|
|
Post by fed up fred on Oct 26, 2012 16:00:17 GMT -1
 Prior to plans being passed for a local development, a public inquiry, paid for by the Government, that means you and me through taxes, said that there would be two access roads to the site and went into great detail about how the junctions of these two roads and the main road would be laid out. The developer said "there will be one access from this site and that is non negotiable" The planning department decided one access road would be sufficient. 
|
|
|
|
Post by fed up fred on Oct 28, 2012 14:05:32 GMT -1
The Secretary of State stated that any council who had land earmarked for development should contact the SoS by the end of 2008, and could maybe have that land saved as development land. Any land not saved would revert back to it's previous use. BMC decided to ignore the SoS and later gave planning permission for large developments on three unsaved sites. When questioned about the way that BMC was over ruling the SoS BMC said "it had made a genuine error". BMC then called a meeting of it's Regulatory and Appeals Board, not to discuss how a council could make such a monumental mistake, but in fact to rubber stamp their decision to over rule the SoS and allow the developments to go ahead.
I didn't realise that councils had more power than the SoS and could just ignore them.
|
|
|
|
Post by fed up fred on Oct 30, 2012 21:03:41 GMT -1
One expects objections from the public about building applications to be taken seriously by planning panels, but one of our planners admitted, in front of witnesses that he tended to ignore people like me and took no notice of what people like me had to say.
I am just a normal resident who objected to a building development along with about 300 other residents and we did wonder what happened to our objections. well now we know.
|
|
|
|
Post by fed up fred on Dec 20, 2012 2:13:32 GMT -1
Once again the planning department has had to advertise that a developer wants to alter the original plans and states that the views of the public will be taken into account. What chance do we have when the views of 300 objectors were completely ignored and one of the planning officers a councillor Dredge told one of the objectors that he ignored anything that people like him had to say
|
|
|
|
Post by fed up fred on Mar 25, 2014 22:19:56 GMT -1
Some houses are being built locally, the plans were passed by a senior bradford council planning officer, the plans show the drains from these houses connecting up to a main drain running down the middle of the road, but there is NO drains running down the middle of the road. Obvious the planning officer has most certainly not done his job correctly and diligently. My opinion "he should be sacked for incompetence" but the sting in the tail is that the plans were drawn up and submitted by bradford council, using the name of another senior officer on the plans.
|
|
Prior to plans being passed for a local development, a public inquiry, paid for by the Government, that means you and me through taxes, said that there would be two access roads to the site and went into great detail about how the junctions of these two roads and the main road would be laid out. The developer said "there will be one access from this site and that is non negotiable" The planning department decided one access road would be sufficient. 