Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
I never said that anyone was "entitled to special treatment" but making a big deal out of a little flagpole just strikes me as petty.
And as for those rules "needing to be followed", pardon me if I beg to differ.
|
If I remember my planning regulations correctly (and it's been some time since I had to cover this sort of thing as a journalist), flagpoles are considered as signage when used at commercial premises, and all signage is subject to planning control - even more so when the building in question, or its locality, is subject to special protection as appears to be the case here.
I have seen what happens when there is little or no planning control over commercial signage, just look at any town in the USA. It is a complete mess. Planning control results in a better environment for everyone, visually or otherwise, and while I accept that it may appear to be petty when reduced to the minutae of an individual case like this, it does serve a greater overall purpose.
As a public servant, and the former leader of a local authority, I am quite sure that Red Ken is entirely aware of all this and is merely indulging in a little populist politicking by wading into this situation.