Letter: The Flawed SANG Policy Should Be Reviewed

Published on: 16 Mar, 2019
Updated on: 16 Mar, 2019

Eashing Lane SANG

From David Carter

I couldn’t agree more with Gordon Bridger who has raised this issue time and time again. SANGs was a rushed through, ill thought out mitigation policy back in 2007 with apparently no mechanism for review.

Picture the scene back in 2007 when all the council policy makers met with Natural England to discuss what they could do to protect the birds. I wonder who it was that came up with the idea of alternative dog walking areas?

I can’t imagine it was the only suggested solution. I like to think that there was someone who asked “Why don’t we just close the car parks to Ockham and Whitmore Common SPA’s during nesting season? It would be a bit like the fishing closed season.

Maybe they did. Maybe this was discussed and discounted on lawful grounds. I just don’t know but these are all the sort of questions that need to be asked by the disgruntled electorate.

Ironically the recent introduction of car parking charges at Whitmoor and Ockham, totally disconnected with SPA protection, has probably done more to discourage visitors to the SPA’s than any SANG but we will never know because no one is monitoring them.

The GGG, despite proclaiming that they are the party to hold others accountable, have never been seen to want to touch this crazy policy, maybe because they misguidedly thought for a long time that these protected birds could actually help them block green belt development.

How wrong they have been on this and how it has backfired now their green belt is being converted to car parks.

I am so cross about this policy because, like Gordon Bridger, I can see this tax on development ultimately reducing developers obligations to affordable housing.

Let us not forget the £2.8 million that was handed over to GBC by the SOLUM developers to put towards SANG mitigation in exchange for a reduction in affordable housing contributions from 30% to 10%.

This £2.8m could have paid for at least another 15 new affordable homes.

Maybe R4GV should manifesto a call for a review of this SANG policy?