Should doctors letter supporting planning objection be public

jenny smith

If someone makes an objection to a planning application partly on their health grounds and in the objection says " I enclose letter from my doctor" should the letter from the doctor be available publicly?

The letter from the doctor is not on the council website anyway, maybe it is on the hard file

I am not involved in this or seeking advice. I saw such a case online and and curious because planning is a public process and all objections are public so i wondered if the public had a right to see the letter as it is mentioned in the objection .? The person also gives details of their illness in the objection letter. It was refused but is within appeal time still

nuac

Imho all planning objections and all documents supporting the applicationn should be on planning file, open for inspection while the application is under consideration

Mr. Incognito

All planning documents lodged are available to the public for inspection.

I have no idea what a medical condition has to do with planning. Objecting on health grounds?

That's just bizarre.

L1011

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I have no idea what a medical condition has to do with planning. Objecting on health grounds?

That's just bizarre.

Have heard of them being used in attempts to bolster claims about noise, blocking of light and dust/smoke before.

seamus

Someone with some kind of sleep issue could make a claim that the proposed development would make things even worse.

Ultimately doctors will write anything down on a piece of paper for a patient and people will object to developments on all sorts of spurious medical grounds.

Planners know this and treat it accordingly.

Relevant stuff could be permanent disabilities, where the development (or its construction phase) will pose difficulties for the person with the disability. Even then the planning is only likely to require modifications rather than outright refusal.

jenny smith

seamus wrote: »

Someone with some kind of sleep issue could make a claim that the proposed development would make things even worse.

Ultimately doctors will write anything down on a piece of paper for a patient and people will object to developments on all sorts of spurious medical grounds.

Planners know this and treat it accordingly.

Relevant stuff could be permanent disabilities, where the development (or its construction phase) will pose difficulties for the person with the disability. Even then the planning is only likely to require modifications rather than outright refusal.

The illness mentioned in the objection letter is serious and permanent.

Ultimately doctors will write anything down on a piece of paper for a patient

No they won't. Doctors are very careful what they put in writing especially if it will be publiclily available.

The objection says noise etc would have adverse effect on health and "i enclose a letter from doctor" But there are other objections which seem serious and genuine. Also part of the objectors house would be affected and he said he did not give permission

I do not understand though how the medical letter which is used to back up objection is not public as all planning documents should be. Maybe it is on the hard file and this is an error

Planners know this and treat it accordingly.

That is not the point.

jenny smith

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

All planning documents lodged are available to the public for inspection.

I have no idea what a medical condition has to do with planning. Objecting on health grounds?

That's just bizarre.

The medical letter is not available online

seamus

They don't have to publish everything online as that is not the official public record.

Most likely it is deemed inappropriate to reproduce the doctor's letter for the online version and if someone really wants to see it, they can still see it in the official public record.

I disagree with your assertion that doctors are very careful about what they put in writing, but that's not a debate for this thread

brian_t

If a Planning Application is important to you then you should go into the Council offices and read the Hard Copy of the file rather than depending on what the council decides to upload to its website.

NUTLEY BOY

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

All planning documents lodged are available to the public for inspection.

I have no idea what a medical condition has to do with planning. Objecting on health grounds?

That's just bizarre.

This is probably not on all fours with the planning issue. I recall a recycling operation dealing with green waste being stopped in one place in Dublin as there was a very significant risk of air pollution to a neighbouring house. I think that the problem was that an occupant of the house had a very delicate medical condition (may have been something like CF or a CF related post transplant situation) which would have been very sensitive to spores and other byproducts with serious consequences for the individual.

So, if a local authority recycling operation can close in the face of a serious medical issue it looks like it could be a reasonably fair ground for a planning objection. That said, I know of no planning applications where health determined a decision.

NUTLEY BOY

brian_t wrote: »

If a Planning Application is important to you then you should go into the Council offices and read the Hard Copy of the file rather than depending on what the council decides to upload to its website.

Exactly.

Also, some planning authorities are slow to update the public file available on line.

jenny smith

brian_t wrote: »

If a Planning Application is important to you then you should go into the Council offices and read the Hard Copy of the file rather than depending on what the council decides to upload to its website.

i understand all the file should be online, otherwise why bother. The whole idea of having it online is being publicly accessible without going there so people can see applications in other areas from their homes

jenny smith

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

This is probably not on all fours with the planning issue. I recall a recycling operation dealing with green waste being stopped in one place in Dublin as there was a very significant risk of air pollution to a neighbouring house. I think that the problem was that an occupant of the house had a very delicate medical condition (may have been something like CF or a CF related post transplant situation) which would have been very sensitive to spores and other byproducts with serious consequences for the individual.

So, if a local authority recycling operation can close in the face of a serious medical issue it looks like it could be a reasonably fair ground for a planning objection. That said, I know of no planning applications where health determined a decision.

Health was not the reason for the refusal

Reati

jenny smith wrote: »

Health was not the reason for the refusal

I think your question has been answered already now.

Everything in the planning process should be available but it can be slower to get put online.

If you for some reason want to see the letter, which likely just confirms the person suffers the illness already mentioned on the objection then head into the local planning office that handled the case.

jenny smith

Reati wrote: »

I think your question has been answered already now.

Everything in the planning process should be available but it can be slower to get put online.

If you for some reason want to see the letter, which likely just confirms the person suffers the illness already mentioned on the objection then head into the local planning office that handled the case.

Health was not the reason for the refusal

was responding to someone else. And i never said i wanted to see the letter

Everything in the planning process should be available but it can be slower to get put online.

the application is online months

Reati

jenny smith wrote: »

was responding to someone else. And i never said i wanted to see the letterthe application is online months

So? It's not someones priority to update the case it seems. Unless you go asked the planners responsible, I'm not sure what other details you will get here

NUTLEY BOY

Could there be any data protection issue ?

jenny smith

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Could there be any data protection issue ?

Hardly any more than for any other issue on the file. The objector give his illness anyway on the objection letter which refer to the doctor's letter. There is a warning on the site re data protection - anyone abusing the data could be prosecuted by data protection commissioner

plodder

Why not ask the planning dept. in question? If they received the letter, then it should be on the electronic file. So, maybe they didn't receive it.

jenny smith

plodder wrote: »

Why not ask the planning dept. in question? If they received the letter, then it should be on the electronic file. So, maybe they didn't receive it.

I would think so.

So, maybe they didn't receive it

he says it was enclosed

Why not ask the planning dept. in question

he is unwell i do not want to cause him any trouble and as for looking at the physical file it is at the other side of the country

brian_t

This is from the Kildare Co Co website, I'd assume it was the same for other Counties.

Disclaimer

While every care has been taken to display accurate information, Kildare County Council will not be held responsible for any loss, damage or inconvenience caused as a result of any inaccuracy or error within. In addition, please note that due to Data Protection restrictions the full contents of some applications are not available through this system.

Should you require confirmation of any information provided in these pages or to see the full contents of any application please contact the staff at the Planning Public Counter.

http://kildare.ie/CountyCouncil/OnlineServices/OnlinePlanningEnquiries/

jenny smith

brian_t wrote: »

This is from the Kildare Co Co website, I'd assume it was the same for other Counties.


http://kildare.ie/CountyCouncil/OnlineServices/OnlinePlanningEnquiries/

Thanks. That explains it. Edit. The disclaimer is different on the relevant site and does not say " due to Data Protection restrictions the full contents of some applications are not available through this system. "

brian_t

jenny smith wrote: »

The disclaimer is different on the relevant site and does not say " due to Data Protection restrictions the full contents of some applications are not available through this system. "

If a Council was not putting the full contents of some applications online, is it required to state this in a disclaimer?

jenny smith

brian_t wrote: »

If a Council was not putting the full contents of some applications online, is it required to state this in a disclaimer?

you seem to think it is

brian_t

jenny smith wrote: »

you seem to think it is

No I asked a quesrion to which I don't know the answer.

If a Council was not putting the full contents of some applications online, is it required to state this in a disclaimer?

NUTLEY BOY

Would the next step here be to make a formal request of the Planning Office for a copy of the letter in question and see what happens ? They might give it or they might cite data protection reasons. If you force them to make a decision you will find out.

brian_t

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Would the next step here be to make a formal request of the Planning Office for a copy of the letter in question and see what happens ?

The first step is to call into the Council offices and view the file in the planning dept but according to the OP "the physical file it is at the other side of the country".

jenny smith

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Would the next step here be to make a formal request of the Planning Office for a copy of the letter in question and see what happens ? They might give it or they might cite data protection reasons. If you force them to make a decision you will find out.

I doubt you can get a copy of the letter alone, although you can purchase the file which may have it,[ see here ]and i am not going to do anything to draw attention to this man as he is unwell and the reasons given for refusal did not include health

Reati

OP - what exactly is your goal in this thread?

jenny smith

Reati wrote: »

OP - what exactly is your goal in this thread?

why is that relevant to you? if you have an issue with the thread report it. no one is forcing you to participate

Reati

jenny smith wrote: »

why is that relevant to you? if you have an issue with the thread report it. no one is forcing you to participate

Yeah, I thought as such....

jenny smith

Reati wrote: »

Yeah, I thought as such....

your irrelevant remark and innuendo reported. I will be ignoring any further input from you

jenny smith

How does one add someone to ignore here? OK found it

Pat Mustard

Mod:

First, users are asked to remain on topic.

Secondly, users are asked to report issues that arise and not to refer to them on the thread.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

brian_t

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But the file is where it is supposed to be. The OP does not live in the county where the planning application was made but "at the other side of the country".

If the OP lives in Donegal and the Planning application was made to Cork Co Co, then the OP cant just drop into the Cork Planning Dept to view it but how is that Cork Co Co's problem.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

elperello

It is possible that the doctors letter was originally sent to a third party and not the planning authority.

newacc2015

IMO a GPs letter for a planning objection should be public record. Different doctors will have different medical opinions. If someone is objecting to a development based on a GPs note, you should be at least be entitled get your own medical expert opinion to see if it holds weight.

I know someone who tried to object to a house being built in a corner site, as 'they had rickets and needed the sunlight in the garden for it'. It was utter BS and a poor attempt at blocking the development. But imagine a GP had put that in writing to object and someone was not allowed to prove it was BS.

jenny smith

newacc2015 wrote: »

IMO a GPs letter for a planning objection should be public record. Different doctors will have different medical opinions. If someone is objecting to a development based on a GPs note, you should be at least be entitled get your own medical expert opinion to see if it holds weight.

I know someone who tried to object to a house being built in a corner site, as 'they had rickets and needed the sunlight in the garden for it'. It was utter BS and a poor attempt at blocking the development. But imagine a GP had put that in writing to object and someone was not allowed to prove it was BS.

I would have thought so