Monday, February 12, 2007

The Appeal Decision for 66-70 Beulah Hill

Press release (immediate):

Croydon Greens dismayed at decision on 66-70 Beulah Hill

To the great dismay of local residents and the Croydon Green Party, The Planning Inspectorate has decided to grant permission for the development at 66-70 Beulah Hill.

The Croydon Green party worked with local residents to organise a large demonstration outside the properties.

After speaking to the Inspectorate, Croydon Green Party’s Shasha Khan said:

“The Planning Inspectorate has made the same mistake as the council planners, in that it has considered this application in isolation. The Appeal Decision even acknowledges that “Beulah Hill carries high volumes of traffic”(1) yet, concludes that the proportional increase resulting from this development will be insignificant. Why isn’t the cumulative impact of all the developments on Beulah Hill taken into consideration?”

He continued:

“This whole episode highlights how the democratic process is not working for the people. Local residents, political parties and Labour MP Malcolm Wicks are opposed to the development, yet Mr Wicks’ own government is behind this trend towards increasingly centralised decision making.

This is a very disappointing decision for the residents of Beulah Hill. I hope this doesn’t break their resolve in opposing similar developments in the future. There only recourse is to go to the High Court and here again the democratic process works against the people as the legal costs act as a disincentive. Whatever action the residents choose next, the Croydon Green Party will continue to support them.”

Notes: (1) Taken from section 10 of the appeal decision

Tags ,


nick said...

The Planning Inspectorate's decision paves the way for the destruction of Croydon's back gardens. Croydon council's planning officers and many of the planning committee were complicit in allowing this development. The Greens are the only political party to come out of this with any credibility. Barnfield Homes emerge "triumphant", but with their name dragged through the mud, and the death of the local environment on their hands.

Shasha Khan said...

Thanks Nick!

The Appeal Decision does not mention the aggressive letter we received from Barnfield Homes. Does this mean correspondance of this nature is acceptable??


Standing up for what matters