18 October (Part 1) - Who are the ‘Fools on the Hill’? Us probably
Probably everyone knows who the principal villain of Heron Hill has been, the secondary one being Bexley
Council itself, but there were heroes too, viz. Belvedere Councillor Daniel Francis aided by his Councillor colleagues.
Throughout his
six year battle to ensure the law was upheld Daniel represented residents’ concerns to
Council planning officers and a fat lot of good it did him. When Ye Olde Leather
Bottle was being demolished without notification to the Council he and others
advised them without seeing any response. Bexley Council stood aside while saying
they could do nothing about it. When the building was
demolished in a dangerous fashion Bexley Council took no action to secure public safety.
When the Health & Safety Executive was persuaded to take an interest and asked
for Bexley Council’s assistance with evidence they got none. It was Daniel who was interviewed
by the H&SE and required to sign witness statements as I was myself. The development company was
fined £20,000.
The only thing that Daniel Francis didn’t do was suffer a roughing up at the
hands of the demolition gang, however his colleague, the former Belvedere
Councillor Gill MacDonald did not get away totally unabused.
Even after
three rejected planning applications Daniel objected to the
fourth in January this year. Well hidden on Bexley’s website is evidence of
Daniel’s final shot in the Battle of Heron Hill. He and Councillor Sally Hinkley
wrote to the Head
of Planning setting out their objections and concerns and
an addendum to the
planning officer’s report was put before the Committee.
They ignored it and another bit of old Belvedere is consigned to the scrap book of history.
Bexley Council rolls over again.
Not for the first time this developer is accused of appropriating a little bit of public land for himself, the
other was at 238 Woolwich Road, and true to form Bexley Council looks the other way.
A footpath crosses the Heron Hill site. In September 2015 the Council
promised to ensure its survival but now it is a
case of “a planning condition of this nature is not required”. The sign has already disappeared.
Note: Is it just me but does writing letters of that length
and complexity begin to justify Councillors’ £10k. allowances?
Index to related blogs.