Fringe Box



Letter: None of the Strategic Sites Should Be In the Local Plan

Published on: 4 Apr, 2017
Updated on: 4 Apr, 2017

From Lisa Wright

In response to: Keeping Wisley Airfield in the Local Plan Would Be Unacceptable

Let’s face it, none of the strategic development sites should be in the Local Plan. They are all in the green belt and have other factors, AONB, environmental, agriculture, historic, etc, that should mitigate against housing development.

As they stand, none are sustainable without investing millions of pounds of taxpayer money into building more railway stations, roads, schools, medical facilities and so on.

We all know Guildford doesn’t need all these new homes.

We all know that our young people won’t be able to buy any of the new “affordable” houses, even if by some small chance any actually get built.

And we all know that the town is gridlocked and suffers accidents on a daily basis, probably due to the density of traffic.

This Conservative government needs a modal shift. That modal shift is not to flatten the countryside and create a few cycle lanes, it is to encourage employers to spread away from central London.

If employment was evenly spread across the country, especially to towns where people really need jobs, have empty homes, huge plots with building consent and roads, perhaps people wouldn’t have to move within an hour of London in the first place and will be able to remain with their family network.

Like me, whose families are 50 miles away, many people in Guildford have found themselves here due to work.

The Conservative Government has forced us into this mess and as far as I can see, have no intention or long term idea how to solve it.

If you voted blue hoping to save everything green, you were very wrong.

Share This Post

Responses to Letter: None of the Strategic Sites Should Be In the Local Plan

  1. Jenny Procter Reply

    April 5, 2017 at 7:13 am

    Well said Lisa Wright.

    The planning system is a mess and for years, along with the NHS and other services, has been undermined and adjusted piecemeal, heaping bad on bad in order to accommodate short term objectives and gains.

    We are all suffering as a result. A truly radical reassessment and overhaul is long overdue and is sadly not looking likely to be forthcoming under the present government.

  2. Jim Allen Reply

    April 5, 2017 at 9:13 am

    The last sentence put me off of this otherwise very well written piece.

    I don’t think you can blame any particular party, the Liberals wanted free movement in Europe without considering the infrastructure, the Conservatives (at least some) want profit, while Labour simply opened the door to any who would come, like America of the past.

    They all got it wrong. The current politicians, many of whom have limited, if any, experience of poverty or war, failed to learn from history and their judgement is affected.

    Additionally, the habit of spinning their messages attempting to make the “facts” suit their message remains manifest.

    So I would say to Ms Wright, well written but don’t blame the colour, blame the spin doctors.

    • Lisa Wright Reply

      April 5, 2017 at 1:02 pm

      I blame career politicians who like to say the right thing, knowing full well that it’s just a bunch of words put together in order to keep their jobs for the next few years.

      In this case, the shortages of social housing definitely lie at the door of the Conservative party. It started when Mrs Thatcher sold everything she could to boost the treasury. It seems the current government has nothing left to sell but the green belt.

      This has nothing to do with migration and everything to do with lack of long term government policy.

  3. John Perkins Reply

    April 6, 2017 at 6:31 am

    I completely agree with Lisa Wright here, with only one minor quibble: the word “sustainable” should be avoided because it has been so abused recently by those who would justify development that it has slightly the wrong connotation.

    At the time it was originated I thought “right to buy” was a good policy which could help people improve their lives and reduce government. Later it became obvious that it was a huge mistake. It did enrich some then, but only at the cost of others now. And government continues to grow.

Leave a Comment

Please see our comments policy. All comments are moderated and may take time to appear.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *