Roxanne Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 There is also some useful information contained in the minutes of this planning meeting dated 2017.Planning End Cafe 2017 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omobono Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 this was a disaster waiting to happen ,and typical of some applications that appear to be rushed through in spite of concerns being expressed , and government departments failing to fulfil their obligations to properly scrutinise these applications .no excuse the developer not having the finance required to have a proper survey of the cliff face , should never have been approved by the minister ! complete failing of the system ! so who pays now , its going to cost millions to sort out this mess ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 22 minutes ago, Omobono said: this was a disaster waiting to happen ,and typical of some applications that appear to be rushed through in spite of concerns being expressed , and government departments failing to fulfil their obligations to properly scrutinise these applications .no excuse the developer not having the finance required to have a proper survey of the cliff face , should never have been approved by the minister ! complete failing of the system ! so who pays now , its going to cost millions to sort out this mess ! the GMTP of course , what did you expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 33 minutes ago, Omobono said: this was a disaster waiting to happen ,and typical of some applications that appear to be rushed through in spite of concerns being expressed , and government departments failing to fulfil their obligations to properly scrutinise these applications .no excuse the developer not having the finance required to have a proper survey of the cliff face , should never have been approved by the minister ! complete failing of the system ! so who pays now , its going to cost millions to sort out this mess ! Insurance companies, either or both the landowners/developers & possibly the houses above Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 32 minutes ago, Omobono said: this was a disaster waiting to happen ,and typical of some applications that appear to be rushed through in spite of concerns being expressed , and government departments failing to fulfil their obligations to properly scrutinise these applications .no excuse the developer not having the finance required to have a proper survey of the cliff face , should never have been approved by the minister ! complete failing of the system ! so who pays now , its going to cost millions to sort out this mess ! All part of Mr Boot's enthusiasm for easing and speeding up planning matters, no doubt. In respect of Applications, he was behind a number of changes that were made in the name of this, "easing the wheels". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 36 minutes ago, Omobono said: this was a disaster waiting to happen ,and typical of some applications that appear to be rushed through in spite of concerns being expressed , and government departments failing to fulfil their obligations to properly scrutinise these applications .no excuse the developer not having the finance required to have a proper survey of the cliff face , should never have been approved by the minister ! complete failing of the system ! so who pays now , its going to cost millions to sort out this mess ! 1 minute ago, Non-Believer said: All part of Mr Boot's enthusiasm for easing and speeding up planning matters, no doubt. In respect of Applications, he was behind a number of changes that were made in the name of this, "easing the wheels". It’s not the responsibility of the planning committee. Yes, they should tell the parties they must have the correct practices and procedures in place. But after that it’s a private matter between the neighbours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 8 hours ago, Banker said: Well he can’t be unless there’s some allegations of fraud which there obviously isn’t so just have to move on for that & concentrate on sorting out problems Gross negligence? He overruled an expert after all. It looks like it's going to cost a fortune to sort out, why should he have impunity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 58 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: Gross negligence? He overruled an expert after all. It looks like it's going to cost a fortune to sort out, why should he have impunity? Because the planning consent included a condition on this very topic. See my post above. It wasn't a reckless "yeah, crack on". The issue was identified and provided for. We don't know what happened next, but we do know the outcome 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 1 hour ago, A fool and his money..... said: Gross negligence? He overruled an expert after all. It looks like it's going to cost a fortune to sort out, why should he have impunity? Maybe you are jumping the gun a bit here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 2 minutes ago, Happier diner said: Maybe you are jumping the gun a bit here? It's impossible to jump the gun where that cnut is concerned. He stole a living from us while an MHK and then came back for more when he was booted out. Despite expert advice to the contrary he allowed this development to go ahead, it really doesn't matter if planning conditions were attached. He used his power and with that comes responsibility, or should do anyway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 12 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: Despite expert advice to the contrary he allowed this development to go ahead, it really doesn't matter if planning conditions were attached. He used his power and with that comes responsibility, or should do anyway. It’s not the job of planning committee, inspector or minister to ensure the adequacy of engineering, demolition method statement, etc, just to impose conditions that there should be such things in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 10 minutes ago, John Wright said: It’s not the job of planning committee, inspector or minister to ensure the adequacy of engineering, demolition method statement, etc, just to impose conditions that there should be such things in place. Oh I don't doubt it, ass covering is one area in which government are extremely adept. The more pertinent question is whether they should be allowed to be, especially given the circumstances in this case? If it weren't for Geoffrey's ego this whole debacle would have been avoided, no amount of establishment rank closing will change that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 26 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: Oh I don't doubt it, ass covering is one area in which government are extremely adept. The more pertinent question is whether they should be allowed to be, especially given the circumstances in this case? If it weren't for Geoffrey's ego this whole debacle would have been avoided, no amount of establishment rank closing will change that. How can you cover your ass if it is not exposed? Do you expect the DEFA Minister to do site visits throughout construction too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 44 minutes ago, John Wright said: It’s not the job of planning committee, inspector or minister to ensure the adequacy of engineering, demolition method statement, etc, just to impose conditions that there should be such things in place. That's not quite true though. It's the job of the planning system to make sure that the proposals can be done in a safe and satisfactory manner, otherwise why would the Inspector have recommended turning down the plans on the grounds they did? And of course Building Control are part of DEFA and may well have input to the process before they take over. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted March 26, 2023 Share Posted March 26, 2023 8 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: That's not quite true though. It's the job of the planning system to make sure that the proposals can be done in a safe and satisfactory manner, otherwise why would the Inspector have recommended turning down the plans on the grounds they did? And of course Building Control are part of DEFA and may well have input to the process before they take over. Which is why there was a condition attached to the approval. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.