<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>Discharge of Conditions</title>
  <link rel="self" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_thread?p_l_id=53683759&amp;threadId=19666928" />
  <subtitle>Discharge of Conditions</subtitle>
  <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_thread?p_l_id=53683759&amp;threadId=19666928</id>
  <updated>2026-07-26T13:16:09Z</updated>
  <dc:date>2026-07-26T13:16:09Z</dc:date>
  <entry>
    <title>RE: Discharge of Conditions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19766230" />
    <author>
      <name>Former Member</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19766230</id>
    <updated>2016-04-26T15:15:45Z</updated>
    <published>2016-04-26T15:15:45Z</published>
    <summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;It should also be recognised that there is a time limit for the discharge of conditions application to be determined by, and the fee is returnable as well......so there are consequences!&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</summary>
    <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-26T15:15:45Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>RE: Discharge of Conditions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19762921" />
    <author>
      <name>Ed Murphy</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19762921</id>
    <updated>2016-04-26T14:25:29Z</updated>
    <published>2016-04-26T14:25:29Z</published>
    <summary type="html">How about "If we don't&amp;nbsp;hear from you within 21 days this will be taken to signify that you have no obejctions to the LPA discharging the condition" ?&amp;nbsp; Otherwise you could wait forever.</summary>
    <dc:creator>Ed Murphy</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-26T14:25:29Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>RE: Discharge of Conditions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19759109" />
    <author>
      <name>Hannah Hogan</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19759109</id>
    <updated>2016-04-26T12:07:33Z</updated>
    <published>2016-04-26T12:07:33Z</published>
    <summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Thanks all,&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Although the Council as&amp;nbsp;LPA&amp;nbsp;would discharge conditions -&amp;nbsp;if LPAs&amp;nbsp;feel unable to fully look at a technical advocated &amp;amp; imposed condition, it's&amp;nbsp;concerning what position that would leave the LPA in - whether to seek advice elsewhere or to challenge the consultee's refusal to comment further.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Cheers for your input :)&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</summary>
    <dc:creator>Hannah Hogan</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-26T12:07:33Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>RE: Discharge of Conditions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19752437" />
    <author>
      <name>Former Member</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19752437</id>
    <updated>2016-04-26T07:49:45Z</updated>
    <published>2016-04-26T07:49:45Z</published>
    <summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Hannah,&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I agree with Paul and Rob. The duty to discharge the condition lies with the LPA. Unfortunately a lack of response from the stat consultee will have to be looked at internally.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Rebecca&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</summary>
    <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-26T07:49:45Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>RE: Discharge of Conditions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19678945" />
    <author>
      <name>Former Member</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19678945</id>
    <updated>2016-04-21T08:54:31Z</updated>
    <published>2016-04-21T08:54:31Z</published>
    <summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Hi Hannah,&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Obviously the LPA are the only ones who can formally discharge the condition. It sounds like you're having difficulty with a statutory consultee not wanting to be involved in assessing a DoC when they've asked for a condition to be put against an application; this is poor form but it happens, unfortunately. I don't think there's any recourse in the regs or elsewhere to force them to provide a comment on a DoC if they're unwilling - so it becomes a tactical/relationship management issue.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Rob&lt;/p&gt;</summary>
    <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-21T08:54:31Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>RE: Discharge of Conditions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19671821" />
    <author>
      <name>Former Member</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19671821</id>
    <updated>2016-04-20T17:36:32Z</updated>
    <published>2016-04-20T17:36:32Z</published>
    <summary type="html">The planning permission is granted by the local planning authority and only it can discharge a condition.&amp;nbsp; It's covered by article 27 of the Procedure Order.</summary>
    <dc:creator>Former Member</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-20T17:36:32Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Discharge of Conditions</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19666927" />
    <author>
      <name>Hannah Hogan</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/cy/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=19666927</id>
    <updated>2016-04-20T11:27:43Z</updated>
    <published>2016-04-20T11:26:30Z</published>
    <summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Afternoon all!&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Quick question, if I may...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Where a statutory consultee has advocated a condition, and permission has been granted&amp;nbsp;and the condition imposed by the LPA - who would most LPAs expect to discharge that condition?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;The requestant&amp;nbsp;consultee or any other relevant risk management authority? Do&amp;nbsp;Stat Consultees have an option to not offer comment / refuse to comment on their own advocated conditions?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The Town&amp;amp;County Planning&amp;nbsp;(Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 doesn't offer a clear steer to DoC - only permissions.&amp;nbsp;...&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Thanks in advance,&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;hannah hogan&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</summary>
    <dc:creator>Hannah Hogan</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-20T11:26:30Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
</feed>
