Bromsgrove planning bosses hit back at claims

By Tristan Harris Thursday 13 December 2012 Updated: 18/12 12:09

BOSSES from Bromsgrove District Council's planning department have hit back at claims made in last week's Standard about the authority's planning committee.

It follows the story on our front page last Friday (December 7) about the applications to build homes on garage sites in Sidemoor and Whitford, which were approved, and the one in Alvechurch, which was refused.

The district council's executive director of planning John Staniland said: “I would like to reassure residents that every planning application is considered on its own merits.

“A team of planning officers carefully consider each application, taking into account current planning policy, Government guidelines and the views of interested parties and they make recommendations to the committee so they can make an unbiased decision."

And Bromsgrove District Council's Planning Committee chairman, Coun Richard Deeming, said: “While the applications referred to in the press article involved similar considerations, no two sites are the same.

“In this case the uniqueness of each application was considered which resulted in different decisions being made and which were based on a raft of information provided by planning officers.

“There is no such thing as a postcode lottery when it comes to making planning decisions – the role of the committee is a serious one as we are determining the future of the district, not only as a place for residents to live in but also as somewhere that encourages economic growth and prosperity.”

Regional news »

Redditch Standard
Will you be joining Alex Hospital Rally?

A MASS rally and march to save services at the ...

Stratford Observer
More houses needed to make Core Strategy sound

MORE homes than originally planned will need to be built ...

Worcester Observer

Visit the Worcester Observer website for the latest.

Evesham Observer
Booze ban proposed for Workman Gardens

DRINKING alcohol in a popular Evesham park could be banned ...