Ealing Planning - is it working for you?

If you've ever been in contact with Ealing Council in your life, there's a good chance that you've been on one side of the planning fence, whether as an objector or as an applicant. 

Regardless of which side you are on, the likelihood is that there is an agenda, whether it's personal or looking out for the wider area and community. The question is on whose side is Ealing Council?

Over my (nearly) ten years as a member of the planning committee and a few as the Conservative planning spokesperson one sees, learns and recognises patterns of good and bad practice in the local planning "industry".  Unfortunately, over recent years the bad is outweighing the good. A tragedy for local democracy. 

Ever been to a planning committee meeting? You will know that you may have to take a trilogy to read until your case may be heard as we sometimes have to go through quite an agenda. How have you felt after your case has been heard? Content? Disgruntled? I suppose depends if the decision went your way. 

Have you noticed that the chair of planning always comments how he will vote just before the committee goes to the vote? Shouldn't a chair be neutral in leading a meeting? 

Before it goes to committee, as only a very small percentage of applications goes in front of the councillors and as well as all major developments, developers seek pre-application advice from the local authority's planning department. This is fair and much needed as everyone knows developers always push the boundaries. It's part and parcel of the process.

Ealing Council's management structure has been slimmed down over the years due to budget savings as it was a somewhat too top heavy. The remit of planning falls under the Regeneration directorate. So the top dog here has the regeneration brief as well as having responsibility for planning. Two independent, yet some would say mutually exclusive, KPIs (Key Performance Indicators - performance measures to you and me). So how can a civil servant be responsible for pushing for regeneration (the Borough needs it) as well as being responsible for recommending if it's suitable? Separation of duties is a must for every person with such high authority. 

For those of you who actively keep up with the planning world you will know that this week is MIPIM week. A trade fair for developers to meet potential clients. Nothing wrong with that. In fact, I would encourage it. It's a big world out there and business needs to be done, neighbourhoods need to be regenerated and people housed. 

One sticking point. Read the answers to my written questions (Q10-12) tinyurl.com/LBE-WrittenQns-23022016. Not content with them, I have enquired further to the answer to Q10 as I would like the names and a finite list. Still waiting. Answers to Q11 and 12 underline that developers 'with an interest' in promoting Ealing are paying for our decision makers to go to Cannes, South of France, to liaise with them. 

You may have come across the recent article in Private Eye's regular 'Rotten Boroughs' column. (tinyurl.com/MIPIM2016-Tweet) It mentions MIPIM. It also touches upon a recent decision giving approval to 18-storey towers above Ealing's town centre. One of the highlights at that planning committee (24th Feb) is that the case officer totally disregarded the opinions of Historic England. Granted, some people might not agree with HE's views. I sat as an observer in the public gallery for this meeting as I wasn't rostered on. I carefully listened to the objectors, applicant's agent, ward councillors, presentation by the planning officer and then the councillor debate. Well, I say debate, call it more of a Q&A, the meeting is hardly a fluid conversation.

The topic of conservation areas came up. The new head of planning came to the defence (as they have to defend their recommendation), stating in simple terms "...there is no intention to review conservation areas". I was taken aback. Only a week beforehand I received an email from the planning head's own boss that she is "...preparing a timetable to review conservation areas". Both can't be right. Surely. 

Some of Ealing Gazette's loyal readers will recall my article just before Christmas (ealingcommon.yourcllr.com/2015/12/11/row-over-planning-notices/) when I highlighted the Labour administration's false economies in eliminating neighbour notification with a new policy of lamppost site notices. What troubled me is that the council's planning spokesperson denied any reconsultations had occurred. This bemused me as I had myself presided over requesting (and succeeding) into getting residents reconsulted for a number of applications in the first six months of the new policy. Unless my email inbox is playing tricks on my eyes.  To add the salt to the council's wounds, the Labour leader of the council, Cllr Julian Bell, jumps on the bandwagon without doing HIS own homework. 

And don't get me started on the council's new planning portal....

Make your own minds up. Is Ealing Planning working for you?

NB: if you're reading the answers to my other written questions, you will notice the gawping errors to Q32. Not only are the calculations wrong (can't the Council add up?), but also, doesn't take into consideration the volumes of social housing they are demolishing as part of the regeneration programme. I will update readers when I get the true figures