Letter: Policy squashes local opinion

SIR – I read with interest your article (A&T, 6th January) regarding the resignation of our parish councillor Mr Speadbury.

I’m not surprised that he resigned, after the New Forest District Council’s complete lack of consideration of what Hordle residents want for their village.

Many of us attended very lively meetings, voicing our opposition to more buildings on open land. We wrote letters of discontent, pointing out the inevitable blackspot at the junction of Hordle Lane and Everton Road, especially when the school day ends.

Cars park all down those roads, adding to the congestion and, to add insult to injury, we learn that well established trees, some with preservation orders on them, are going to be destroyed, when many of us opposed this plan right from the start.

Look at the green arguments against that idea alone. Where is the Green Canopy that we were promised!

Throughout many constituencies there is much evidence of abandoned brownfield sites, rundown old barns, and property that’s been empty indefinitely, which should be considered first.

We are well aware that we have a huge housing shortage, especially affordable housing, and I dare say there will be great opposition to my arguments.

However, tourists don’t necessarily want to see masses of developments when they visit and, looking at the architect’s plan in the A&T, those proposed houses do not look like affordable properties.

We also learn of the proposal for a further 156 properties off Hordle Lane. How many of those well established trees and hedgerows will be destroyed in this development?

Mr Speadbury suggested that we should invite Michael Gove to visit the village.

Mr Gove stated that local communities should be allowed to have their objections regarding further development, saying that “the plan-making process for housing has to start with a number. This number should, however, be an advisory starting point, a guide that is not mandatory”.

Sarah Kelly,

Hordle