SIR – The proposed 73 (not 43 as cited in your article) house allocations at Powick is more than any other category two village, and more than all but one category one village.
The Hospital Lane proposal, unlike all others, has not even undergone a sustainability appraisal.
Consider: 1. Development applications on or adjacent to this land have been rejected on three previous occasions, because access was problematic.
2. The last sentence for the proposal states, “There are no access constraints associated with this site.”
Odd, considering the site’s past planning application history.
3. At the Bovis exhibition, it is revealed that the company has bought a house in Russell Close, to be demolished to provide access for the additional houses.
Did whoever suggested the inclusion of the sentence about there being no access constraints have extraordinary foresight?
In Powick’s case, this ‘consultation’ is nothing more than an exercise to meet legal requirement – responses from the public will make no difference.
The real issue here is the insidious hoodwinking of the public by letting them believe that they have any say, or any right to challenge decisions made on their behalf.
CATHRYN THROUP
Powick
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here