LETTER: Crazy scheme in vulnerable area

Your letters

Your letters

0
Have your say

We have lived in Twineham for 52 years and so know the locality very well. We have three grown-up children who were baptised in Twineham church, and our daughter was married there. Our children went to the village school, as, more recently, did three grandsons.

We have considerable experience of living in a very low-lying area, where the river is tidal. Our home has been cut off by flooding on many occasions. Our cellar can be knee deep in water.

Footpaths are treacherous, and the extensive water meadows can be substantially flooded. Over the years we have seen cars abandoned by the side of the road or being pulled by tractors from deep water.

Twineham Lane can flood in seven different places, and to the south Reeds Lane and the B2116 (linking Henfield and Hurstpierpoint) can also be impassable.

Why does Mayfield propose to build 10,000 houses and supporting infrastructure on an area so vulnerable to flooding?

The proposal would of course also cause devastating flooding further downstream. In addition, anyone who buys one of the proposed 10,000 new houses or invests in a shop , medical centre, school, or business premises etc will have the greatest imaginable difficulty and extra expense in insuring the building or indeed its contents.

This crazy scheme is strongly opposed by Horsham District Council, Mid- Sussex District Council, and the Members of Parliament concerned.

All the individuals involved, unlike the directors of Mayfield, have been democratically elected. Again, unlike the Mayfield directors, none of them have any financial interest in the proposal. Above all, local residents are united in being implacably opposed the scheme.

The proposal could make the Mayfield directors, and other investors in the company, very, very rich. We are particularly concerned that one of the Mayfield directors, Lord Matthew Taylor, was also involved in overhauling Britain’s new planning laws.

We believe that it could be said that he has a definite conflict of interest, and suggest that in the circumstances he arranges to give any Mayfield shares owned by himself and his family to a body such as the Council for the Preservation of Rural England.

SHIRLEY and STEPHEN EDELL

Twineham Lane, Twineham