LETTER: ‘Least bad’ is not good enough

In response to Dr Lindsay’s letter, (WSCT 19/9/13,) I would like to make the following points:
Your lettersYour letters
Your letters

I understand the argument made by Dr Lindsay that the objections to the 475 Billingshurst housing application have to be robust and supported by evidence.

However, I suggest that, in order to succeed, the objections need not necessarily be supported by local authorities if sufficiently rigorous supportive evidence is obtained at a local level.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Surely, our district councillors, consulting with the relevant local groups, could have had a more hands-on approach, and exhibit knowledge and understanding of serious local concerns regarding the impact of this proposed development.

Dr Lindsay speaks in generalities and does not state where he really stands. Am I unrealistic to expect a district councillor to represent some balanced and informed views on this subject?

To abstain and then talk about a ‘least bad’ decision is, I suggest, hardly a commendable stance to take, and I cannot believe our district councillors can be proud of their role in this issue.

Dr Lindsay states defensively that Horsham District Council ‘is not influenced at all’ by the prospect of a ‘New Home Bonus’ (NHB). I draw his attention to the following definition: ‘It (the NHB) is designed to create an effective incentive to encourage local authorities to facilitate housing growth’ (Minister for Housing and Local Govt. Feb 2011).

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

How else does the local authority ‘facilitate housing growth’ except through the planning system? In the above quoted document the Minister for Housing explains that ‘localism’ is supposed to be at the heart of this NHB initiative, with the local authorities talking to communities about housing issues and encouraging local involvement by explaining that the NHB would be allocated to benefit the affected communities.

I could better understand Dr Lindsay’s indignation had Horsham District Council followed this recommendation.

Instead, it has stated the NHB will be placed in its reserves. Since HDC seems to be the beneficiary of this incentive I suggest the presumption of ‘influence’ is, under the circumstances, a reasonable deduction.

Instead of feeling aggrieved ,I suggest Dr Lindsay now truly represent the Billingshurst community and make sure the NHB is used as was intended!

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

In addition I note that Dr Lindsay refers to the fact that the HDC decision to allow the appeal was partly based on concerns about losing control of that other ‘sweetener’ S106 money! No financial implication here?

Dr Lindsay stated that the ‘it’ (the development), ‘will bring increased trade into Billingshurst’.

I’m not sure what evidence Dr Lindsay has to support this claim. In fact evidence from the past supports a contrary argument. Since the last large-scale development, the village has experienced the loss of three garages, the closure of several specialist shops, and, possibly because of the limited and user hostile parking facilities in the village, the migration of more people to supermarkets outside the village.

Admittedly, we do have more ‘fast food’ stores, charity shops and estate agents. Is that the ‘increased trade’ which Mr Lindsay anticipates?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Reading DrLindsay’s letter, I get the distinct impression that, despite being a Billingshurst and Shipley district councillor, he does not seem prepared to fight our corner.

I hope Dr Lindsay will prove me wrong but with actions rather than words…

ANN RODWELL

Forge Way, Billingshurst