Error In Your Mereham Story
PUBLISHED: 12:52 12 June 2009 | UPDATED: 10:56 04 May 2010
PLEASE can I point out an error in the small piece on Page 9 of the Ely Standard of June 4 in the story entitled: Fresh fight for eco-town campaigners? Mereham was not initially submitted by the developers as an eco-town. Half-way through the 2007 public
PLEASE can I point out an error in the small piece on Page 9 of the Ely Standard of June 4 in the story entitled: Fresh fight for eco-town campaigners? Mereham was not initially submitted by the developers as an eco-town. Half-way through the 2007 public inquiry they attempted to change its status to that of eco-town (thinking this would mean they stood more chance of it being approved by the planning Inspector and subsequently by the Secretary of State) but the government rejected it and it never even made the shortlist for consideration as an eco-town.
Had Mereham been an eco-town proposal it would have required the developers to provide 30-50% affordable housing, and to build to 'green' standards (level 6 of the Code for Sustainable Homes) with recycled material and carbon-neutral energy use throughout the development.
Instead, Mereham was - and remains - a proposal for a 5,000-8,000 dwelling car-dependent housing estate and business park on productive farmland on the A10 between the villages of Stretham and Wilburton. There was no provision for social housing, other than leaving some spare land on which the local council could build if and when funds became available. There was also only tokenism paid to sustainable building methods and energy use. Whatever you think about the eco-town concept (and for many, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England and the Royal Town Planning Institute, it has been roundly discredited), to give Mereham the designation of "eco-town" is granting this hideous proposal far more credence than it deserves.
Many thanks for continuing to keep the fight against Mereham in the public domain.
Thanks Barbara, we are happy to set the record straight.