The title of the article to which Mr. Martin Weeks contributed and which appeared in the Romsey Advertiser November 11 certainly caught my eye and deserves a response.
The planning system may have its flaws, but one of its strengths is the right of the public to comment on applications that affect them. They are not exercising a ‘God-given right to control’ development, that authority rests in the first place with TVBC’s planning committee which had refused two earlier requests, but any criticism of them by Mr Weeks is conspicuous by its absence .
It also makes no mention of the objection of Romsey Extra and Romsey City Council to the current and previous request. Does he have the same dark vision he has for the residents?
What the residents were doing was raising their concerns so that they could be considered by the council. Consideration of these comments is not a waste of taxpayers’ money or officers’ time, but the performance of the council’s statutory duties.
Reviewing development applications is largely a subjective process, which I suspect is what Mr. Weeks is upset about when residents’ opinions don’t reflect his own.
I’m not sure I agree with his glowing description of what is now allowed. Three side-by-side flat-roofed boxes with properties adjoining Tadfield Road served by a rather narrow access with a ninety-degree bend by the old CycleWorld building will enhance the quality of Romsey. Good luck to the residents who try to get out of the site on garbage day!
Steve Lees, MRTPI Planning Consultant,
. Letter NIMBYism of the inhabitants Romsey Chronicle Hampshire