Re: Re: An interesting article.
Points i agree with
* more often than not pre-planning consultations are meaningless… planners wont give any indication of a like or dislike to proposal and invariable end with ‘put in the application and see how it goes’… useless….
* development plans are little different from the ones they replace… maybe glossier paper….
* vague, indifferent and inconsistent descriptions in development plans add only confusion and allow different planners adopt policies on a personal view point instead of a clear guideline.
* our planning system needs to be overhauled to become more transparent, fairer, and respectful to the application in a ‘hand in hand’ working relationship instead of the ‘behind closed doors’ adversarial system we commonly have…
Points i disagree with:
* 20 year development plans would not work for reasons described by Frank… thats why we have NSS and NDP
* since the introduction of the rural guidelines it has become a lot easier to advise clients of the probably outcome of their application, usually on first meeting….
* invalidations are invariably the agents cause… while frustrating, they are certainly not for no reason…
* need to vote on European directives… we have European representatives, thats what they are for….