"The local council is suppose to support and act on behalf of the local population, not the direct opposite."It's no good coming up with that old chestnut, because many Council functions involve working within the confines of national legislation and guidance, and planning applications have to be determined against the relevant development plan and all other material planning considerations, which whilst taking on board the views of local residents doesn't mean they take priority. And as I said the other day on CW4, development plan policies are rarely black and white, they usually say things like "we won't support x unless it can be demonstrated that..." which lends itself to persuasive technical arguments being made in support.You misunderstood my reference to Wandsworth - I wasn't citing it as an example of the benefits of development, quite the opposite (the fact that in terms of passengers wanting to get on peak-time services to Waterloo it is the busiest station between Brentford and Waterloo), but what I was citing it as an example of how it's happening all over the capital. "London has remained a great city because most areas prevent the destruction of their character and history" - sorry but I don't think that's correct, simply because I don't think Hounslow has done any less (nor anymore) than any other Borough to prevent the loss of its character and history, where that character or history is a sufficient asset to be worthy of protection. You ask why Isleworth hasn't seen the same level of development as Brentford, the answer is obvious. Whilst public transport isn't fantastic around Brentford, where I live (an area of average public transport access) it's under 20 minutes walk to the district line and the North London Line/London Overground, 20-25 minutes walk to the Picadilly line, under 10 minutes walk to Kew Bridge station, plus there bus and nightbus services from virtually right outside my door to all of those stations and further afield. If I want to drive, I'm under 1/2 mile from the M4/A4 corridor and both the North and South Circulars.Apart from buses, Isleworth is a 'wasteland' public transport wise, reflected in its low level of access to public transport (PTAL). Road wise there's the A316 and little else.Bearing in mind the increased demand for housing is centred around young professionals, the prime locations for major development are those with good public transport connections to London. Which is precisely why when you travel by train to Waterloo from Brentford, you'll pass umpteen new towers of residential-led development, even though as you pass them you'll already be squashed in the train carriage like a sardine (just like I was this morning, yesterday morning etc.)In part public transport weaknesses are also why you've not seen the same pace of development within Richmond, together with the fact that there are many parts of Richmond Borough which do consist of genuine character or heritage assets worthy of protection. Equally you'd probably argue that the political powers that be within Richmond are generally anti-development and praise them for that, conveniently forgetting the thousands of pounds of taxpayers money that Richmond has spent on failed High Court actions and costs awarded against it on appeals in recent years. I'm not saying LBRUT is a 'bad' Council, but its another Council I deal with all the time (on behalf of developers, objectors and neighbour groups) and I certainly don't find it any 'better' than LBH.I agree (personally speaking) that development shouldn't be jammed in anywhere, and I also agree (again personally speaking) that development doesn't necessarily bring benefits to an area, but that is the reality unless the powers that be at the top of the tree look at the bigger picture and start directing growth away from the capital. And until that happens, Councils can't do much more.
Adam Beamish ● 3452d