WRITE to us by emailing firstname.lastname@example.org or post us a letter at Malvern Observer, Letters to Editor, Church Green East, Redditch, B98 8BP
CONGRATULATIONS to the hundreds of pupils in the area who are probably still celebrating some truly outstanding GCSE results.
While changes have been made this year because the qualification was apparently becoming too easy, good grades, particularly A* to A grades, do not just happen without pupils applying themselves.
Regardless of whether students remember half of what they have crammed into their heads in the last six months, working hard and earning your just rewards is lesson they will be able to carry with them whatever they choose to do next.
TO COIN a phrase ‘when I were a lad’, constables had a regular beat which they walked every day at set times, they were known and respected by all the residents, their presence on the streets a visible deterrent to criminals and vandals.
Now we have to report crime by email or dialling 101 or 999. I realise that we cannot stand still, however it would be nice to see constables on the streets.
Inspector Brighton tells us that there is high visibility of PCSOs in Malvern. Perhaps she would be kind enough to let us know what times they appear, as I have yet to see any.
In view of the fact that we are told that the numbers of police officers are increasing, what do they all do, sit in offices filling in forms in triplicate? As Great Malvern is hardly a hamlet, it seems to me ludicrous that the nearest stations are Worcester and Hereford. Furthermore, what is to happen to the police station now that it is redundant, conversion into yet more flats?
M G Jackson, Malvern
WE LIVE at 29 Richmond Road and with fellow residents, attended a public meeting on August 20, regarding the proposed two storey extension to the dental practice at 12A Richmond Road.
We were invited, prior to the meeting, to comment and the residents were unanimous in their rejection of the proposal. However, the scheme was approved by 10 votes to 7 by the planners.
In our opinion the 10/7 vote for the scheme was a travesty of the planning system where, to the best of our knowledge, at least two votes were from members who are patients of the practice. This may well have been prejudicial to the final decision. The resident’s comments seem to have fallen on deaf ears with little
or no consideration.
We object to their decision on the following grounds:
It was put in writing that the proposal was ‘acceptable in principle’ by the conservation officer prior to the planning committee’s meeting. We consider the dental practice proposal was seriously prejudged.
The proposed design follows a single minded agenda with an overtly modern structure that pays no respect to the historic style of Richmond Road and Farley Road which are in a designated conservation area. No attention has been paid to the definition of ‘conservation area’ or the wishes of the residents. The design is both utilitarian and cheap looking and whilst the existing structure is an eyesore, the new proposal just creates a two storey eyesore.
We, the residents, have gone to considerable expense improving and maintaining the appearance of our houses to preserve some of the unique character of Malvern.
In our particular case, we have created off-road parking for two cars to help alleviate the growing parking problem in the road.
The application was for just ‘cosmetic’ improvements to the existing five consultant practice. We find it difficult to believe the cost involved would be undertaken without having to generate more revenue.
Without doubt, at some point, the practice will be enlarged, (contravening the application) and this will add to the parking problem which is a separate issue that should be addressed by the authorities.
We believe there is also a future option of turning the building into flats, which again would contravene the planning application. The design of a similar proposal, in 2008, was more compatible than the current design and ironically this was turned down.
Whilst fellow residents have expressed very similar views the points raised in this letter are ours alone.
Michael and Linda Kimberley. Malvern Link.
* John Williams, head of policy and governance at MHDC, has since clarified that the council can only advise members on declaring an interest but it is their own responsibility to decide whether it will result in a conflict of interest.
ON AUGUST 20 the majority of councillors on the Southern Area Development Management Committee of Malvern Hills District Council approved an application for a modern development at 12A Richmond Road, Malvern Link, on the corner of Farley Road. Unfortunately some local councillors have been persuaded that anything goes (as long as it has bit of Malvern stone on it).
The conservation officer recommended approval on the grounds that a modern contemporary design would not mimic the historic buildings but would complement them and preserve and enhance the character of the Malvern Link Conservation Area.
This makes a mockery of the term ‘conservation area’ and sets a precedent which means that such areas in Malvern will eventually lose any charm they have left. Then presumably we will not need conservation areas or a conservation officer – savings to be made.
THERE has been some interesting juxtaposition of news items recently. The council leader stated that his party puts people before politics, yet the papers are full of articles about whole neighbourhoods and villages putting forward coherent arguments against planning applications, arguments which are totally ignored.
Now we read this leader has installed a relatively novice councillor to head up planning policy, while he himself, has put in a planning application for housing on his land. And wasn’t there another councillor some time back, who applied for and got planning permission for his land against the wishes of his constituents?
What with this and awarding himself and others ‘pay’ rises, an interesting picture emerges of precisely which people he is prioritising.
Albert Road North, Malvern