was today, 04/05/2021.

 

On Friday afternoon, 30/04/2021, Planning informed me that a Coal Authority Risk Assessment would be required.

 

So basically, I was given Friday afternoon and a bank holiday weekend to source a CARA.

 

Any idea what will happen to the decision date? Will this just be pushed back an additional few weeks so I can source?

 

Thanks.

[ToughButterCup]

The answer looks to be , unfortunately, yes. The LPA has a statutory duty to help you make an application. Their repsonse has been as unhelpful as it possibily can be within the framework they have to operate: it would have taken a few moments to see that the Risk Assessment was not present, and to give you a ring.

 

The Coal Authority is a Satutory Consultee (for  relevant Planning Applications).

I am suprised that the onus is on you to provide such a Risk Assessment: Statutory Consultees are those that the LPA are required to consult by law .

 

However, a quick look at this resource shows that the CA is used to providing risk assessments for developers. And that makes me think a few  things;

• I bet that the CA is not the only authority to be licenced to provide a Risk Assessment - if you have to provide one, likely it can be done more cheaply by others
• It should have been made clear to you that you needed a  CARA before you applied
• I'd be looking at similar Planning Applications to see whether they too were asked to provide a CARA. If not come back to us and we'll ( well, I will at least , because I'm quite cross on your behalf) help you with the next stage
• I'd be reading those (Planning Application) Risk Assessments in great detail to  determine the qualifications of those authoring the report. 
• I'd be ringing round companies that provide those Risk Assessments.

I'd be very very tempted to  ask whether a short-form risk assessment would suffice ( bit like a Stage 1 and Stage 2 report for ecology and soil profiles).

Reading between the lines, I'm quite cross for you . Do you mind telling us the LPA and the rough area of your application? I like to get my teeth into stuff like this.......

 

Ian

 

 

 

Edited May 4, 2021 by ToughButterCup

[Temp]

5 hours ago, SiBoyle said:

My decision date for Planning was today, 04/05/2021.

 

On Friday afternoon, 30/04/2021, Planning informed me that a Coal Authority Risk Assessment would be required.

 

My bet is they only looked at your application last week when they realised their decision deadline was approaching. They can now claim the deadline doesnt apply as your application was incomplete.

 

Our planners also told us 24 hours before deadline that they wanted changes. This despite spending over a year at the preapplication advice stage. Fortunately they were trivial and my architect was able to get revised drawings to them same day. A few years later one of the planning officers made a comment that he thought the house looked nice and that his department had "done a good job". I had to bite my tongue. They have no shame.

Edited May 4, 2021 by Temp

[Big Jimbo]

Go on Toughbuttercup. People constantly make excuses for planners in councils. Poor things have so much to deal with etc. Me, i'm a plain speaker, and think they are just $hite.

Temp. my planner told me on the phone that he thought my idea for Two smaller houses on the plot, instead of One large one, was a great idea. Then told me it was refused without him trying to put any sort of case for it forward, because the Parish Council objected, and they don't go against the Parish Council. W4nker$.

[ToughButterCup]

16 hours ago, Temp said:

...

My bet is they only looked at your application last week when they realised their decision deadline was approaching. They can now claim the deadline doesnt apply as your application was incomplete.

...

 

I agree, @Temp. But if our suspicions are correct, what's the point of the Application Validation process? Has that process been subject to reducto ad absurdam : i.e. has the application fee been received?

 

Quote

A local planning authority may request supporting information with a planning application. Its requirements should be specified on a formally adopted ‘local list’ which has been published on its website less than 2 years before an application is submitted. Local information requirements have no bearing on whether a planning application is valid unless they are set out on such a list.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/making-an-application#Local-information-requirements  (downloaded 05/05/2021)

 

@SiBoyle : were you made aware of a fomally adopted 'local list' (of required supporting information)  before you applied?

 

@Big Jimbo, I agree there is some evidence of poor practice among LPA Planners. But we can say that about all disciplines and sectors. 

[Temp]

13 hours ago, ToughButterCup said:

 

I agree, @Temp. But if our suspicions are correct, what's the point of the Application Validation process? Has that process been subject to reducto ad absurdam : i.e. has the application fee been received? 

 

 

Yes. As I recall its just a tick box exercise. Its possible not every planning application in that county needs a Coal Authority Risk Assessment so this may not be on the local list of mandatory documents.

 

Its my belief that the validation check is done by junior admin staff or possibly even outsourced to the company that scans them into electronic format. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Temp

[ToughButterCup]

5 hours ago, Temp said:

...

Its my belief that the validation check is done by junior admin staff or possibly even outsourced to the company that scans them into electronic format. 

...

 

To try and be charitable,  everyone is trying to do more with less....

[Temp]

I don't mean any disrespect. I just meant I don't think planning officers do the validation check themselves.

[the_r_sole]

planning validation is done by technicians and not planning officers and they regularly ask for information which isn't relevant to the application - they've got worse and worse over the last few years to a point where i've been in a public meeting where a planning consultant accused the local authority of using it as a delay tactic to control the work load of officers....

[ToughButterCup]

50 minutes ago, the_r_sole said:

....- they've got worse and worse over the last few years to a point where i've been in a public meeting where a planning consultant accused the local authority of using it as a delay tactic to control the work load of officers....

 

Well, @SiBoyle, if  yer man says so, then you are not alone . Good to know innit? ?

 

 

[SiBoyle]

It's Durham City Council. We have a pre app and this wasn't specified. The land has had permission granted in the past, however his has expired, and there were no coal risk assessments within the online documents for either if those approvals. I've submitted a report from Groundsure which the architect has said should suffice. 

 

I've hit a new stumbling block now though with highways. 

 

'In regards to these proposals the garage does not constitute as means of parking many are used as storage or converted and are not classed as in curtilage parking requirement for new housing. You will need to provide two parking spaces at the dwelling in front of the garage. In regards to the access and the 1.8m footway this needs to run along the site to the neighbour’s driveway (the existing verge is public highway). A 1.8m highway standard footway should be provided for access for future residents, servicing and post deliveries.'

 

 

[SiBoyle]

Just now, SiBoyle said:

It's Durham City Council. We have a pre app and this wasn't specified. The land has had permission granted in the past, however his has expired, and there were no coal risk assessments within the online documents for either if those approvals. I've submitted a report from Groundsure which the architect has said should suffice. 

 

I've hit a new stumbling block now though with highways. 

 

'In regards to these proposals the garage does not constitute as means of parking many are used as storage or converted and are not classed as in curtilage parking requirement for new housing. You will need to provide two parking spaces at the dwelling in front of the garage. In regards to the access and the 1.8m footway this needs to run along the site to the neighbour’s driveway (the existing verge is public highway). A 1.8m highway standard footway should be provided for access for future residents, servicing and post deliveries.'

 

 

A garage does not constitute a parking bay. Our drawings also show space for two parking bays in addition to the garage. 

 

The land either side of our plot does not have a footpath to the front. They are saying we need one, even though it is not going to connect anything to either side. There is a path on the opposite side of the road. 

[MikeSharp01]

33 minutes ago, SiBoyle said:

They are saying we need one, even though it is not going to connect anything to either side. There is a path on the opposite side of the road. 

Is that a new requirement more generally. IIRC because all developments that extend the envelope of the community need to provide access. I think it came up on a grand design prog, or some such programme, and in their case they had to provide a footway all the way back to the village.

[Temp]

1 hour ago, SiBoyle said:

A garage does not constitute a parking bay. Our drawings also show space for two parking bays in addition to the garage. 

 

The land either side of our plot does not have a footpath to the front. They are saying we need one, even though it is not going to connect anything to either side. There is a path on the opposite side of the road. 

 

Has the planning officer said you must do what highways have asked for? They usually but not always do.

 

You could try asking the PO if he agrees with HA or if he thinks retaining the "wild flower verge" is better?