Training Ground Plans Rejected

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Training Ground Plans Rejected

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 4 of 4 << First < 1 2 3 4

Goldfiinger Just down the road 03 Sep 17 8.56am
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly My vocation is in Planning. The Planners decisions and reasons for the outcome(s)of Applications can be hugely variable. The Council state the reason for refusal is based on residents objections. In my opinion, the objections are speculative (at best), largely without basis, and in a lot of cases are conflicting. Why does the number of people on site form part of objections ? seven additional car parking spaces are of no significance, when they later state that the site is hardly used in the off-season. Speculation that alcohol may be served on site and pished-up people will be casing nuisance ? WTF ?!!! Speculating on Planning Creep in the future is of no consequence to the current proposal, and would be addressed through the Planning System. Tree screening around the perimeter is probably the main issue that might need to be addressed. The rest is just b0ll0x, to be honest Edited by Forest Hillbilly (25 Aug 2017 9.15pm) Im no expert on planning but I've always been lead to believe it fairly easy for planners to refuse planning permission the first time for fairly minor reasons even the whims of the residents can have an impact on decisions even if these aren't based on the realities of planning laws. Appeals however I understand is where this all gets sifted out and it basically comes a lot more down to laws. I.e. Planning laws, tick all the boxes and 95% of the time it'll pass through at appeal. NIMBYS unless they have deep pockets to tie up the courts can't actually stop a legally sound planning application. At least that's my general understanding. It matters not if they like something or not, at appeal it should all come down to the letter of the law.
Alert a moderator to this post

Goldfiinger

Just down the road 03 Sep 17 8.56am

Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly

My vocation is in Planning. The Planners decisions and reasons for the outcome(s)of Applications can be hugely variable.
The Council state the reason for refusal is based on residents objections. In my opinion, the objections are speculative (at best), largely without basis, and in a lot of cases are conflicting.
Why does the number of people on site form part of objections ? seven additional car parking spaces are of no significance, when they later state that the site is hardly used in the off-season.
Speculation that alcohol may be served on site and pished-up people will be casing nuisance ?
WTF ?!!!

Speculating on Planning Creep in the future is of no consequence to the current proposal, and would be addressed through the Planning System.

Tree screening around the perimeter is probably the main issue that might need to be addressed.

The rest is just b0ll0x, to be honest

Edited by Forest Hillbilly (25 Aug 2017 9.15pm)

Im no expert on planning but I've always been lead to believe it fairly easy for planners to refuse planning permission the first time for fairly minor reasons even the whims of the residents can have an impact on decisions even if these aren't based on the realities of planning laws.

Appeals however I understand is where this all gets sifted out and it basically comes a lot more down to laws. I.e. Planning laws, tick all the boxes and 95% of the time it'll pass through at appeal. NIMBYS unless they have deep pockets to tie up the courts can't actually stop a legally sound planning application. At least that's my general understanding.

It matters not if they like something or not, at appeal it should all come down to the letter of the law.

Alert a moderator to this post

Dan1994 Wallington 03 Sep 17 1.29pm
Surprised they didn't reject the cricket ground's proposal due to them not being based in Kent for the past half century. [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Dan1994

Wallington 03 Sep 17 1.29pm

Surprised they didn't reject the cricket ground's proposal due to them not being based in Kent for the past half century.

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 4 of 4 << First < 1 2 3 4

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Training Ground Plans Rejected

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors