I honestly don’t know what the council are doing here.
I asked them for some advice about their planning website and would normally
have expected a reply within 10 working days, well I haven’t had any answer
from them.
The first email below, outlining my questions, was sent to
the council’s planning department at their request because they didn’t have the
information I asked for to hand when I telephoned them.
The difficulty I face here is essentially that the main
planning application it relates to has a fairly short window that you can
respond in.
Here are the emails I sent them.
-----Original Message-----
From: michaelchild <michaelchild@aol.com>
To: planning.services <planning.services@thanet.gov.uk>
CC: iain.livingstone
Sent: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 11:58
Subject: new planning website
From: michaelchild <michaelchild@aol.com>
To: planning.services <planning.services@thanet.gov.uk>
CC: iain.livingstone
Sent: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 11:58
Subject: new planning website
Re my
phone call about comments on using the new planning website; I am writing to
request the information that wasn’t immediately at hand to the officer I spoke
to, at his request.
With
respect to public comments, (these were not previously published in the way
they are on the new planning site) meaning that the way they are handled is
pertinent to using responding to applications.
1 Comments appear either to have the respondents name and
address redacted to the street name, or to have no respondents name or address.
Does this mean where comments have no respondents name or address that neither
were supplied to the council, and if so are these valid comments?
2 Are the
comments weighted to the respondents location, and if so by what method? To
expand on this would UK taxpayers opinions be of more significance that those
of foreign nationals and TDC council taxpayers and local residents be of the
most significance?
3 Does
the council have some method of ensuring that multiple comments are not made by
one respondent under different aliases? For instance, without one, the
applicant could make multiple comments supporting their application and so
influence the planning committee.
As discussed on the phone it is my intention to comment of
some live applications, using your new website, and as these have relatively
short time windows during which I can comment, your prompt reply would be much
appreciated.
Best
regards Michael
From:
michaelchild
To: planning.services
CC: iain.livingstone
To: planning.services
CC: iain.livingstone
enquiries
;
lgo
Sent: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:54
Subject: Re: new planning website
Sent: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:54
Subject: Re: new planning website
Hi Ian, et al
I don’t seem to have had a reply
to this one, could you kindly chase it up for me as it relates to whether I
take the trouble to respond to various local planning applications including
the redevelopment of the Manston Airport site.
The bottom line here being that
while I am happy as a local resident to take the trouble to read 272 documents, for this one application alone and
produce some sort of response, I am not prepared
to do this if it counts the same amount as say:- An anonymous contributor, a
foreign national, who has never visited the area, someone making multiple
responses under various aliases.
I am sure that while from your
point of view it appears that this and other applications with responses on the
new Thanet Planning website are being handled properly, legally and
responsibly, however from the point of view of a member of the public this
really isn’t the case. If you looks at the Manston application at https://planning.thanet.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=O5Z2F2QE00300 you will see that the majority of
“Public Comments” say:- “Customer Details, Name: Not Available – Address Not
Available.”
The
basic information as to whether or not the council has or has any way of
validating the comments just isn’t there.
Best regards Michael.
I don’t know if any of the
councillors reading this want to take this one up, to my mind it is a very
important issue.
Here is the view of Ramsgate, my
guess would be 1820s
Here is the watercolour paining of
Canterbury, the idea is that the people in the shop window are the reflections of the people sitting outside Chocolate Cafe, I did the painting from upstairs there.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments, since I started writing this blog in 2007 the way the internet works has changed a lot, comments and dialogue here were once viable in an open and anonymous sense. Now if you comment here I will only allow the comment if it seems to make sense and be related to what the post is about. I link the majority of my posts to the main local Facebook groups and to my Facebook account, “Michael Child” I guess the main Ramsgate Facebook group is We Love Ramsgate. For the most part the comments and dialogue related to the posts here goes on there. As for the rest of it, well this blog handles images better than Facebook, which is why I don’t post directly to my Facebook account, although if I take a lot of photos I am so lazy that I paste them directly from my camera card to my bookshop website and put a link on this blog.