Planning committee Related query

[Robert Ashton]

We've also gone to and spoken at a planning committee. Our application was initially refused by the planning manager, so had to get a councillor to 'call it in' so that it went to committee, and to make sure, we also invested in a barrister's written advice. On the day, we had two questions and unanimous support. Two committee members even walked over to shake my hand!

 

My view is that the planning system is out of date and not fit for purpose. Planning officers have to f work with rules that are no longer relevant, and as @deancatherine09 found, neighbours who object for all the wrong reasons.

 

 

[saveasteading]

56 minutes ago, Big Jimbo said:

crappy Parish councils

The councillors perhaps, but not the principle.   There are elections every 4 years so you should stand next time.

[Big Jimbo]

3 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

The councillors perhaps, but not the principle.   There are elections every 4 years so you should stand next time.

Unfortunately, Parish councils are generally made up of old people who have the spare time. These people are not our forward thinkers, but rather the type who don't like to see change.  Our parish council object to almost everything planning wise. Unless you are One of them who wants to build an enclosure around his swimming pool. I have been to many of the meetings where the chair says "We will be objecting to this" even before the item is discussed. It is obvious that some of the voting members have not even looked at the applications before the meeting, and just go along with the Chair. If the parish object, the planning officer has to do a full report if he wants to go against them and support the application. When the parish object, it causes the application to go before the district planning committee if the planning officer wants to support. These meeting are held in the evening where the head of planning, and the planning officer has to attend. These will be paid at overtime rates. It's no wonder that you can't get hold of any planning officers in my district. The system is a total waste of money. Many councils have taken the vote away from Parish councils due to the complete waste of time and money that they cause.

Parish councils should be treated just like neighbours. Have a right to object, but it should not cause a waste of depleted council funds, and should not trigger a district council planning committee meeting. There are untrained nimby's who effectively cause a lot of extra work to the trained planning officer.

They are however very good at agreeing to spend money on a memorial bench when one of them dies.

[saveasteading]

1 hour ago, Big Jimbo said:

meetings where the chair says "We will be objecting to this" even before the item is discussed. I

Exactly why other councillors are needed. This one is a bully, breaking the rules, with the clerk letting them away with it.

That is a big subject, known as predeterination and can disqualify theuf input. It used to be a disualifiable offence but the government withdrew the complaints process....wonder why?

Most parish councils cannot demand a committee meeting. It needs a District Councillor to do that.

 

My pc got fibre  internet into the community early,  published a neighbourhood plan, has controlled development, stopped the kind if chairing you mentioned.  And so on.

 

OK so don't get involved.  Very few do.

But then let it go. It's democracy controlled by the bigger system and we can either partake or leave it to the powerful.

Even attending as public can make them behave properly.

But complaining here does nothing. Other than maybe make you feel better.

 

[Achu]

12 hours ago, deancatherine09 said:

We had this. 6 objections and 3 repeat objections (orchestrated by our neighbour, most of the objectors didn't live near us and were their friends & family).

 

Went to committee with support of the planning department - my partner & I spoke for 3 minutes. Objecting neighbour spoke for 3 minutes, PC 3 minutes and local councilor 5 minutes (all against us, but it was clear the PC and the local councilor had been fed lies by the neighbors and they came across as fairly incompetent - spouting off reasons why we shouldn't build a house there when we already had permission for a different design).

 

One person abstained to vote (think the PC had got to him) and all others voted in support. One lady even chastised the neighbours for objecting - saying we should be actively encouraging sustainable developments like ours not trying to stop them. Another said the new design fitted in much better with the street scene and there were murmurings of support when he said that.

 

It was awkward and stressful, and I nearly cried with relief when it was voted for approval, but it's important you attend I think. I think one of the things that helped us was that we were there and spoke, so the committee could see we were a couple trying to create a home and not a developer, and also how much we cared.

 

When it was voted for approval, neighbours got up and left. Can't tell you how good that felt! 

 

Best of luck and please come back to update us with the outcome.

I just finished the meeting, and it didn’t go very well. Three Objectors (neighbours) speak against the application. Four counsellors also object to the application; I can see they’re friends, and they were shaking hands and having discussions with the neighbours before the meeting.

They all objected to the rear parking space and said it needed to be accessed by the council to determine the visibility of the road While turning into the parking space. They said the application was deferred.

I don’t know what to do now, and my mind is completely blank. We feel like we've been isolated and cornered.
What do you guys suggest? I think I need to go for appeal, don't I? 
According to the planning officer's report, they were supporting the application, so is there any chance to go to court with that report from the planning department without going for further assessments suggested by the councillors?

[Achu]

12 hours ago, Robert Ashton said:

We've also gone to and spoken at a planning committee. Our application was initially refused by the planning manager, so had to get a councillor to 'call it in' so that it went to committee, and to make sure, we also invested in a barrister's written advice. On the day, we had two questions and unanimous support. Two committee members even walked over to shake my hand!

 

My view is that the planning system is out of date and not fit for purpose. Planning officers have to f work with rules that are no longer relevant, and as @deancatherine09 found, neighbours who object for all the wrong reasons.

 

Please read my update regarding the meeting 

 

[Achu]

On 31/07/2023 at 09:44, Big Jimbo said:

Best of luck. Let us know.

 

On 31/07/2023 at 09:47, joe90 said:

🤞🙏

 

12 hours ago, deancatherine09 said:

We had this. 6 objections and 3 repeat objections (orchestrated by our neighbour, most of the objectors didn't live near us and were their friends & family).

 

Went to committee with support of the planning department - my partner & I spoke for 3 minutes. Objecting neighbour spoke for 3 minutes, PC 3 minutes and local councilor 5 minutes (all against us, but it was clear the PC and the local councilor had been fed lies by the neighbors and they came across as fairly incompetent - spouting off reasons why we shouldn't build a house there when we already had permission for a different design).

 

One person abstained to vote (think the PC had got to him) and all others voted in support. One lady even chastised the neighbours for objecting - saying we should be actively encouraging sustainable developments like ours not trying to stop them. Another said the new design fitted in much better with the street scene and there were murmurings of support when he said that.

 

It was awkward and stressful, and I nearly cried with relief when it was voted for approval, but it's important you attend I think. I think one of the things that helped us was that we were there and spoke, so the committee could see we were a couple trying to create a home and not a developer, and also how much we cared.

 

When it was voted for approval, neighbours got up and left. Can't tell you how good that felt! 

 

Best of luck and please come back to update us with the outcome.

 

12 hours ago, Big Jimbo said:

Great news. IMO i would rather go in front of the planning committee anyday than have to put up with crappy Parish councils and usless planning officers.

 

12 hours ago, Robert Ashton said:

We've also gone to and spoken at a planning committee. Our application was initially refused by the planning manager, so had to get a councillor to 'call it in' so that it went to committee, and to make sure, we also invested in a barrister's written advice. On the day, we had two questions and unanimous support. Two committee members even walked over to shake my hand!

 

My view is that the planning system is out of date and not fit for purpose. Planning officers have to f work with rules that are no longer relevant, and as @deancatherine09 found, neighbours who object for all the wrong reasons.

 

 

 

11 hours ago, saveasteading said:

The councillors perhaps, but not the principle.   There are elections every 4 years so you should stand next time.

 

11 hours ago, Big Jimbo said:

Unfortunately, Parish councils are generally made up of old people who have the spare time. These people are not our forward thinkers, but rather the type who don't like to see change.  Our parish council object to almost everything planning wise. Unless you are One of them who wants to build an enclosure around his swimming pool. I have been to many of the meetings where the chair says "We will be objecting to this" even before the item is discussed. It is obvious that some of the voting members have not even looked at the applications before the meeting, and just go along with the Chair. If the parish object, the planning officer has to do a full report if he wants to go against them and support the application. When the parish object, it causes the application to go before the district planning committee if the planning officer wants to support. These meeting are held in the evening where the head of planning, and the planning officer has to attend. These will be paid at overtime rates. It's no wonder that you can't get hold of any planning officers in my district. The system is a total waste of money. Many councils have taken the vote away from Parish councils due to the complete waste of time and money that they cause.

Parish councils should be treated just like neighbours. Have a right to object, but it should not cause a waste of depleted council funds, and should not trigger a district council planning committee meeting. There are untrained nimby's who effectively cause a lot of extra work to the trained planning officer.

They are however very good at agreeing to spend money on a memorial bench when one of them dies.

Please read my update regarding the committee meeting. I didn’t even get one word of support from any of the counsellors. I am pretty sure that they didn’t consider any of the points we made or the planning officers support. They were all supporting the objecting neighbours.

Four councillors attended the meeting and were friends with the neighbours. As I have seen, they were talking and shaking hands before the meeting and also discussing during the break time.

[Johnnyt]

You've not been refused, so glass half full?

Even if your visibility splay does not meet the exact requirements, it's not the end, they have discretion as does an Inspector.

Was it on the advice of the planning officer or senoir officer it was deferred. There's not enough to refuse so maybe the officers are going the extra mile to placate the committee.

You need to wait for a determination before appealing unless you are appealing for non-determination.

Perhaps have a word with a traffic consultant and get a survey undertaken and introduce it as late evidence.

 

[Achu]

3 minutes ago, Johnnyt said:

You've not been refused, so glass half full?

Even if your visibility splay does not meet the exact requirements, it's not the end, they have discretion as does an Inspector.

Was it on the advice of the planning officer or senoir officer it was deferred. There's not enough to refuse so maybe the officers are going the extra mile to placate the committee.

You need to wait for a determination before appealing unless you are appealing for non-determination.

Perhaps have a word with a traffic consultant and get a survey undertaken and introduce it as late evidence.

 

Because of all the raised hands for deferral, the planning officer agreed to go with it. For me, it sounds like there's no hope. The sad thing is, I am sure that the neighbours convinced a few of the councillors that they were living nearer, and these neighbours have been living here for a few years. We just moved in here last year.

[Johnnyt]

The planning officer does not have the say, that belongs to the committee, they are guided by the officer.

The committee couldn't have been confident to refuse you

Is there a web cast link to the committee, there is here in cheshire west, it would be worth reveiwing.

Whilst it is not that common for a committee to go against the recommendation of the officer,the expert here, they must very have good reasons to differ and all that is grist to your mill for any appeal.

You know what they are trying to nail you on, so bring fresh evidence to the new hearing to counter it. Get a traffic consultant on board who can undertake a survey and look at what diffference your proposed development will make in reality.

[Johnnyt]

I've just read the officer's report.

Paras 6.26 to 6.30 are simply supportive of your proposal in terms of highways.

You may have a position were you could air a cost application on appeal if the committee remain intransigent.

They have no evidence your access and parking causes an issue. They are having no regard to the highway's officers recommendation.

Without evidence they may be considered unreasonable.

 

[Achu]

4 minutes ago, Johnnyt said:

I've just read the officer's report.

Paras 6.26 to 6.30 are simply supportive of your proposal in terms of highways.

You may have a position were you could air a cost application on appeal if the committee remain intransigent.

They have no evidence your access and parking causes an issue. They are having no regard to the highway's officers recommendation.

Without evidence they may be considered unreasonable.

 

 Please have a look if you have time from 3:06:30 onwards.

 

They were even saying the planning department came to a conclusion without proper study.

how I can find a traffic consultant? Am I able to hire them and submit the report ? Sorry if my questions are silly 
 

 

[Johnnyt]

Yes you can engage the services of a traffic consultant to look at splays and  parking.

It is evident the parking is somewhat variable and snapshots over a period may be helpful.

If you took the residents argument to another degree, they wouldn't let any of their kids pass the driving test and buy a car and park it in the road.

There is often a lot of hyperbole spoken as was the case here "extreme problems" etc, get the professional opinion and survey to counter.

[Johnnyt]

Would you turn right out of your access towards Nelson Road?

If so, it could appear from your location plan to be about 10 meters from the rhs as egressing of your access to Nelson Rd.

The Highway Code says , Rule 243,  you must not park withing 10 meters or 32 feet of a junction.

If so there should be no cars parked to your right to hinder your view of affect your turn out.

 

 

[Achu]

7 hours ago, Johnnyt said:

Would you turn right out of your access towards Nelson Road?

If so, it could appear from your location plan to be about 10 meters from the rhs as egressing of your access to Nelson Rd.

The Highway Code says , Rule 243,  you must not park withing 10 meters or 32 feet of a junction.

If so there should be no cars parked to your right to hinder your view of affect your turn out.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, Johnnyt said:

Would you turn right out of your access towards Nelson Road?

If so, it could appear from your location plan to be about 10 meters from the rhs as egressing of your access to Nelson Rd.

The Highway Code says , Rule 243,  you must not park withing 10 meters or 32 feet of a junction.

If so there should be no cars parked to your right to hinder your view of affect your turn out.

 

 

No, please look at the screen shot here; the proposed access is marked blue where we proposed to remove the fence panel to enter our garden. There is definitely the whole length of the house and the rest of the garden space to reach the entrance of Nelson Road, so it should be over 10 metres long.
sorry if I understand something wrong here.

[joe90]

I have just watched the whole meeting and my take is, the objections are not based on planning but “we don’t like it”, the chronic parking already exists, you don’t need planning fir removing the fence, concrete slab or converting the garage. However, as raised in the meeting it is county that grant dropped kerb permission and there appears a reluctance from them to issue them. That point needs clarification.    I do think the OP has been badly advised on what he needs planning for and what is permitted development. I don’t blame them from deferring as the rear access is all dependant on dropped kerb permission. 
 

I do wonder if the OP should apply fir a dropped kerb to county first, if granted he has a chance to park to the rear. I don’t see what he is actually asking for planning for?

 

p.s. if a bin lorry can’t actually get down Milton road then can a fire engine?. My brother lived in a narrow road, a fire engine could not access so they double yellow lined one side of it. Their answer to critics was “parking is not a right”.

Edited August 2, 2023 by joe90

[Achu]

1 hour ago, joe90 said:

I have just watched the whole meeting and my take is, the objections are not based on planning but “we don’t like it”, the chronic parking already exists, you don’t need planning fir removing the fence, concrete slab or converting the garage. However, as raised in the meeting it is county that grant dropped kerb permission and there appears a reluctance from them to issue them. That point needs clarification.    I do think the OP has been badly advised on what he needs planning for and what is permitted development. I don’t blame them from deferring as the rear access is all dependant on dropped kerb permission. 
 

I do wonder if the OP should apply fir a dropped kerb to county first, if granted he has a chance to park to the rear. I don’t see what he is actually asking for planning for?

 

p.s. if a bin lorry can’t actually get down Milton road then can a fire engine?. My brother lived in a narrow road, a fire engine could not access so they double yellow lined one side of it. Their answer to critics was “parking is not a right”.

I really appreciate your time and effort for watching the whole video.

So I am thinking of applying for dropped kerb first and see if it gets approved or not, is that what you are also suggesting?

Someone also  mentioned here  that to do highway  consultation and submit the report .

 

[Achu]

1 hour ago, joe90 said:

I have just watched the whole meeting and my take is, the objections are not based on planning but “we don’t like it”, the chronic parking already exists, you don’t need planning fir removing the fence, concrete slab or converting the garage. However, as raised in the meeting it is county that grant dropped kerb permission and there appears a reluctance from them to issue them. That point needs clarification.    I do think the OP has been badly advised on what he needs planning for and what is permitted development. I don’t blame them from deferring as the rear access is all dependant on dropped kerb permission. 
 

I do wonder if the OP should apply fir a dropped kerb to county first, if granted he has a chance to park to the rear. I don’t see what he is actually asking for planning for?

 

p.s. if a bin lorry can’t actually get down Milton road then can a fire engine?. My brother lived in a narrow road, a fire engine could not access so they double yellow lined one side of it. Their answer to critics was “parking is not a right”.

Please find the picture of the kerb,It might not be a dropped kerb technically but it’s practically a dropped kerb. 

[saveasteading]

49 minutes ago, Achu said:

practically a dropped kerb. 

It is usually necessary to rebuild the footpath too, to a higher strength.

[Big Jimbo]

I watched the meeting, and i am going to play Mr Nasty. IMO a single dropped kerb is not going to allow you to either enter or exit the new parking space in your garden. The parking in your area is difficult. People are going to be parked either side of your dropped kerb, and the chances are that you will also have a car parked opposite your dropped curb. With that parking the road is just not wide enough to allow you to enter or exit. IMO you would need either a double dropped curb, or as @joe90 has said would need the council to put a double Yellow line down One side of the road to allow access for a fire engine. Not sure i would be happy to be living down the end of that dead end.

[saveasteading]

1 minute ago, Big Jimbo said:

i am going to play Mr Nasty

I made exactly your argument on behalf of the Parish Council, with drawings of the turning circle proving that the applicant may be trapped in or out of their drive OR that 3 street spaces must go.. (It is the case that fire engines (remarkably small and maneuverable really) sometimes can't get along the street.

Council accepted the argument. At appeal it went the other way, with the only justification really being that neighbours would have to sort it out ! 

The yellow line, and loss of perhaps 6 spaces, is always an end result.

 

9 minutes ago, Big Jimbo said:

Not sure i would be happy

Might not make for comfortable living either, if the neighbours have to park elsewhere. But usually people wont park the car out of sight, so I don't know what happens next.

[Big Jimbo]

@saveasteading My father had severe mobility issues, a car, a narrow road, and a single dropped curb. Age concern visited him, and he said that sometimes he could not either get on or off the drive. The age concern lady had a son who worked for highways. They doubled his dropped curb, and stuck a double yellow line opposite about 3 cars long, at no cost to him. So a net result of 4 public spaces lost. God knows how she got her son to get that put through. The neighbours, as you can imagine, went bonkers. My daughters old road had so many dropped curbs, that there was actually nowhere to park on the street for over 400 meters. A lot of our streets were just not designed, back in the day for so many cars.

[Achu]

1 hour ago, Big Jimbo said:

I watched the meeting, and i am going to play Mr Nasty. IMO a single dropped kerb is not going to allow you to either enter or exit the new parking space in your garden. The parking in your area is difficult. People are going to be parked either side of your dropped kerb, and the chances are that you will also have a car parked opposite your dropped curb. With that parking the road is just not wide enough to allow you to enter or exit. IMO you would need either a double dropped curb, or as @joe90 has said would need the council to put a double Yellow line down One side of the road to allow access for a fire engine. Not sure i would be happy to be living down the end of that dead end.

So why does the highway authority said there is no safety concerns. I am not arguing with you.

[Achu]

24 minutes ago, Big Jimbo said:

@saveasteading My father had severe mobility issues, a car, a narrow road, and a single dropped curb. Age concern visited him, and he said that sometimes he could not either get on or off the drive. The age concern lady had a son who worked for highways. They doubled his dropped curb, and stuck a double yellow line opposite about 3 cars long, at no cost to him. So a net result of 4 public spaces lost. God knows how she got her son to get that put through. The neighbours, as you can imagine, went bonkers. My daughters old road had so many dropped curbs, that there was actually nowhere to park on the street for over 400 meters. A lot of our streets were just not designed, back in the day for so many cars.

So you are saying it’s very unlikely to get permission? My question is: why is the planning officer supporting the application if it’s unsafe and there's not enough space to turn the car?

[Big Jimbo]

1 hour ago, Achu said:

So why does the highway authority said there is no safety concerns. I am not arguing with you.

Because the lazy sods didn't even bother to look at it properly.