News, comment and features

Skims over the disastrous impact of her activism on SOV. Whole thing now getting developed anywhere into rubbishy flats, creating just as much pressure on local services and schools (including the one my toddler will be competing to get into) yet with NO s.106 and NO CIL payments. So we get a shed load of flats. More pressure on local services. More competition for school places. More stress on our creaking road system and NO financial compensation to tackle these issues.

All 100% predictable.

David, the recognition was for her role in allowing local people to influence planning, not for the particular outcome. Do you not believe that people should be able to express their opinions? You're pretty good at expressing your own, and often in a rather unpleasant way. Do you think that developers should be able to do whatever they want regardless of the consequences for people living in and passing through an area? I personally believe that despite the attack on the concept of the commons over recent centuries there is such a thing and that "ownership" of a bit of the earth's surface does not give the "owners" carte blanche.

You only have to visit the US to see how ugly towns can be when money (ie biggest bang for the buck) and "ownership" trump aesthetics. I don't believe that local people should have a veto on what can be complex issues, but there should be a meaningful dialogue and the sessions that Jane arranged provided an improved way of facilitating that dialogue.

And it is also helpful when it comes to the planning committee system, which to me seems flawed. So much depends on the handful of councillors on the committee, who may be prejudiced or open-minded, stick in the muds or imaginative, lazy or conscientous. (Having said that, I don't know what the alternative might be.)

As it happens (and at the risk of becoming persona non grata locally), my personal view is that the Southgate towers would not have had a negative visual impact (though I have reservations about the suitability of tall buildings from the residents' point of view and from a sustainability angle about demolishing so many buildings and using large quantities of concrete, which is a significant source of greenhouse gases). The new towers might also have drawn the eye away from the hideously ugly building at the top of Chase Road that completely ruins the appearance of Southgate Circus when looking northwards. The other major problem with Southgate Circus and Chase Side is that its aesthetics are spoilt by an infestation of cars. Contrast how it looks now with photographs of the wonderful tube and bus stations taken in the 1930s.

(The tower blocks proposed for Enfield Town are, however, another matter - completely unsuitable for the centre of an ancient market town.)

However, none of this detracts from Jane's valuable work.

Nor does it alter the fact that, despite several warnings, David's post contains an unpleasantly phrased personal attack. I am therefore banning him for six months, after which time any repeat will mean an immediate permanent ban.