Sir, In responding to the independent Government inspector’s suggestion that site B is not sound for strategic allocation of housing, SODC’s cabinet member for planning, Angie Paterson, states his direction “goes against local opinion and the view of the town council”. She is wrong about this.
In 2009, only one per cent of those surveyed thought site B appropriate for development.
The town council has only expressed a preference for Site B if SODC’s judgement was based on “sound planning advice”. The Government inspector appears to believe it was not.
Furthermore, of more than 1,000 responses to the core strategy submitted to the Inspector, two-thirds concerned Wallingford. In other words, the vast majority of local people questioned either the legal compliance of the decision-making process, or the soundness of site B.
Had Angie Paterson attended the session on Wallingford in front of the inspector, she might have better understood the information presented from all interested bodies, and perhaps the views of the general population of the town and surrounding areas whom she purports to represent. Site B was the wrong place to put so many houses.
But I believe that the local opinion is against such a sizeable development anywhere in Wallingford.
Jennie Walmsley Wallingford
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article