Archives2

ASHBURTON LEARNING CENTRE – PLANNING COMMITTEE RAILROADS RESIDENTS

The facts: a letter was sent by the council officers to some local residents, on 10 October 2003, advising them of the plan to replace the current Ashburton Community School and playing fields with a new “Learning Village” consisting of a replacement school and 100 new homes. This letter merely stated the bare facts and included no proper detail for residents to consider.

The letter was written on a Friday 10 October and the first copies arrived at residents’ homes on 13 October. The deadline for objections was 2 November. This was a Sunday. Therefore, in order for letters to arrive in time, they would have to be in the Council offices by Friday 31 October. Taking into account the weekends in between these two dates, this allowed just 14 working days to find out the facts, ascertain the implications of the development and write a sensible letter, based not upon emotional outrage and “nimbyism” but the proper planning issues as relevant to the Croydon Unitary Development Plan, (1997). A tall order for the average local resident, I’m sure all agree.

Amazingly, the developer’s exhibition, including models, plans and artists’ impressions was staged in Ashburton School on 5 November. In other words, residents were given an opportunity to view details of the project 3 days after the deadline for objections. This was not made clear at the meeting.

What kind of consultation process is this? The answer of course is that it is an absolutely outrageous demonstration of contempt for all the local residents.

This sentiment was reinforced at the meeting held in the Town Hall on Thursday 20 November. The Chair merely confirmed that the statutory notice was given to residents and stated that this was adequate “consultation”. Clearly this is not the case. As Cllr Chris Wright wisely observed, whilst the statutory notice technical keeps the procedure neatly within legal confines, 14 working days notice is hardly sufficient time for residents to make a considered judgment.

There was a plea for a deferral of this project until such time as proper consultation could take place with local residents. Yet, this was blindly refused, thus increasing bad feeling in the neighbourhood and provoking yet more objections. It is naïve of the committee to ignore the simple fact that this project could proceed far more smoothly if residents and homeowners were enfranchised by allowing them to engage in a proper consultation exercise rather than deliberately excluding them from the procedure.

Clearly the fact that the exhibition took place after the deadline is a ridiculous oversight and should be sufficient grounds for a deferral.

The plan was passed by the committee, with complete disregard for local residents.

Return to top 1 2 3 4 5 Next