I wonder where on the spectrum Raedwald assesses this rather fraught situation ?
Summarising: in a particular London district, a specific community wants to take charge of planning decisions - using the government's 'localism' policy for devolving powers - with (as we read) the intent of allowing a considerable quantity of house-extensions to be built, in order to facilitate the doubling of their numbers they anticipate in the next several years. One of their leading lights,
"a father of nine and secretary of the bid for a planning forum who was jailed for ballot fraud in 2001, estimated the average family size in his community was eight children and said he sees "constant conflict" over extensions. He believes the opposition to extensions is part of a more sinister threat aimed at encouraging the fast-growing community to find other places to live."All very interesting and, to me, a very good illustration of how things can get well out of kilter when you push decisions down to 'community' level. If this attempt at taking formal planning control succeeds, I am sure we can all extrapolate to other potential developments that might follow. (If you were to give planning decisions over to my local residents' association, for example, you'd get a rather different outcome as regards house extensions.)
But perhaps others see it as just part of life's rich tapestry. Where are the lines to be drawn ?
How would readers legislate ?