Jump to content


Photo

Save London's Gardens


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16 JMS

JMS

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 328 posts

Posted 28 December 2007 - 09:41 AM

Ziwa

An objection along the lines you mentioned will carry very little weight indeed.

However, as I mentioned above I will be surprised if this application (even though it is in outline) gets permission - there simply isn't enough information provided to justify it, to the extent that I am surprised the application even got registered.

#17 Ziwa

Ziwa

    Member

  • Members 1
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,403 posts

Posted 28 December 2007 - 03:52 PM

So maybe we should have a local workshop on how to file planning objections. I really have no idea how to do it properly. I guess it takes a fair amount of research and time….not simply a slightly more involved parallel to signing a petition

#18 Zirconium

Zirconium

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 532 posts

Posted 28 December 2007 - 07:36 PM

Ziwa
I'm not an expert in planning applications but it seems to me that your comments would have been very relevant considering that the garden is in a conservation area. I think it is very reasonable to object on the grounds that green space is being lost. After all the trees in that garden are "protected" - meaning they cannot be chopped down without the Council's permission. By objecting you are strengthening the Council's resolve to do something about it.

By and large if you read a planning application and respond to specific points made in the application I think they have to be considered by the planners.

#19 JMS

JMS

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 328 posts

Posted 30 December 2007 - 02:07 PM

Ziwa/Zirconium

Any objection to an application is noted and will have some weight attached to it. The issue is the degree of relevance and the extent of the weight to be attached to that individual objection which will them cumulatively be weighed up against the merits of the proposal.

An objection to a particular proposal which merely makes reference to some generalised comments rather than dealing with the specifics of that proposal (which could well include relating it back to more generalised matters) will be viewed in general terms. Furthermore, if you sign your objection off "peeved from peckham" it has the effect of diminishing the serious of your objection. This would be particulaly the case if (for example) you don't include your address.

Its the same principle with standard letters - if 20 local residents submit a standard letter of objection ie 20 letters all identical just signed by different residents etc (because usually what happens is one local resident produces them and gets all his neighbours to sign and submit them) - the weight of this objection will be significantly diminished even though 20 different residents may have each submitted it.

I think this scheme is very poorly thought out and presented by somebody of little development experience. But everything is a matter of judgement. There is a huge housing shortfall in London. there are new higher housing targets set by Ken Livingstone and the GLA the applicants will argue that this proposal will help meet these requirements. They may also argue (correctly) that backgardens constitute previously developed land. an officer at the Council will have to make a judgement call as to whether matters such as these outweigh any harm caused by the development.
Nothing is black and white in planning it is always a question of judgement.

I do think though that making comments about "short term developers" is unhelpful. That's a generality and may be the case in certain circumstances but each application is determined on its own individual merits (besides I think that if a developer offered £250k for somebody's backgarden a lot of people would think twice about their princples).

#20 James

James

    Member

  • Sponsors
  • 4,833 posts

Posted 30 December 2007 - 04:16 PM

Its the same principle with standard letters - if 20 local residents submit a standard letter of objection ie 20 letters all identical just signed by different residents etc (because usually what happens is one local resident produces them and gets all his neighbours to sign and submit them) - the weight of this objection will be significantly diminished even though 20 different residents may have each submitted it.

Web designers have a similar problem with search engines... if two pages look identical then only one will be indexed. We get around this problem by mixing up the text between versions so that they appear to look different even though the source information is the same. If twenty residents want to object to something then the main proponent should consider supplying the source text to each person electronically, so that they can doctor it and make each objection 'unique'.

European.vote - EU Referendum


#21 robdavis75

robdavis75

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 31 December 2007 - 03:50 PM

I knew nothing about the proposal as i live just outside the area that has been mailed by the council. Thanks for the tip-off Zirconium! I've just objected as it will remove another peice of woodland habitat from the local area - by the way Tawny Owls sometimes roost in and around Stambourne Woods, what a shame if they were to disappear. According to the website there are 17 objections so far (inc. mine). I hope more people do what i did and decide to object having seen Zirconium's posting!

#22 fungigirl

fungigirl

    Member

  • Members 2
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts

Posted 19 January 2008 - 07:50 PM

Planning was refused (good) 22 objections. :D

http://planning.croy...ine/35177_1.pdf

#23 Zirconium

Zirconium

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 532 posts

Posted 20 January 2008 - 10:35 PM

Well spotted Fungigirl.....this is indeed good news. I wonder if they will reapply?
Let's please watch out for other applications for backland development in large houses where there are ecological issues.

#24 Retired Member 1

Retired Member 1

    Member

  • Retired Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,716 posts

Posted 11 February 2008 - 01:24 PM

I have received an email from the COuncil confirming that the application was refused ;-)

GOOD !!!
Gipsy Hill Rocks!!!

#25 Spoon

Spoon

    Paolo Di Catio's mum

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,033 posts

Posted 11 February 2008 - 02:17 PM

I got the council's email too.

#26 Retired Member 1

Retired Member 1

    Member

  • Retired Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,716 posts

Posted 22 February 2008 - 12:56 PM

http://www.valshawcr...ndex.php?id=352

seems interesting
Gipsy Hill Rocks!!!

#27 Zirconium

Zirconium

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 532 posts

Posted 22 February 2008 - 03:19 PM

.....and http://www.valshawcr...ndex.php?id=351 though it doesn't say how many people responded in the survey!

#28 Borgus

Borgus

    Member

  • Members 3
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 739 posts

Posted 22 February 2008 - 05:43 PM

And it doesn't say how many of those who 'object' actually live in large houses that have been converted into flats or on land that was formerly part of someones garden years ago! ;)
"It does not require many words to speak the truth." - Chief Joseph