Today's most viewed
MP worried over flats plan anger
LOCAL anger at plans to build 33 flats reflect wider concerns over disillusionment with politics, says a Swindon MP.
Anne Snelgrove, the representative for South Swindon, met members of the Radnor Street and Area Residents Association over proposals for a block of 21 flats in Shelley Street and a further 12 in nearby Radnor Street.
While the MP assured the residents that she was on their side in the fight against "unsympathetic" planning applications, she said she was concerned at comments about local politics.
George Brockbanks, of the Residents' Association, said: "People are sitting around talking about problems with parking and new developments.
"Ask any of them and they'll say what difference does it make talking to your councillor? It'll happen anyway."
The residents are opposed to plans by Ember Construction to build a block of 21 flats, with parking and landscaping, at the top of Shelley Street.
They say that the three-storey building will not be in keeping with the area, it will add pressure to the drainage system and exacerbate parking problems.
A previous proposal for 30 flats on the site was withdrawn, and one for 24 flats was refused.
A further application is to build a block of 12 flats in Radnor Street, on the site of the Radnor Stores.
Eastcott councillor and leader of the Liberal Democrat group, Stan Pajak, insisted residents' interests were well represented.
He said: "We are listening to them and we are acting for them.
"The Radnor Street and Area Residents' Association have been very vocal in their objection to this plan and there has been a meeting between developers and members of the association.
Mrs Snelgrove said: "I think it is really worrying that so soon after a local election, when only 29 per cent of those eligible went to the polls, there is this level of disillusionment with the work done by councillors."
She added: "Something has to be done to re-engage people with the democratic process."
11:07am Tuesday 13th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Justin Tomlinson, Taw Hill, Swindon on 11:30am Tue 13 May 08
Yes Anne you are right, something has to be done to re-engage people. Perhaps a General Election?
Yes Anne you are right, something has to be done to re-engage people. Perhaps a General Election?
Posted by: Voice of Sanity, Swindon on 11:48am Tue 13 May 08
'attaboy Justin!!!!
The sooner the better.
'attaboy Justin!!!!
The sooner the better.
Posted by: Justin Tomlinson, Taw Hill, Swindon on 12:07pm Tue 13 May 08
As Anne is unlikely to help push for one...
The serious point which causes frustration with the planning process is that there is very little flexibility in the system, ie the planning laws / rules are often on the side of the developers. It is staggering to see how many things that can't be considered when looking for an objection (as I know from experience from a variety of issues in my ward over the years).
I think the system should take a greater account of local residents wishes. When I have major planning issues I normally bring the developers to meet the residents face to face, these seems to help focus the minds though still often only relies on the goodwill of the developers not to take a rejection to appeal.
As Anne is unlikely to help push for one...
The serious point which causes frustration with the planning process is that there is very little flexibility in the system, ie the planning laws / rules are often on the side of the developers. It is staggering to see how many things that can't be considered when looking for an objection (as I know from experience from a variety of issues in my ward over the years).
I think the system should take a greater account of local residents wishes. When I have major planning issues I normally bring the developers to meet the residents face to face, these seems to help focus the minds though still often only relies on the goodwill of the developers not to take a rejection to appeal.
Posted by: Polymath, Swindon on 12:11pm Tue 13 May 08
Swindon is turning into a city and SN1 needs to "grow up". Unless we want to carry building out into the countryside even more than we already do? Town centre development is feasible. There is existing infrastructure and services. People can use public transport to access any other part of the town or indeed to travel on the train. If you want car parking spaces, live in the suburbs.
Swindon is turning into a city and SN1 needs to "grow up". Unless we want to carry building out into the countryside even more than we already do? Town centre development is feasible. There is existing infrastructure and services. People can use public transport to access any other part of the town or indeed to travel on the train. If you want car parking spaces, live in the suburbs.
Posted by: Ian13, Swindon on 12:15pm Tue 13 May 08
How about listening to what the public want and actually doing it?
Or honouring election pledges - a vote on Europe and an exemption from the smoking ban for non-food pubs and clubs!
How about listening to what the public want and actually doing it?
Or honouring election pledges - a vote on Europe and an exemption from the smoking ban for non-food pubs and clubs!
Posted by: Tobz on 12:23pm Tue 13 May 08
How ironic that the woman who cannot and won't listen is criticising councillors for the feeling of disillusionment and disengagement! Check your own voting record Anne - and then consider why we don't believe that politicians act in the interests of their electorate...
How ironic that the woman who cannot and won't listen is criticising councillors for the feeling of disillusionment and disengagement! Check your own voting record Anne - and then consider why we don't believe that politicians act in the interests of their electorate...
Posted by: stfcrule, old town on 12:27pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Polymath[/bold] wrote:
Swindon is turning into a city and SN1 needs to "grow up". Unless we want to carry building out into the countryside even more than we already do? Town centre development is feasible. There is existing infrastructure and services. People can use public transport to access any other part of the town or indeed to travel on the train. If you want car parking spaces, live in the suburbs.[/quote] Are you serious ?????
Polymath wrote:
Swindon is turning into a city and SN1 needs to "grow up". Unless we want to carry building out into the countryside even more than we already do? Town centre development is feasible. There is existing infrastructure and services. People can use public transport to access any other part of the town or indeed to travel on the train. If you want car parking spaces, live in the suburbs.
Are you serious ?????
Posted by: Polymath, Swindon on 3:02pm Tue 13 May 08
Yes, I'm serious. I'm open-minded though, so what's your opinion on the matter?
Yes, I'm serious. I'm open-minded though, so what's your opinion on the matter?
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 3:04pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote]Mrs Snelgrove said: "I think it is really worrying that so soon after a local election, when only 29 per cent of those eligible went to the polls, there is this level of disillusionment with the work done by councillors."[/quote]
I find this comment not only insulting by hyporcritcal in the extreme.
Myself, and around 70 other residents, campaigned against yet more flats and the council Planning Committee voted against the application.
Unfortunately, although she was happy to pose for a photo opportunity about her 'helping' our cause, Anne Snelgrove did absolutely nothing to help.
Everyone knows that John Prescott's Planning Inspectorate regulations means that councillors are all but forced to allow any development that is technically legal, no matter how morally wrong or unsuitable for the area concerned.
It is an absolute disgrace that Snelgrove is implying that the council are at fault here.
The fact is that peope voted Tory in the local elections because Labour cannot be trusted, do not listen to the people and constantly ignore the common good.
People are sick to death of politics because they are sick to death of a ten year old, has-been (never was?) government that doesn't listen, doesn't care and simply doesn't want to know about anything other than the Stalinist line it takes.
Anne Snelgrove has just sunk local politics to an even lower position with this remarkably deluded attack on a council the people have only just resoundingly voted [italic]for[/italic].
Trust me, Ms Snelgrove, they will not be voting for you whenever we're finally allowed our democratic right to oust you and your increasingly pathetic government!
Mrs Snelgrove said: "I think it is really worrying that so soon after a local election, when only 29 per cent of those eligible went to the polls, there is this level of disillusionment with the work done by councillors."
I find this comment not only insulting by hyporcritcal in the extreme.
Myself, and around 70 other residents, campaigned against yet more flats and the council Planning Committee voted against the application.
Unfortunately, although she was happy to pose for a photo opportunity about her 'helping' our cause, Anne Snelgrove did absolutely nothing to help.
Everyone knows that John Prescott's Planning Inspectorate regulations means that councillors are all but forced to allow any development that is technically legal, no matter how morally wrong or unsuitable for the area concerned.
It is an absolute disgrace that Snelgrove is implying that the council are at fault here.
The fact is that peope voted Tory in the local elections because Labour cannot be trusted, do not listen to the people and constantly ignore the common good.
People are sick to death of politics because they are sick to death of a ten year old, has-been (never was?) government that doesn't listen, doesn't care and simply doesn't want to know about anything other than the Stalinist line it takes.
Anne Snelgrove has just sunk local politics to an even lower position with this remarkably deluded attack on a council the people have only just resoundingly voted
for.
Trust me, Ms Snelgrove, they will not be voting for you whenever we're finally allowed our democratic right to oust you and your increasingly pathetic government!
Posted by: Captain T, Swindon on 3:05pm Tue 13 May 08
Justin, you and Anne are typify the problem at heart here. She blames the councillors, because the council is Tory controlled, and you blame planning laws, which reading between the lines, means you naturally blame the (Labour) government.
This is where you have to draw the line. The issue here is that residents do not believe the buildings would be inkeeping. How about a little bit of cooperation and working together to try and put a stop to the development and both of you get off your political high horses and stop blaming each other. That's why only 29% of those eligible voted.
Justin, you and Anne are typify the problem at heart here. She blames the councillors, because the council is Tory controlled, and you blame planning laws, which reading between the lines, means you naturally blame the (Labour) government.
This is where you have to draw the line. The issue here is that residents do not believe the buildings would be inkeeping. How about a little bit of cooperation and working together to try and put a stop to the development and both of you get off your political high horses and stop blaming each other. That's why only 29% of those eligible voted.
Posted by: Old_Chap, Swindon on 3:18pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]Tobz[/bold] wrote:
How ironic that the woman who cannot and won't listen is criticising councillors for the feeling of disillusionment and disengagement! Check your own voting record Anne - and then consider why we don't believe that politicians act in the interests of their electorate...[/quote] Spot on Tobz!!!
The sooner Snelgrove is recycled the better.
Tobz wrote:
How ironic that the woman who cannot and won't listen is criticising councillors for the feeling of disillusionment and disengagement! Check your own voting record Anne - and then consider why we don't believe that politicians act in the interests of their electorate...
Spot on Tobz!!!
The sooner Snelgrove is recycled the better.
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 3:23pm Tue 13 May 08
Captain T, I know from personal experience that the matter is always out of the council's hands.
Since Prescott's new planning application regulations came into effect, the only applications council's can turn down are those that are illegal.
All legal applications are able to be turned down but the developer then simply appeals to the Planning Inspectorate who then grant the application and fine the relevant council.
This IS a government legislation/policy problem, not the council's.
Captain T, I know from personal experience that the matter is always out of the council's hands.
Since Prescott's new planning application regulations came into effect, the only applications council's can turn down are those that are illegal.
All legal applications are able to be turned down but the developer then simply appeals to the Planning Inspectorate who then grant the application and fine the relevant council.
This IS a government legislation/policy problem, not the council's.
Posted by: Captain T, Swindon on 3:41pm Tue 13 May 08
Frontier, I realise the council don't have the clout we'd perhaps rather they did. What I'm saying is that we've got Tomlinson and Snelgrove moaning about each other and what they should be doing is either working with the developer or lobbying the government for a change in the planning laws.
This story comes across as Snelgrove blaming the council and doing nothing and Tomlinson throwing his hands up in the air and saying 'nothing we can do about it'
It's time everyone got together and tried to do something about these kind of local issues and do what the people of Swindon elected them to do.
Frontier, I realise the council don't have the clout we'd perhaps rather they did. What I'm saying is that we've got Tomlinson and Snelgrove moaning about each other and what they should be doing is either working with the developer or lobbying the government for a change in the planning laws.
This story comes across as Snelgrove blaming the council and doing nothing and Tomlinson throwing his hands up in the air and saying 'nothing we can do about it'
It's time everyone got together and tried to do something about these kind of local issues and do what the people of Swindon elected them to do.
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 4:11pm Tue 13 May 08
The reality is that Tomlinson can't do anything about it.
Nor can Snelgrove - unless, of course, she requests that her government changes their policy. Something she will never, unfortunately do.
After all, we all know what a fine political statesman John Prescott turned out to be.
Pass another block of 'luxury' flats with that trifle and condensed milk would you?
The reality is that Tomlinson can't do anything about it.
Nor can Snelgrove - unless, of course, she requests that her government changes their policy. Something she will never, unfortunately do.
After all, we all know what a fine political statesman John Prescott turned out to be.
Pass another block of 'luxury' flats with that trifle and condensed milk would you?
Posted by: HoneyPie, The Shire on 4:57pm Tue 13 May 08
That woman has more front than Selfridges!
That woman has more front than Selfridges!
Posted by: LordBelacqua, Swindon on 4:59pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote][bold]HoneyPie[/bold] wrote:
That woman has more front than Selfridges![/quote] Haha, quite so!
I do wonder if Ms Snelgrove is just naive though - after all, we all know that this government is very good a losing information, not so good at releasing it...
HoneyPie wrote:
That woman has more front than Selfridges!
Haha, quite so!
I do wonder if Ms Snelgrove is just naive though - after all, we all know that this government is very good a losing information, not so good at releasing it...
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 5:04pm Tue 13 May 08
Ahhh, now it all becomes clear.
Labour have obviously gone out today to portray themselves as actually caring that people are sick of politics - even though it's a decade of Labour that have made people sick of politics.
Should have known Snelgrove would be simply doing as her party tells her.
Here's the 'delightful' Hazel Blears telling us how awful we think politics is, yet seemingly unable to realise it's entirely her own government's fault:
tinyurl.com/698pox
It's a shame Anne Snelgrove used such an important topic as the uncontrolled proliferation of flats in Swindon on which to hang her opportunistic press release on.
Yet again proves she's far more interested in her job and her government than anyone or anything in Swindon.
Ahhh, now it all becomes clear.
Labour have obviously gone out today to portray themselves as actually caring that people are sick of politics - even though it's a decade of Labour that have made people sick of politics.
Should have known Snelgrove would be simply doing as her party tells her.
Here's the 'delightful' Hazel Blears telling us how awful we think politics is, yet seemingly unable to realise it's entirely her own government's fault:
tinyurl.com/698pox
It's a shame Anne Snelgrove used such an important topic as the uncontrolled proliferation of flats in Swindon on which to hang her opportunistic press release on.
Yet again proves she's far more interested in her job and her government than anyone or anything in Swindon.
Posted by: I Too Could Be a Councillor, Swindon on 7:24pm Tue 13 May 08
Yes! Labour. I blame the government.
Our Tory Council are brilliant, beautiful.
They've never done anything wrong, always listen to the public, especially when it comes to the town's history and nature reserves.
The Swindon Tory council are perfect, not in the least bit power crazy.
Ouch I stubbed my toe! That,s Labours fault I expect.
Mike Bawden (Tory) boasted about initiating the Coate fiasco (which isn't over yet) That's labours' fault.
I'm only writing this because Mr Prescott told me to do it.
I forgot to mow the lawn yesterday, all labours fault.
Labour Labour Labour.
If only they were angels, like our Tory council.
Bah! Labour Labour Labour.
I expect it was Labour that said "put a ten storey tower block on top of the Mechanics'" and not the Labour government that called the plans in whilst the Tory council rolled over.
Labour this labour that and a bit more Labour ZZZZZzzzzzzzz
Yes! Labour. I blame the government.
Our Tory Council are brilliant, beautiful.
They've never done anything wrong, always listen to the public, especially when it comes to the town's history and nature reserves.
The Swindon Tory council are perfect, not in the least bit power crazy.
Ouch I stubbed my toe! That,s Labours fault I expect.
Mike Bawden (Tory) boasted about initiating the Coate fiasco (which isn't over yet) That's labours' fault.
I'm only writing this because Mr Prescott told me to do it.
I forgot to mow the lawn yesterday, all labours fault.
Labour Labour Labour.
If only they were angels, like our Tory council.
Bah! Labour Labour Labour.
I expect it was Labour that said "put a ten storey tower block on top of the Mechanics'" and not the Labour government that called the plans in whilst the Tory council rolled over.
Labour this labour that and a bit more Labour ZZZZZzzzzzzzz
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 7:27pm Tue 13 May 08
God don't you just love politics, 'it's my ball, play by my rules, or I'll go home'. I have to say had a really constructive meting today with Glyn Bennett, drainage chappie at SBC. I think my two colleagues and I came away feeling we can implement a plan for South Marston to alleviate any potential threat of flooding. Not often I compliment SBC but on this occasion it was hopefully worthwhile.
God don't you just love politics, 'it's my ball, play by my rules, or I'll go home'. I have to say had a really constructive meting today with Glyn Bennett, drainage chappie at SBC. I think my two colleagues and I came away feeling we can implement a plan for South Marston to alleviate any potential threat of flooding. Not often I compliment SBC but on this occasion it was hopefully worthwhile.
Posted by: I Too Could Be a Councillor, Swindon on 7:36pm Tue 13 May 08
Potential risk of flooding????
That'll be Labour's fault, I expect
Potential risk of flooding????
That'll be Labour's fault, I expect
Posted by: I Too Could Be a Councillor, Swindon on 7:39pm Tue 13 May 08
oops!
I forgot to mention, that I forgot to take my sandwiches to work today.
That's Labours fault that is.
oops!
I forgot to mention, that I forgot to take my sandwiches to work today.
That's Labours fault that is.
Posted by: HoneyPie, The Shire on 9:17pm Tue 13 May 08
If you too could be a Councillor, why are you not a Councillor?
Is that Labour's fault, too?
If it is, they may be doing something right. So who's fault would that be?
Please, do tell us...
If you too could be a Councillor, why are you not a Councillor?
Is that Labour's fault, too?
If it is, they may be doing something right. So who's fault would that be?
Please, do tell us...
Posted by: oldtowner, Old Town on 9:54pm Tue 13 May 08
[quote]She added: "Something has to be done to re-engage people with the democratic process."[/quote]
Anne Snelgrove's got a cheek to talk about the democratic process.
How about the democratic right to vote for the EU Constitution, Anne? Something you promised in your manifesto then voted against this year.
She added: "Something has to be done to re-engage people with the democratic process."
Anne Snelgrove's got a cheek to talk about the democratic process.
How about the democratic right to vote for the EU Constitution, Anne? Something you promised in your manifesto then voted against this year.
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 11:13pm Tue 13 May 08
I Too Could Be a Councillor, nice to see you still don't actually have the first clue about what you're talking about.
The irony about your stupid post is that the current situation with planning applications very much IS all Labour's fault.
It's as simple as that. In fact, some local councils have scrapped Council Planning Committees entirely, as all they can do now is accept applications that are legal and prevent applications that are illegal - they have no power, whatsoever, to prevent legal planning applications going ahead, no matter how destructive or unsuitable those plans might be.
You might not like that, you might think it's a shame that Labour have shot themselves in the foot [italic]yet again[/italic] with their policies but that's the reality.
I Too Could Be a Councillor, nice to see you still don't actually have the first clue about what you're talking about.
The irony about your stupid post is that the current situation with planning applications very much IS all Labour's fault.
It's as simple as that. In fact, some local councils have scrapped Council Planning Committees entirely, as all they can do now is accept applications that are legal and prevent applications that are illegal - they have no power, whatsoever, to prevent legal planning applications going ahead, no matter how destructive or unsuitable those plans might be.
You might not like that, you might think it's a shame that Labour have shot themselves in the foot
yet again with their policies but that's the reality.
Posted by: amlorusso, Swindon on 3:42am Wed 14 May 08
I read this and I never want to be politician, I mean who wants the job with people complaining about people doing illegal things not being stopped, and people complaining about somebody who is acting within the law not being stopped, just because you don't like it.
Even if SBC could turn down a legal proposal, why should they bother on the basis of what's been posted in this forum? Is anyone even remotely interested in discussing the merits of the planning application itself, or shall we throw some more mud?
Kudos to RFM for the only moment of level-headedness.
I read this and I never want to be politician, I mean who wants the job with people complaining about people doing illegal things not being stopped, and people complaining about somebody who is acting within the law not being stopped, just because you don't like it.
Even if SBC could turn down a legal proposal, why should they bother on the basis of what's been posted in this forum? Is anyone even remotely interested in discussing the merits of the planning application itself, or shall we throw some more mud?
Kudos to RFM for the only moment of level-headedness.
Posted by: HoneyPie, The Shire on 6:23am Wed 14 May 08
AML - Just because something is legal, doesn't necessarily mean that it is right. There are always people who will find loopholes in the law to exploit for financial gain (taxation is another fine example...)
Many of these 'complaints' are as a result of laws that do not take into account the merits of the planning application - the views of the people who have to live with the development are not taken seriously. So yes, they will complain - what else can they do?
Local planning decisions should be made by people (and/or their representatives) who live in the locality, with any potential benefits and drawbacks fully discussed before the plans are agreed. There also needs to be some sort of independent right of appeal to a higher level for the local residents - not just the developers. The developers will move on to (demolish) pastures new - the residents will have to grin and bear it.
Bad laws do exist. If nobody complains about them, why bother changing them? And it's the same theory for Politicians. They know what they are getting themselves into when they put themselves forward for election.
Our local MP doesn't appear to want to discuss the merits of this planning application, but try to score political points. Hence the posts on this forum. Or should we all just ignore her political mud-slinging?
AML - Just because something is legal, doesn't necessarily mean that it is right. There are always people who will find loopholes in the law to exploit for financial gain (taxation is another fine example...)
Many of these 'complaints' are as a result of laws that do not take into account the merits of the planning application - the views of the people who have to live with the development are not taken seriously. So yes, they will complain - what else can they do?
Local planning decisions should be made by people (and/or their representatives) who live in the locality, with any potential benefits and drawbacks fully discussed before the plans are agreed. There also needs to be some sort of independent right of appeal to a higher level for the local residents - not just the developers. The developers will move on to (demolish) pastures new - the residents will have to grin and bear it.
Bad laws do exist. If nobody complains about them, why bother changing them? And it's the same theory for Politicians. They know what they are getting themselves into when they put themselves forward for election.
Our local MP doesn't appear to want to discuss the merits of this planning application, but try to score political points. Hence the posts on this forum. Or should we all just ignore her political mud-slinging?
Posted by: Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon on 7:07am Wed 14 May 08
amlorusso, thank you, I do my best. I think many people are missing a much wider issue here. In an economic climate that is only going one way, and that is South, Swindon could end up being a waste land if developers get fed up with these constant delays. We actually need them now, more than they need us.
amlorusso, thank you, I do my best. I think many people are missing a much wider issue here. In an economic climate that is only going one way, and that is South, Swindon could end up being a waste land if developers get fed up with these constant delays. We actually need them now, more than they need us.
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 10:15am Wed 14 May 08
HoneyPie, great post. You've nailed all the salient points.
amlorusso, have you ever looked into how planning applications work? If you look at the grounds that are permissible for objection you will see that they're carried over from days gone by and have very little relevance or importance for people today.
On the other hand, the specific areas that people are not allowed to object to are directly relevant to the reduction in quality of life and living standards that new developments (especially blocks of flats) often create.
Whether Tory or Labour, most recent legislation has been solely in favour of developers - with residents given virtually no control over what happens in the areas they live, work and pay tax in.
Labour have now removed Council's power to veto unwanted developments and so we see the free for all that we have in Swindon where any available land/empty buildings are immediately converted into prison-cell like blocks of flats.
This is often very cynically done under the pretence of providing 'affordable' housing, whilst in reality it's a quick and easy way to maximise developer profits.
On that point, I am not against developers making money - far from it - but that should not be at the expense of communities and with the destruction of things that make various areas what they are.
Old Town is the classic example of this. Once one of the most pleasant areas of Swindon it has been ruined by over-development and a never ending barrage of flats.
As HoneyPie says, just because something's not illegal doesn't mean it's good or desirable.
An example of just how ridiculous town planning regulations are is the fact that in any given area, each planning application can only ever be considered in isolation.
That means that a developer could submit plans for 10 blocks of flats in one area and each must be considered as if it were the only one. In reality, it means the direct [italic]opposite[/italic] of 'planning'.
HoneyPie, great post. You've nailed all the salient points.
amlorusso, have you ever looked into how planning applications work? If you look at the grounds that are permissible for objection you will see that they're carried over from days gone by and have very little relevance or importance for people today.
On the other hand, the specific areas that people are not allowed to object to are directly relevant to the reduction in quality of life and living standards that new developments (especially blocks of flats) often create.
Whether Tory or Labour, most recent legislation has been solely in favour of developers - with residents given virtually no control over what happens in the areas they live, work and pay tax in.
Labour have now removed Council's power to veto unwanted developments and so we see the free for all that we have in Swindon where any available land/empty buildings are immediately converted into prison-cell like blocks of flats.
This is often very cynically done under the pretence of providing 'affordable' housing, whilst in reality it's a quick and easy way to maximise developer profits.
On that point, I am not against developers making money - far from it - but that should not be at the expense of communities and with the destruction of things that make various areas what they are.
Old Town is the classic example of this. Once one of the most pleasant areas of Swindon it has been ruined by over-development and a never ending barrage of flats.
As HoneyPie says, just because something's not illegal doesn't mean it's good or desirable.
An example of just how ridiculous town planning regulations are is the fact that in any given area, each planning application can only ever be considered in isolation.
That means that a developer could submit plans for 10 blocks of flats in one area and each must be considered as if it were the only one. In reality, it means the direct
opposite of 'planning'.
Posted by: Robert Buckland on 1:54pm Wed 14 May 08
Local residents have good reason to feel pessimistic, because this application is yet another chapter in what for them has been at twenty-five year saga. The land at the top of Shelley Street is a geological nightmare. My understanding is that there are five watercourses running into it, making it unstable to say the least. The concrete remains of the original, failed attempt to develop the land in the 1980s remain in the ground, submerged in water. In 2005, a similar application by the same developer was rejected by the Council. Residents are entitled to ask the question: when is this going to end? The consultation process is already well under way and having spoken and met with residents, I know that they feel well and truly left out of things - in short, they feel worn down by events.
It is up to politicians to work with residents to help them gain access to information and to help ensure that their voices are heard.
Local residents have good reason to feel pessimistic, because this application is yet another chapter in what for them has been at twenty-five year saga. The land at the top of Shelley Street is a geological nightmare. My understanding is that there are five watercourses running into it, making it unstable to say the least. The concrete remains of the original, failed attempt to develop the land in the 1980s remain in the ground, submerged in water. In 2005, a similar application by the same developer was rejected by the Council. Residents are entitled to ask the question: when is this going to end? The consultation process is already well under way and having spoken and met with residents, I know that they feel well and truly left out of things - in short, they feel worn down by events.
It is up to politicians to work with residents to help them gain access to information and to help ensure that their voices are heard.
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 3:00pm Wed 14 May 08
Robert, at the risk of repeating myself... local politicians, be they councillors or MPs can do NOTHING to prevent any legal planning application from happenening.
Therefore, if the developer has submitted plans within current regulations (which is basically anything - interestingly there is a minimum dwelling per hectare limit, but no maximum...) then the plans will eventually be agreed, either by the council (as they have no choice) or by the Planning Inspectorate in Bristol (who, ultimately, can do as they please).
Robert, at the risk of repeating myself... local politicians, be they councillors or MPs can do NOTHING to prevent any legal planning application from happenening.
Therefore, if the developer has submitted plans within current regulations (which is basically anything - interestingly there is a minimum dwelling per hectare limit, but no maximum...) then the plans will eventually be agreed, either by the council (as they have no choice) or by the Planning Inspectorate in Bristol (who, ultimately, can do as they please).
Posted by: I Too Could Be a Councillor, Swindon on 7:46pm Wed 14 May 08
I blame Labour.
I've got wrinkles in my forehead. That wouldn't happen if our Tory council were in control.
I've got bags under my eyes, all Labour's fault.
I blame Labour
I blame Labour.
I've got wrinkles in my forehead. That wouldn't happen if our Tory council were in control.
I've got bags under my eyes, all Labour's fault.
I blame Labour
Posted by: Frontier(s) on 11:19pm Wed 14 May 08
I Too Could Be a Councillor, go back to the 'vision' thing and the [italic]hilarious[/italic] puns on developer's company names.
It was marginally more amusing but about as boring.
I Too Could Be a Councillor, go back to the 'vision' thing and the
hilarious puns on developer's company names.
It was marginally more amusing but about as boring.
Posted by: I Too Could Be a Councillor, Swindon on 6:16pm Thu 15 May 08
Tut Tut, Big Frontier Mac.
You Don't have the monopoly on blaming Labour you know.
Monopoly is a boring game. I blame Labour for that.
You could always do the "vision thing", but then you'd have to change [bold]your script[/bold] , and blame the Tories (SBC Majority).
Labour Labour Labour
Tut Tut, Big Frontier Mac.
You Don't have the monopoly on blaming Labour you know.
Monopoly is a boring game. I blame Labour for that.
You could always do the "vision thing", but then you'd have to change
your script , and blame the Tories (SBC Majority).
Labour Labour Labour
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
