Thursday, December 01, 2011

This is how planning decisions are made.

One of the recent decisions that got made in the November 8th Planning meeting was regarding a temporary change of use on a parcel of land from industrial to residential. The full decision can be found covering pages 27 to 59 in this document.

I'll summarise:

Stourport Town Council - Recommend Refusal
Highway Agency - no comment
Environment Agency - Recommend Refusal
Severn Trent Water - no comment
Planning Policy - Recommend Refusal
Worcestershire Regulatory Services:
(Contaminated land) - it's industrial and as the change is to residential it needs a certificate.
(Noise) - "probably the most environmentally hostile sites within the District"  Recommend Refusal.
West Mercia Police - "The area in which this application is proposed has one of the highest rates of burglary in the District." Recommend Refusal
Health and Safety Executive - No hazards
Strategic Housing Services Manager - failed to answer
Worcestershire County Council Gypsy Liaison Officer - The people already living without approval on the site seem fine. Recommend Approval.
Watercourse Officer - Recommend Refusal.
Neighbours: Nine Objections. Recommend Refusal;
Seven signatures Recommend Approval
Officer comments: Recommend Refusal.

So casting your eyes over all the expert opinions the result should be quite obvious - the committee approved it. How did they come to this decision:

However, at the last Planning Committee, Members indicated that they were minded to approve the application on the basis that:
  1. there is an identified need for pitches;
  2. the site is located adjacent to Nunns Corner, a tolerated travellers site within the same floodzone;
  3. there is sufficient early warning of the flooding of the River Severn to allow occupiers to evacuate; and
  4. there are a lack of alternative sites.
Or to rephrase
  1. The pitches are required
  2. Two wrongs make a right
  3. They've got time to pack up and move
  4. For some reason none of the other 15 sites listed by the Baker report count
Seriously read these pages and see how many times this application is recommended for refusal with some arse-grab reason being found to cancel it out which amounts to 'But we really need more pitches'. It's pathetic.


Orphi said...

So, let me get this straight…

“We're going to approve this because there's nowhere better”