ANYONE who has travelled overseas, particularly to the Third World, will have seen the damage unrestricted building development can do.

From Riga to Rio, New Delhi to Nanjing, towns and cities are suffering as the developers move in and common sense moves out.

Thankfully, we have strict rules and regulations to govern such matters. But that is not to say that developers don't make every attempt to pursue their own agenda.

Kidderminster's Manor Oak Residential Properties has twice attempted to gain permission to knock down two large, detached Victorian homes in Battenhall Road, Worcester, and build a block of flats and some terraced houses.

Now, we have nothing against this particular firm - or housing developments in general. Sympathetic, attractive projects, in the right areas, are not only desirable, but necessary. There is a need for housing in Worcester and, we hope, developers will take up the challenge of supplying that need.

But this plan was, quite rightly, doomed from the start. A block of flats in this location would have stuck out like.. well, a big block of flats. These are two well-built buildings that do not need to be demolished in the name of 'progress' - or profit.

Earlier this year, the city council refused the firm's initial application. Manor Oak appealed and, thankfully, the Planning Inspectorate has upheld the city's decision.

Over the years, Worcester's planners have been rightly criticised for some of their decisions - this time, however, they got it just right.