Please see below a corrected version of my last posting (the new Transparency Code for Councils is. of course, Feb 2015).I have also posted the (easier to read) formatted version at: https://db.tt/6auQT0xWDear Andy,In your posting above, you wrote setting out your understanding of the proposed new "reduced" Planning Department's procedures of Neighbour Notification:"Ealing are cutting any form of notification of planning applications that they don't have a statutory obligation to make. This includes some notices in the paper and posting notices on lampposts but the vast majority of notices will still be in the paper. Have I got this right?"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~It seems to me however in the absence of a further response from Ms Aileen Jones, LBE Head of Planning, to my query re. Regulation 5, that in fact the vast majority of notices will NOT be in the paper, unless they are "major developments" or under a specialist category.Regular developments of less than 10 dwellings (incl. flats) in or adjacent to a Conservation Area will NOT be published in the press. But here is the problem that in the absence of a response re. Regulation 5, I do not see how this is compliant with the law. If Regulation 5 has been disapplied by statute, then there will be no Notices in the press except for the instances mentioned above.If you look at the existing (2012) Ealing Council Planning Applications Neighbour Notification procedure, which may be seen on the Council's Website at: https://db.tt/E4PCYvUl, you will see the following statement under the heading: "CONSULTATION CODE OF PRACTICE FOR NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS":-"It is Ealing’s practice to notify more widely than the statutory requirement. The Town & Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995, as amended, particularly Article 8 applies (see Appendix) and as amended in 2010. It is required that certain applications be advertised in a local newspaper, but many applications are advertised where the Council considers there to be a “wider interest” for more than the immediate neighbours. Where legislation offers a choice of using a site notice or notification letter to adjoining owner/occupiers, Ealing’s normal practice is to notify neighbours by letter, but both methods are used when an application is advertised. In addition, the type of application may make it appropriate to consult local groups and amenity societies and specialist organisations (see Statement of Community Involvement and list captured on GIS)."This ties in with Ms Aileen Jones's several public statements that "the Council is proud of the fact that it carries out MORE than the statutory requirements". My present query is this that in the current planning handbooks, the following appears on page 438 of Moore, in section 21.136, where it states: "(c) Under s 73 of the LBCA Act 1990, the local planning authority must give publicity to any applications for planning permission where the development would, in the opinion of the authority, affect the character or appearance of a conservation area. Under reg 5 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Regulations) 1990, the local planning authority MUST publish in a local newspaper circulating in the locality in which the land is situated and display on or near the land for not less than seven days, a notice indicating the nature of development proposed and stating where a copy of the application, and all plans and other documents submitted with it may be open to inspection, for a period of 21 days."This seems to relate to any developments in a Conservation Area (and not just for "major developments").In Statutory Instrument 2003 No.956, part of the text for Regulation 5 was modified in the sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph (1) relating to Conservation Areas. Paragraph (2) of the regulation was only slightly modified. The new sub-paragraph (a) as per Regulation 5 now inserts the new text below:(5) In regulation 5—(a) for sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph (1), substitute —“(a) publish in a local newspaper circulating in the locality in which the building is situated a notice indicating the nature of the works which are the subject of the application and—(i) naming a place within the locality where a copy of the application, and of all plans and other documents submitted with it, will be open to inspection by the public at all reasonable hours during the period of 21 days beginning with the date of publication of the notice; and(ii) stating the address of a website where a copy of the application, and of all plans and other documents submitted with it, will be open to inspection by the public during the period of 21 days beginning with the date of publication of the notice, and the place on the website where such documents may be accessed, and how they may be accessed; and”;(b) in paragraph (2), omit “both of” in both places in which it occurs, and in sub-paragraph (a) after “sub-paragraph (a)” insert “(i) or (ii)”.Reading the 2003 modified text of Regulation 5, I cannot see where the notification requirement to “publish in a local newspaper circulating in the locality” has been disapplied, - rather, the modified regulation seems to confirm the requirement?I have twice asked Ms Aileen Jones to please state if there is a new amendment disapplying the above statutory requirements. I cannot find it in the planning books as yet.I also asked Ms Jones for details of a Cabinet Meeting and also a Conservation Area Forum that she mentions and asked to be referred to the Agenda and Minutes, etc and any notes issued re. the latter. So far, I have not received a reply to these requests either.After at least 30 years of sending out postal Neighbour Notifications, as I believe most Councils do, and in view of Ms Jones being "proud" of always doing more than the bare minimum, I think that it is appalling that neighbours are not now going to be written to anymore.Ms Jones suggests that people can browse the Web to find out if a planning application has been made in their road, but there are thousands of roads in the Borough no doubt and there are residents who have never used or owned a computer or a "smartphone" (whatever that is?).As to Site Notices, I would have thought that the expense involved in Council staff travelling the Borough far and wide to erect Notices on lampposts (if there are always such lampposts near the application land?) would far outweigh the cost of postage stamps to one or two houses either side or at the back of the application land. Also, Site Notices may not always be readily visible to some neighbours (say on a corner plot or at the rear in another road) and when it is known that this is the ONLY Notice of an Application that is going to exist, then there could also be the deliberate removal of the Notice. [Apart from that, there may be a delay in erecting a Notice. In one case, in Lewisham, the Public Planning Notice for demolition and proposed new building went up outside the premises (and in fact the premises were being used by the Council itself as a "Parking Shop") on the very day that the 21 days period ended!]This ending of letters in favour of Site Notices may be a false economy?I hope that this "unneighbourly" decision will be rescinded as soon as possible - especially as it comes precisely at the time that the commendable "Local Government Transparency Code February 2015" has been introduced to include improving any procedure that "gives people the tools and information they need to enable them to play a bigger role in society" and "to increase democratic accountability and make it easier for local people to contribute to the local decision-making process".It does not seem quite the right time for Ealing Council Planning Department to stop sending out the familiar 21-day Notification Letters to neighbours or cut out Notices in the local press for Conservation Areas (excluding major developments) after 30 years or more of doing so.In 1989, the Assistant Chief Planning Officer, Mr Richard Kirby, took it on himself to prevent access to main planning files until just 3 days before the Committee Meeting claiming that he was enforcing the "Access To Information Act" (1985). Mr Kirby did not have Committee or Cabinet authority to do this, and a subsequent claim to the contrary was not so, according to and as openly admitted to me by former Cllr. Janis Grant, assistant to the former Planning Supremo, Cllr. Gareth Daniel (later Chief Executive in LB. Brent). A neighbour in Gordon Road wrote in to the local press saying that if this was the case then the Act was clearly misnamed! An article was headed "Iron Curtain Descends in Planning Department" and another "Planners Lock Files Away" (or similar). I have all the old cuttings somewhere.This repressive regime was only ended in May/June 1990, when Cllr. Norman Pointing was made Chairman of the Town Planning Committee and "open access" was restored to this Borough (as there had always been hitherto).Thus, we have fought hard for people in LB. Ealing to be kept notified and have easy access to information.This withdrawal of Press Notices (some of which would not be in accordance with Regulation 5, unless this has been disapplied by statute?) and the ending of Neighbour Notifications by letters to adjoining properties is the start of this cutting down of the free flow ofinformation.What will be next to "save expenses"? * Withholding of files again as in 1989? * No more Planning Committee site visits? * No more Planning Committee Meetings in public? (i.e you just send the Planning Permission to the housing associations and other favoured developers in the post!).I hope that all Resident Associations, Amenity Groups, concerned residents will express their objection to the tampering with the long established Neighbour Notification procedures.In May 1994, the highly respected Labour Leader and Acton resident Cllr. John Cudmore pledged:"Planning decisions must take account of the feelings of local people"In February 2015, the Government encourages people to better involve themselves in the "decision-making process".But how can this happen when the Council is now resiling from 30 years of good neighbourly practice?Victor Mishiku 10/3/15
Victor Mishiku ● 4040d