Sainsbury's give up, but developers don't

DON’T uncork the champagne or hang out the bunting just yet.
Yes, it is very good news that Sainsbury’s have pulled out of the scheme to build a supermarket-on-stilts on an unspoilt water meadow alongside Southampton Road.
But their change of heart wasn’t prompted by concern about our environment or the hundreds of public objections.
It was because of “significant changes in customer shopping habits”, i.e. profits have plummeted.
The would-be developers, Salisbury Gateway – don’t let the grandiose title fool you into thinking this is anything but a money-making exercise – are far from admitting defeat, however, and say they are already talking to other potential partners.
The site is not zoned for development under our core strategy. There are good reasons for that. They involve flooding, landscape value, wildlife, and traffic congestion.
Now the core strategy is being revisited.
Even before the wretched document was formally adopted in January – and it was sold to us on the basis that it would meet all our housing needs until 2026 – council planners had launched a search for more land for new estates. Coming soon, to a green field near you.
It’s no wonder developers push their luck all the time when officialdom keeps moving the goalposts.
Once a site has been ruled out for development, our diminishing band of public servants - whose salaries are paid by your taxes and mine - shouldn’t be required to spend their time in ‘pre-application talks’ with people who want to build on it.
All they should have to say is: “Look mate, read the strategy. This land is not up for development. Go somewhere else.”
But I’m told they have to follow “due process”, which dictates that they should also waste the time of all the highly-trained staff who are required to submit reports on planning applications – landscape officers, ecologists, traffic officers, the fire service, you name it ……
The would-be developers, meanwhile, who stand to make zillions, pay less than £34,000 by way of an application fee for a project of this size.
By the way, nobody much in this general election campaign seems to be talking about the environment.
It was a big issue last time round, but now it’s as if our political classes mostly concur with David Cameron’s view of “all this green crap” as just a passing fad.
Of course there are matters of more apparent urgency commanding public attention, such as the NHS, immigration and what Harold Wilson called “the pound in your pocket”.
But many people do care about wider issues, and if they don’t, they jolly soon will when the natural resources that we treat so wastefully start to run out.