Local empowerment denied
Sir: Leo McKinstry’s experience of failing to prevent a wholly unsuitable planning application in a neighbour’s garden (‘Naked greed meets Stalinist control’, 7 June) is sadly familiar. A few years ago a developer persuaded three neighbours of ours to sell him parts of their gardens. A planning application to build five huge detached houses to fill the space was duly filed.
Essentially every single neighbour objected to this application, the only exceptions being those who had a financial interest in the application being successful. The parish council planning committee condemned the application. The local district councillors objected to the application. The application was turned down at the district level. Repeat applications were made, with trivial adjustments, often before the previous application was turned down. Eventually, the district council gave up the unequal struggle and caved in.
Of course the outcome was inevitable. The developer had too much to gain to give in. What is the loss of a view over a mature garden worth compared to the profit from developing five large detached houses on a prime site in a village in the middle of the green belt? The forces at work here are exactly the same as those that keep the Common Agricultural Policy in receipt of the lion’s share of all revenues to the EU.
Many proposals have been made to reform the Town and Country Planning Act but, as McKinstry correctly points out, this Stalinist piece of legislation works very well both for politicians and for those who fund political parties. The chances of it being significantly reformed are nil.
Stephen Hemingway
Knebworth, Hertfordshire
Previous page
