lørdag 22. juni 2019

No. 1436: Our struggle against PBE here in Oslo has been the little man's fight against the bureaucracy, but I think we will "win" and eventually win as David prevailed over Goliath!

No. 1436:
Our struggle against PBE here in Oslo has been the little man's fight against the bureaucracy, but I think we will "win" and eventually win as David prevailed over Goliath!

1 Sam. 17. 42 When the Philistine looked ahead and became David, he despised him because he was young and reddish and fair-haired. 43 And the Philistine said unto David, Am I a dog, because thou art come unto me with sticks? And the Philistine cursed David by his god. 44 And the Philistine said unto David, Come unto me, and I will give thy flesh to the birds of the air, and to the beasts of the field. 45 David answered the Philistine, "You come to me with swords and lances and spears; but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, who is God of the nations of Israel, whom you have reproached. 46 On this day the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will kill you and separate your head from your body, and on this day I will give the bodies of the camp of the Philistines to the birds of the sky and to the wild beasts of the earth, and all the earth shall see that Israel has a God. 47 And all this people shall see that it is not by the sword, but by the spear of the Lord; for the Lord is in charge of the war, and he shall deliver you into his hand. 48 And when the Philistine arose and went forth, and drew near to David, David hastened, and ran toward the host, the Philistine to meet. 49 And David put his hand in his bag, and took of it a stone; he flung it out and hit the philistine in his forehead, and the stone penetrated deep into his forehead, and he fell on his face to the ground. 50 So David overcame the Philistine with the sling and the stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him, though David had no sword in his hand. 51 And David sprang up, and stood near the Philistine, and took his sword out of his vagina, and slew him, and cut off his head with it. And when the Philistines saw that their giants were dead, they took flight.

Picture of case manager Kjell Henning Thon with neighbor who publishes notes, but in retrospect he claims that this should have been understood.
Can't understand how it is possible to mess up so much of a public agency and in retrospect do not admit anything or show better discretion towards others afterwards when one even makes those mistakes and needs the grace of others.
It again shows that they make a difference between people, and that they seem to be untidy, rotten, non-jealous, schizophrenic, unpredictable and academically obscene!

The Planning and Building Administration's double standard with which they operate is both abuse of power and authority, as one should not make a difference between the country's inhabitants.

What is also marvelous with PBE here in Oslo is that, in my opinion, they are simply academically unfit.
Will almost say dangerous, therefore I would say that only it should and should others in and around them make them stop and make a big change internally throughout the public agency.

Let me mention an example, if I could have taken much more.

Our neighbor also applied for exemption from masonry.
They thought they had gotten, but it turned out that it was a note so lay out for several years. Who can from "ordinary" people see a difference between a note and not a note?
PBEs are really some rock cups when they publish drafts publicly.
Would think they are using drugs.
We are not working on this and believe that what is on the website is valid and approved documents.
Sure you can't be, since PBE here in Oslo is busy posting their own notes under approved documents.
See here for documentation of what I write, read for yourself.


The City of Oslo The Planning and Building Administration
Kjell Henning Thon
Archive code: 531 Construction site: CROATIA 2 D Property: 143/104/0/0
Address: Sjølyst plass 4, 0278 OSLO
Applicant: Link Arkitektur AS Address: PB 204, 1602 FREDRIKSTAD Action type: Detached house Species type: Entry Answer to transmission in ongoing case-Crocodile path 2 D The Planning and Building Administration refers to the letter from the responsible applicant Link Architecture 22.03.2019. In the letter the responsible applicant indicates that the said case has been granted a permit for amendment 22… 06.2015 (document number 2010 11373-85).

The agency has looked at the said document, and this is a draft which by an obsolescence has been available on case inspection a period. The agency strongly regrets this and the misunderstanding that has arisen due to the error. We emphasize that the document has now been removed, and does not represent a legally adopted decision, as it has no date, no signature and also has parts that clearly indicate that there is a draft through missing fields for authorized rights, internal comments marked / separated by a star (***). The agency therefore maintains our request in a letter dated 11.03.2019 where we ask for a reply to the last letter with Need for additional documentation.

We also extend the deadline for submitting this documentation to 03.05.2019.
Planning and Building Services Department for Construction Projects North / East
This document is electronically approved 04.04.2019 by: Kjell Henning Thon - case officer
Nils-Henrik Henningstad-functioning unit manager

They replied to this email:

Oslo municipality v / Plan and building agency Sak: 201011373. Crocodile path 2D

After receiving their letter of June 4, 2018, in this connection have gone through all the documents in the case.
It is striking that several documents sent from PBE refer to an illegality case on the neighboring property Krokstien 2C. We suspect that mail reception has mistakenly assigned documents to this case. Therefore, there has been an impression that the support wall was not approved.
We therefore wish to point out that the support wall in the measure Krokstien 2D (case number 2010 11373) has been approved by PBE in connection with a given permit granted on 22 June 2015 (2010 11373-85).

All documents after this date are colored by the fact that there was an illegal case with the neighbor in Krokstien 2 C at the same time.
It is therefore our opinion that support wall in connection with. The case 2010 11373 has been clarified and that everything is ready for the final certificate to be transmitted.
Yours sincerely Martin Ebert LINK arkitektur AS Fredrikstad, 29.05.2018
(Quote end.)

Furthermore, the Planning and Building Administration is striving to make things worst for us. I don't understand why either. We called down and received guidance not just once, but at least twice. And that our then case officer Kaja Aubert Lange defended us against our malicious and furious neighbor Roar Telje who was so angry at all that we did. He was furious because we had tenants. He was furious because we had built funkishus, which didn't fit in here, and he was furious because we had parked our car at Stormyrveien. +++ many other things. When he did not hear at Kaja Aubert Lange, then he reinforced his rage against us and hatred I would almost call it to get more neighbors to sign what he sent by mailer and other to PBE. Talk about that this neighbor has got a lot of misery. Then it turns out afterwards that everything he has come up with has only been a solid bluff. Blue. he writes about plowing and other things that it will cause problems with the wall we have built. In fact, it is the place in Oslo city that the haulage car runs best by!

This writes Roar Telje in mail to PBE.
«On the Wall towards Stormyrveien It is claimed in the Nabov War that the wall has been established above the previously specified boundary and old wall. This is not right! The old, natural delimitation of the plot was a mountain cliff that ended well within where the wall is now built. The "new" slope made by the builders ended slightly longer than the "old" border (with fence), but due to the slope there was room for road maintenance and snow skiing. This is a road with bus traffic, and chanterelle for space for snow from the quarry car is absolutely essential in a road that has 1st priority after snowfall. The consequence of the location of the wall is that the snow is pushed along the road and filled into the access and parking areas of other neighbors along the way. "

All of the indictments and hate-mails that our neighbors have sent to the PBE of arguments have been shamed. Nothing has turned on. The snow run has worked perfectly, there is not a single place in Oslo city that snow skiing works better than here.
There is a straight wall at 11 meters which is 1 meter from the 5-meter road where you can also push endless amounts of snow in if you need it.
The problem is on the other side of our wall where the neighbor's wall is only 20 cm from the road, that is the real and real problem in Stormyrveien.
Telje also writes that our wall is no longer out in the road than what our slope was before we set up the wall. It is 20 cm longer than before, which again shows that our wall is only a win-win situation.

Furthermore, it is also strange that not only have we built our wall according to their directions, but they also have the neighbor's wall and garage just across the road with us. If we have built illegally, what about them right across the road? They have to back straight from their own garage right out into a one-way street. And they have built a wall 20 cm from the road.
They cannot hold on to such frivolity and create so much frustration, annoyance and certainly much more.

Our responsible applicants, Ferdigattest also write about this in our application to PBE, which was rejected for completely incomprehensible reasons!

This is what Ferdigattest AS writes in his application on behalf of us:
Concerning the wall, negative consequences for road traffic and maintenance are: This point also seems to be necessary to point out that it is somewhat striking that neighbor in Stormyrveien 4, 5 and 6 has signed these statements. It is important to emphasize in this context that the promoter of this project does not in any way want to indicate his neighbors as he sees that some have done in this case, because he has misunderstood the regulations and the listed wall. But when all three neighbors Stormyrveien 4, 5 and 6 themselves have walls that are all close to or within regulated road boundaries, it becomes difficult not to mention this. When there are also several other walls in the area with corresponding location, then it must be said to be an established practice in the area in question with mures until - and indeed also in - regulated road boundaries. In fm. Both Stormyrveien 4 and 6 also lie the walls all the way out to the paved road. In Stormyrveien 5 is a garage and a wall with approximately the same location in ft. the roadway as the measure now being sought. We can hardly see that the wall in Krokstien 2c significantly affects the road surface more than these measures. The fact that 2 neighbor (s) have a continuous exit of more than 20 m, and that none of the 3 neighbors have a random access on their own grounds, is considered to contribute significantly more negatively with respect to. traffic conditions than the right wall along the road for which this is sought. But as mentioned - it is not the responsibility of the shipper to hang up in the neighborhood. You only want to get your order in order. Mht. This point is also obvious that the wall that lies right out in the road surface to some extent affects road technical considerations. However, after an overall assessment, the wall is not considered to have a significant impact on road technical considerations. Mht. Road traffic is affected to a limited extent since visibility etc. on the right stretch is not changed to any great extent. In this connection, it appears to the previous statement. Mht. maintenance, it is pointed out that the asphalt edge remains with sufficient distance to the wall, and that there is a road fault in the area in question, so that one can store some snow here. Otherwise, there is a considerable area where the wall goes to terrain where snow has been stored in recent years. Initiatives have never experienced this as difficult. As far as we understand, the City Environment Agency has not registered a single complaint or incident in recent years, neither with respect to the case. that the areas in question are hazardous to traffic or maintenance problems. We note that the wall has been standing for a long time without the road authority in the municipality - who manages and maintains the road - has not registered any problems, neither with regard to. use or operation.
(Quote end.)

Final Comment:

I wrote the following in the headline: "Our fight against PBE here in Oslo has been the little man's struggle against the bureaucracy, but I think we will" win "and eventually win as David prevailed over Goliath!"

We read in the word of God that the mighty Goliath felt so powerful but had not expected him to have any weak and bad sides as well.
That's how it is with PBE here in Oslo.
They think if we don't have the brain to think about? It is perceived as strange that they to such a degree run so hard against us. Not least because we had a positive dialogue with them before we started our construction projects.
Then they turn around 180 degrees and welcome us. We did nothing but what we did on the advice and guidance of them. Furthermore, we look around here that the neighbors who have opposed ourselves have exceeded both one and the other.
They back out terribly into Stormyrveien, because they have arranged themselves so badly that they do not have a snap spot or something on their own property.
They have put illegal signs with private parking. This does not matter to PBE that it is not. The argument is inter alia that it was done before 2006.
But our responsible applicants and Ferdigattest also point out this point that no one has applied for a wall here at Hellerudtoppen in 100 years.

Then we shall be taken, and in time.

So it turns out that what is the problem here is, at least, us.
Even in retrospect and what has emerged. So, apparently, PBE did not think that the neighbor above us should have a wall 1 meter from the road that is natural to have. But they can still have their wall just 20 cm from the road.
Here with us this creates double with problems. Why do you ask? That's because the road is one-way. Where we can park our car, it is not up to our wall. Parking is prohibited there. But there next door has its wall only 20 cm from the road. The wall is as illegal as it is possible to have a wall. This does not concern PBE at all, it bears witness to awkwardness, and that they are professionally obscene.

That they leave that wall, but want us to tear our wall.
It again shows that they make a difference between people, and that they seem to be untidy, rotten, non-jealous, schizophrenic, unpredictable and academically obscene!

One thing is certainly, I / we have mated all things that PBE has come up with to us. Not a single one now stands back. Eg. Nils-Henrik Henningstad claimed that there were several here in Oslo city who had to demolish wall under the order of PBE.
I went in to look at those things. There, the Fire Department and other agencies had been in there and ordered and said it was dangerous with that wall. Blue. that there could be no emergency vehicles.
With us it is the opposite, there is a clear advantage for everyone. Even for emergency vehicles as we have built.
This compares Nils-Henrik Henningstad with our property. This is not only rude, but it is worse. It is both lies and to fabricate a "truth" that is directly manipulative. To keep PBE on and adjust to such people I see as an impossibility.
They do as the scripture says, call the light dark and dark light.

Isaiah 5. 20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who make darkness the light and light

Ingen kommentarer:

Legg inn en kommentar