I note that many letters regarding the proposed building of homes around Bury St Edmunds rightly address the lack of infrastructure for such development.
Might I also add that the bigger picture, nationally and globally, in 2031 needs to be considered in addition to this?
I suggest that the economic/social landscape will be as altered and unrecognisable as the surrounding countryside would be by 2031, should this massive expansion should take place.
In other words,where will all these new people work? How will they pay for their homes?
Given the massive economic shift in world markets and emerging economies and the subsequent massive demand from emerging economies for fuel, I suggest that any notion of commuting to Cambridge, Ipswich and further afield to work, on a daily basis, will be virtually extinct.
All trends suggest that fuel will not get any cheaper, will become incredibly expensive and scarce and will render current casual car useage as we currently know it, utterly redundant.
The current government and local authorities espouse the ‘green’ aspect of planning and transport policy on one hand, yet allow ideas of future economic life to assume that daily, long distance commuting to work as being viable to stand unopposed in the planning for the future of Bury.
A more enlightened vision of 2031 would embrace the idea that such travel will simply not be possible for most of the residents of the new developments. In other words, expansion will merely create housing that cannot be paid for by money earned by regular employment by the occupants.
There will be no work available to accommodate the thousands of new people that such expansion would bring, let alone all the other practical considerations already highlighted by other readers.
Furthermore, any attempt to create an industrial, social, or economic infrastructure for incoming new residents would only achieve the loss of what many wish to live here for; namely the rurality and relative peace of an old agricultural market town.
For the sake of the future of Bury and its current young inhabitants, I urge anyone who loves the town to try to hold on to it now and not allow such proposals to be swept in on a manifesto of such expansion being ‘inevitable’ or indeed remotely viable.
n At present we have (only just!) a small market town enjoyed by residents and visitors alike-so why are planners hell bent on proposing to destroy this quality of life?
Cllr Griffiths and his entourage need to realise that redevelopment should not necessarily mean expansionism.
Bury St Edmunds.