| Topic: | Re:The Planning Process | |
| Posted by: | Adam Beamish | |
| Date/Time: | 26/11/10 09:41:00 |
| Hi John, Indeed, it is easy to generalise and there are pros and cons on both sides. My comparison with Heston & Chiswick was that they are both part of the same Borough and the same planning policies apply yet of course they are very different places. I have followed the Victoria Gardens 'saga' with interest - what I was never clear on was whether the initial decision not to enforce was because (1) some Committee members considered the evidence wasn't unambigious and on the balance of probability the extension was immune, or (2) that it wasn't expedient to enforce as didn't cause any material harm. Presumably the former. I will say that I can think of one appeal decision when I worked at LBH where an Inspector quashed an enforcement notice against an extension which we argued wasn't immune, and the Inspector's approach could best be summed up with "I can't believe someone would lie to this extent so it has to be immune". But aerial photograph evidence is extremely useful - and as technology advances the quality of the evidence improves, so I do struggle with the initial decision (which to be fair several Councillors on H&C didn't support). Sorry to be pedantic but it is a major gripe of mine when the word 'illegal' is used - until the Council serve a notice which isn't complied with within the specified period a development isn't illegal, it is merely in breach of planning control, and there is the world of difference between the two (a criminal record and a max £20k fine !). |