|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on May 22, 2021 8:37:06 GMT
You should stop using these big words until you have fully understood what they mean and mastered the joined up writing bit. That first para is a real horror. Did no one try to teach you structure or style? What a shame. .... says the author of the contemporary classic "Yeahh! Yeahh!! Yeahh!!!" Wasn't that Meg Ryan in When Harry Met Sally?Anyway, can we stop the bitching please, it's boring. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on May 22, 2021 8:38:59 GMT
They've even got a HP postcode too!  Saucy! They've even got a HP postcode too! saucy! I think you need to ketchup to the thread before posting. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 22, 2021 8:47:37 GMT
Oh! Yes. So many lessons and so much tedium at an early age, but useful. Did you see what I did there. I used a comma. 'They' warned against the use of what was then termed the 'comma pot', and random scatter, and the dreaded Oxford variant! The rest! The rest is down to wide reading and development of a personal style. I recommend it. Para for paragraph: Have you never encountered that before? Is it such a sin? Oh dear! It is not a sin, but a quantum of hypocrisy when criticising the grammar of another! A complete misuse of two more words. This correspondence could run and run but I choose to end it now. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 39,015
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on May 22, 2021 10:15:19 GMT
Rumours that "interesting" polling for this seat could soon emerge were doing the rounds yesterday. What happened to this? A good question. Not all rumours turn out to be true, by definition. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 22, 2021 10:19:30 GMT
A good question. Not all rumours turn out to be true, by definition. Tbf, he hears a poll is being done, results usually come out at the weekend. Or he hears about a Party poll that does not suit the Parties.. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 23, 2021 9:15:11 GMT
I notice Daisy Cooper going on about the new planning Act which is coming. I suspect this played well for the Lib Dems in St Albans in the locals. In the news today as well. This is the sort of thing Tory voters may decide to send a signal about
|
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473 
|
Post by peterl on May 24, 2021 9:38:45 GMT
This article in the Guardian also suggests that changes to planning rules may be a millstone round the Tories neck in this seat. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 24, 2021 9:53:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 24, 2021 9:58:52 GMT
And note that like most home counties areas, the Metropolitan Green Belt covers almost everywhere outside the main towns.  |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 24, 2021 10:10:20 GMT
And note that like most home counties areas, the Metropolitan Green Belt covers almost everywhere outside the main towns. I presume there is no Local Plan in place so presumably now the unitary authority will have to come up with one which zones everything that is not green belt or protected open space as preferred for development (assuming those bits of the White Paper remain in place) |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 24, 2021 10:20:18 GMT
When local authorities are abolished, their local planning policy continues in place (as interpreted by the successor authority) until a new one is adopted.
Chiltern district was in a bit of a pickle over its planning policy when abolished last year. The most recent full plan was adopted in 1997 which lapsed in 2007 apart from those policies that were 'saved'. It had then adopted a Core Strategy in 2011 which superseded some of the policies. The council was working on a new plan, jointly with South Bucks, at the time of its abolition and had actually got to the point of Examination in Public where the inspectors found that they had failed in the duty to co-operate with Slough council. Faced with the likelihood that the inspectors would have added a massive housing growth area next to Slough, the interim Buckinghamshire council decided to withdraw this plan in October.
TL;DR version: Planning for housing growth in Chesham and Amersham constituency is a total mess and likely to remain so.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 24, 2021 11:05:21 GMT
When local authorities are abolished, their local planning policy continues in place (as interpreted by the successor authority) until a new one is adopted. Chiltern district was in a bit of a pickle over its planning policy when abolished last year. The most recent full plan was adopted in 1997 which lapsed in 2007 apart from those policies that were 'saved'. It had then adopted a Core Strategy in 2011 which superseded some of the policies. The council was working on a new plan, jointly with South Bucks, at the time of its abolition and had actually got to the point of Examination in Public where the inspectors found that they had failed in the duty to co-operate with Slough council. Faced with the likelihood that the inspectors would have added a massive housing growth area next to Slough, the interim Buckinghamshire council decided to withdraw this plan in October. TL;DR version: Planning for housing growth in Chesham and Amersham constituency is a total mess and likely to remain so. I am going by the White paper where even authorities that have a local plan will have to draw up a new one using the new zoning rules. Since Chiltern no longer exists, I assume that will be Bucks. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 24, 2021 11:24:33 GMT
When local authorities are abolished, their local planning policy continues in place (as interpreted by the successor authority) until a new one is adopted. Chiltern district was in a bit of a pickle over its planning policy when abolished last year. The most recent full plan was adopted in 1997 which lapsed in 2007 apart from those policies that were 'saved'. It had then adopted a Core Strategy in 2011 which superseded some of the policies. The council was working on a new plan, jointly with South Bucks, at the time of its abolition and had actually got to the point of Examination in Public where the inspectors found that they had failed in the duty to co-operate with Slough council. Faced with the likelihood that the inspectors would have added a massive housing growth area next to Slough, the interim Buckinghamshire council decided to withdraw this plan in October. TL;DR version: Planning for housing growth in Chesham and Amersham constituency is a total mess and likely to remain so. I am going by the White paper where even authorities that have a local plan will have to draw up a new one using the new zoning rules. Since Chiltern no longer exists, I assume that will be Bucks. The law hasn't changed yet. The Queen's Speech indicated that legislation is likely this session but the Bill hasn't yet been introduced. When it is, implementation will take some time. Eventually it will be down to Buckinghamshire council to designate the areas for growth, renewal, and protection, but it won't have a free hand - they couldn't get away with designating the entire green belt as 'protected' because there wouldn't then be enough sites in the rest to build the number of homes required. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 24, 2021 11:42:54 GMT
I am going by the White paper where even authorities that have a local plan will have to draw up a new one using the new zoning rules. Since Chiltern no longer exists, I assume that will be Bucks. The law hasn't changed yet. The Queen's Speech indicated that legislation is likely this session but the Bill hasn't yet been introduced. When it is, implementation will take some time. Eventually it will be down to Buckinghamshire council to designate the areas for growth, renewal, and protection, but it won't have a free hand - they couldn't get away with designating the entire green belt as 'protected' because there wouldn't then be enough sites in the rest to build the number of homes required. I agree, but they will get a very strong push to use the targets published in December. Kirklees could have brought in the CIL which had been approved by the Inspector early in 2020, but the govt told them not to (or so they say). But meanwhile I doubt anyone will be passing a local plan until they know what the rules are |
|
|
|
Post by gibbon on May 24, 2021 13:30:34 GMT
Andrew - this can only create confusion for everyone whether as a developer or residents potentially affected by a planning application. How long will it be before this become an lection issue and we see the usual bar charts showing only the Lib Dems can beat the tories?
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on May 24, 2021 13:32:18 GMT
Andrew - this can only create confusion for everyone whether as a developer or residents potentially affected by a planning application. How long will it be before this become an lection issue and we see the usual bar charts showing only the Lib Dems can beat the tories? Last week, at the latest. |
|
|
|
Post by gibbon on May 24, 2021 13:49:18 GMT
And no doubt more to come. When will there be an opinion poll published for this seat. Might be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 24, 2021 14:32:34 GMT
Andrew - this can only create confusion for everyone whether as a developer or residents potentially affected by a planning application. How long will it be before this become an lection issue and we see the usual bar charts showing only the Lib Dems can beat the tories? Last week, at the latest. Indeed, I suspect you are about 4 leaflets and a couple of letters behind the curve there gibbon |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on May 24, 2021 15:15:36 GMT
A chap from Amersham drove over today to pick up a PC case I'd sold him on Ebay. As he was leaving I couldn't help but call out 'good luck with the by election' then closed the front door quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 24, 2021 19:20:27 GMT
A chap from Amersham drove over today to pick up a PC case I'd sold him on Ebay. As he was leaving I couldn't help but call out 'good luck with the by election' then closed the front door quickly. Apparently the Tories delivered a total of 6 Royal Mail letters to one 2 person household this morning. Postal vote campaign I assume |
|
