Planning
Sorry to have taken so long starting this topic. It is probably the most contentious issue at parish level and I know that passions are raised by but do resist making libellous comments. Anything that accuses an identifiable person of wrongdoing is libel. So "we all know the recent applicant in FV/MN has friends in high places" is superficially vague but both identity and wrongdoing are stated. I understand that you cannot libel councils.
I don't think that corruption is a problem but there is some weakness in the planning office over retrospective applications and some inconsistencies between small applications and large. I have kept an eye on the relative success of FV and MN applications. Quite a few FV have been refused but none of these refusals seem particularily suspicious. I wonder which "council" is referred to in the posts, is it MN Parish Council, West Dorset District Council or FV Parish Meeting (not a actually a council at all)?
I don't think that corruption is a problem but there is some weakness in the planning office over retrospective applications and some inconsistencies between small applications and large. I have kept an eye on the relative success of FV and MN applications. Quite a few FV have been refused but none of these refusals seem particularily suspicious. I wonder which "council" is referred to in the posts, is it MN Parish Council, West Dorset District Council or FV Parish Meeting (not a actually a council at all)?
posted by John at
7:02 am
17 Comments:
No but what about the ones that have been passed?LL
By
Anonymous, at Thursday, 14 September, 2006
I think that there is something terribly wrong with the planning system,and to say there is nothing underhand is hard to believe when you go over all the applications that have got through.Tempers are running high over this issue and to be honest the council seem to take little in and if they do maybe some comments are a little to close to the truth to comment on,when will the planning system work for all instead of just a few.
By
Anonymous, at Thursday, 14 September, 2006
I agree there is certainly something suspect going on,I have looked at the planning applications and have noticed very few are getting passed in FV I live in MN and even I feel that FV is getting a raw deal,we get more houses in MN and more traffic mainly due to larger projects and it does seem unfair that FV should be shunned by the council.Also i would like to know why there are no affordable houses at the station why were these passed without affordable housing being part of the project,MN parish council should have pushed for this rather than just thinking about profit from new housing.If this continues MN will end up like all the other villages and residents will suffer,after all we elect the council maybe we should have a change.Let FV have some of the growth they have children who can't afford to live in the village and could do with more housing after all they have the school in their parish more should be done for them so if any councillors read this buck up your ideas or get out.DD
By
Anonymous, at Saturday, 16 September, 2006
The planning is a bloody joke all these big developers allowed everything but everybody else can go to hell.Its about time that the council all of them helped the local people by this i don't mean the developers the individuals who get a rough deal.I also live in MN and feel that FV get nothing everything is centred around MN as it is the larger parish,they have the school and i feel it is about time they got a better deal,they have to put up with the extra traffic and noise which our parish has caused and continue to do so.Why cant they have housing go through is it because there is something going on with the system?FV residents deserve a bit more credit and support not the continual grief it gets.PM
By
Anonymous, at Tuesday, 19 September, 2006
How can some people get planning on land outside the building boundary and others cant?Oh I forgot they are builders thats why others obviously have the wrong name and not the right contacts.PO
By
Anonymous, at Tuesday, 19 September, 2006
I agree with all the comments made obout the planning system it is wrong and developers get away with murder.There was alot of people that did object to some of the planning but they were ignored as usual and the builders got what they wanted,the council should be ashamed it is starting to look very suspect with certain people getting it all give others a chance.The building outside the boundery was disgusting but yet again they got away with it,and as for the affordable housing at the station MN parish council SHOULD have pushed for it as local people are being pushed out of our own villages by this developement.The Parish council the WDDC and the builders should be ashamed of themselves after all its them killing off the communities....
By
Anonymous, at Tuesday, 19 September, 2006
I have read the various comments on planning with increasing bewilderment. Some people are clearly angry but it seems a rather undirected anger.
First the matter of the development at the Station. The statement that there are no "affordable houses" is simply and plainly wrong. I believe that about seven of the twenty odd dwellings are of this type and they will presumably be administered by someone like Magna.
Second, the assertion that the Parish Council has not pushed for affordable housing - well this is wrong too. In fact the Parish Council has no choice in the matter - all new developments must, by law, include around 30% affordable housing. Furthermore the affordable housing development outside the boundary was supported by the PC because it was the only place where affordable housing could be built.
Third, without doing a great deal of analysis on the individual applications, about 5 out of the last 20 applications for FV (excluding repeats) were rejected. This does not seem particularily excessive. The individual rejections, on the whole, do not seem unreasonable. MN has a slightly better "hit rate" but not much. Some recent apps for individual new houses have been refused in MN just as they have in FV. If someone believes that something fishy is going on (though the questions how, why and who do, I think, demonstrate the absurdity of such an assertion) they would have to demonstrate application by application that the decison was perverse and clearly biased in favour of MN. If anyone wants to have a go at this then I would be interested to see it.
One correspondent said, with regards to the lack of new affordable housing in FV, that councillors should "buck up their ideas or get out". I have never been one to shirk from criticising MNPC or FVPM but there is no reason why or method by which MNPC can affect planning in FV and FV doesn't have any councillors. WDDC councillors have no say on planning unless they are on the planning committee and this only decides a minority of apps.. Remember also that councils, except in rare instances, do not apply for planning approval - that is for individuals and developers. If no-one has applied to build a development in FV then no council can force someone to do so.
The arguments on this Blog present FV as the victim - not getting the new developments it needs - but it could equally be argued that MN is the victim as, so the argument might go, it has developments foisted on it that the people do not want.
By
John, at Thursday, 21 September, 2006
I beleive something was attempted a few years ago to prove this but was slapped down as one person involved(no names mentioned) was a well known member of MN and something to do with the council,so funny enough nothing was taken further.PD
By
Anonymous, at Saturday, 23 September, 2006
is any of the housing by the church affordable housing?and I think it is true MN may be the victim in this case,it's a shame that all the housing going up in MN has happened as the so called village enviroment is being taken away it is more like a small Town now,and sadly FV will be swallowed up by it eventually.As for planning in FV I think people have given up bothering about getting planning,sadly most of the planning that has gone through is yet again by developers rather than individuals.The point I think people are making is that FV has little housing for thier children etc why not extend the boundary this will at least allow some small developments to go up.The building outside the boundary mentioned I believe is not MN but the building outside the FV boundary,wht is good for one should be good for the other but sadly in this case yet again that is not the case.Overall this issue will never be resolved and we will all just have to sit back and watch while the housing dept get on with whatever they want.....
By
Anonymous, at Saturday, 23 September, 2006
Lets face it everything is going up in MN population vandalism pollution houses it is a shame we are losing our village roots and it will only get worse.The village has got rough around the edges and as a resident I for one am starting to hate it,what are the Parish Council doing about it,I hope something soon as it will be too late.
By
Anonymous, at Wednesday, 27 September, 2006
I am thinking of changing my name then maybe all my planning applications will go through as well,alot depends on a name oh as well as contacts from the past....
By
Anonymous, at Sunday, 01 October, 2006
Regarding the calor tanks,does this mean that if we go ahead and put a planning application in when the work we want is done and then withdraw it we get to keep the alterations without the proper planning,if this is the case surely we should all go ahead and do it(or does it just apply to certain people)....
By
Anonymous, at Wednesday, 29 November, 2006
I have recently heard that enforcement is on the cards over the calor gas tanks! Lets keep our fingers crossed. I do think that poor enforcement brings the whole thing into disrepute.
By
John, at Wednesday, 29 November, 2006
Is there any news on the enforcement order or are they going to get away with keeping them?
By
Anonymous, at Wednesday, 20 December, 2006
I hear that it is likely that the tanks will be removed and some other heating system for the houses devised. Good news indeed.
By
John, at Friday, 22 December, 2006
Maybe publishing the new planning policies would be a good idea as everybody deserves the same chance of planning and not just the select few PO
By
Anonymous, at Tuesday, 16 January, 2007
Could somebody tell me why one certain builder has got nearly all there planning through and why nobody keeps an eye on the planning applications.It has been mentioned how MN gets the majority of planning approved but FV does not.The path in FV has been put back it seems that FV is always let down by the Councils and councillors why is it that its so hard to get planning in FV when they too have the need for housing for thier kids,the school is in FV not MN it seems that MN think they are above the rest of us that live in this village and its about time something was done about it.its said that FV does not pay the same rates as MN why the hell should we when we get sod all for it anyway.
By
Anonymous, at Thursday, 15 February, 2007
Post a Comment
<< Home