Council housing and the Sydenham Society

[JMLF]

Beautifully put.

[TredownMan]

Forum messages are sometimes taken to mean something different to what the original poster intended (either by accident, or to 'push a point'). This is the nature of one way communication - when you can't hear / see the other parties in the discussion.

It's also the same with the process and nature of planning applications. Raising objections to a submitted planning proposal does not necessarily mean that you do not want the scheme in principle to go ahead - only that there are some points of it that you 'object' to.

Unfortunately this language has a negative effect as it means one has to talk (for example) about person 'x' objecting to person 'y's plans. This objection can range from one where there is a fundamental objection to the proposal in principle to, at the other extreme, querying the type / colour tile on an extension roof. They are all classed as objections. This sometimes doesn't help mature conversation between neighbours and those with differing views, but it is the system we have today as far as planning is concerned so we're stuck with it - the planning committee has to work its way through the varying points of view.

So when discussing planning there are at least two potential points that can create misunderstanding between those involved. It's something to bear in mind when talking about this subject on a forum such as this.

It's most unfortunate for the Sydenham Society that the same misunderstandings - that its committee wish merely to improve projects proposed by people living nearby, and not run them into the sand, and delay them until the advocates give up - seem to keep cropping up round here.

Perhaps the best way to clear up any confusion would be a little transparency about how such decisions are formulated.

[Pally]

Transparency would help to alleviate any apparent misconceptions!