| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:West Chiswick and Gunnersbury Society | |
| Posted by: | Adam Beamish | |
| Date/Time: | 09/12/15 14:30:00 |
| My comment about population growth was 'contentious' because personally speaking whilst I'm not for something as draconian as China's previous one child policy, I do think that globally population growth cannot be allowed to continue unchecked. But that's a whole different ball game to determining planning applications. As for being dismissive about the air quality issues raised by WG&CS, I'm dismissive of them in that I think/know there are other issues that take precedence when appraising applications, and I was a little perplexed by the emphasis they were placing on this. FWIW, I don't like to knock local societies. WC&GS haven't but other societies have approached me asking for me to assist them, as do individuals wanting me to object to applications, and I'd like to think that even (as is normally the case) I decide not to take the matter on (usually because I simply don't think it would be a good use of their money to instruct me when they can just as eloquently argue their cause themselves) my input is still helpful. What has always grated on me is when individuals or groups go overboard, like for example the Packhorse and Talbot debacle, or more recently the Empire House challenge. |