JULY 16 2021 – “THE BIGGER PLAN FOR 10,000 HOMES ON THE SITE IS JUST A DREAM (LET’S CALL IT A NIGHTMARE!)” – TONY HOGBEN – DEPUTY LEADER OF HORSHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL

Homes England’s £3bn masterplan for 10,000 houses West of Ifield [including the ancient Parish of Ifield]

 

“The bigger plan for 10,000 homes on the site is just a dream (lets call it a nightmare!)…” – July 16 2021

Tony Hogben

Cabinet member for Horsham Town, Parking and Communications. 
Horsham District Councillor Rusper & Colgate Ward,



Telephone:    07500 808898 
Email: Tony.Hogben@horsham.gov.uk

 

JULY 15 2021 – “DESPITE MASSIVE LOCAL OPPOSITION, SPINELESS HORSHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL CABINET APPROVES HOMES ENGLAND’S MONSTROUS £3BN MASTERPLAN OF 10,000 HOUSES, BURYING IFIELD GOLF COURSE UNDER CONCRETE & TARMAC, CREATING AN ENVIRONMENTAL CATASTROPHE, AND CONDEMNING THE ANCIENT PARISH OF IFIELD TO A NIGHTMARE ‘GIANT BUILDING SITE’ FOR YEARS TO COME”

 

JULY 17 2021

Dear Tony,

West of Ifield

Thank you for confirming that you note our points!!!

We had understood from Liz Kitchen that you felt that West of Ifield was a totally unacceptable option and so I had hoped that you, at least, would have appeared at the Council meeting yesterday to represent the view that you represent.

The 15th July Committee meeting would, I thought, have been considered to have been of major importance as it affected the appearance, history, infrastructure and the environment of all of the countryside from Rusper, to Faygate and to Ifield!

It would have hoped, therefore, that you would have considered this meeting to have been of major importance for the future of our area!

If you were not able to attend, we might have hoped that you would have made your views known in absentia.

If not, where do we go to for democracy!!!

Our case is unanswerable to anyone who listens!!!

It would appear that Council’s view does not comply with Government dictac on Greenbelt development, it does not comply with Sustainability or Bio-Diversity constraints, it does not comply with loss of an historical, 100 year old, thriving sporting facility, it does not comply with the impossible effects on an already straining local road network, it does not comply with an already surcharged medical infrastructure.

WHAT ON EARTH DOES IT COMPLY WITH??

If you are in agreement with our unanswerable argument, please let me know how we should proceed from here!

Otherwise, if you agree with the committee’s grotesque travesty of a democratic decision, please let me know so that we can take our reasoned argument elsewhere!

Kind regards,

Malcolm Bender

Pinewood, Rusper Road,

Ifield,

 

Drawing by Jem Clarke