 |
 |
Yes, very important to take into account the context of the decision making. As Rob says: is there sufficient information to make a reasonable decision based on an achievable scheme. Ruth Willcox Environmental Protection Officer Public Protection Service Plymouth City Council Civic Centre Plymouth PL1 2AA T +441752304154 E [log in to unmask] www.plymouth.gov.uk -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ivens, Rob Sent: 28 July 2015 13:36 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Technoprint case in Planning I would agree with much that has been said: But I would add one further thought. As I understand it- the question for any planning decision is can the matter be dealt with by condition- ie are the uncertainties resolved, or is there sufficient information to make a reasonable decision based on an achievable scheme. In the case of contamination in certain circumstances the scheme is not achievable... and worse if the planners grant permission eg for residential housing and this cant be built then the LA can end up facing a claim for compensation. (Roger Braithwait I believed sited just such a case re a landfill) Rob Ivens So much to read so little Time -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David E Jackson Sent: 28 July 2015 12:12 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Technoprint case in Planning Dear All, This case came up on the list a while ago and was widely discussed at that time. My understanding was that the primary focus of the case was an examination of the decision making process and whether it was appropriate for it to be deferred to Planning Officers. The secondary matter (and I sense from the Judges perspective it was more of an case specific observation than a precedent) related to whether it was appropriate to grant approval with conditions (and thus allow the resale of the site with the benefit of those conditions), when the discharge of this conditions was neither practicably or economically viable. It is interesting to note a couple of things. Firstly, the Planners were under a externally imposed time constraint to approve the decision, even though they had insufficient information to make a determination. Should there be a mechanism for "stopping the clock" on such decision's without fear of further legal challenge? Secondly, will Planners be under further pressure to approve similar decisions, without sufficient information, under Govt's new assumed approval mechanism for brownfield housing zones? Cheers David Have you tried www.molevalley.gov.uk? Our easy to use, accessible website allows you to access our services at any time. You can look at planning applications, pay bills online or find out more about where you live using the Mole Valley and Me feature. Please note that calls to the Council may be recorded and monitored for training purposes. The computer system may also be monitored and recorded to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes. This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, the E-mail and any files have been transmitted to you in error and any copying, distribution or other use of the information contained in them is strictly prohibited. ******************************************************************************************************************************************** IMPORTANT: This e-mail (including any attachments to it) is strictly confidential and intended solely for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. It may contain privileged, confidential or sensitive information. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy or distribute it to any other person or take any action in reliance. If you have received it in error, please notify your system manager and the sender as soon as possible and then delete it from your system.