As I have mentioned in previous blog posts, I am very concerned about the power of Nimby's to restrict the growth of urban development and all the problems it can cause.
In regard to my local area, I received a copy of the 17th February 'Echo Xtra' (ok, I am getting behind on some of my ranting!), which ran with the headline "Ruining our lives", a serious headline I think you'll agree. The article reports concern from residents in North Cardiff that the plans to include local sites in the Council's Local Development Plan risk their 'way of life'. The sites mentioned include the 'land north of the M4', which is basically a collection of low yielding fields alongside the motorway.
The plan proposes up to 1,200 residential units, a new primary school, local shopping, a park-and-ride facility, a 10-hectare business park and a country park. Which if you ask me sounds marvelous. New homes which will help struggling first time buyers, new public facilities, new employment opportunities, and of course all of the jobs which go with building it all in the first place.
However the article reports comments from a local resident including "new suburb" would "sandwich Rhiwbina within Cardiff", "This huge development wipes out green space" and "This is radically going to change the face of where we all live and doesn't serve anyone except the developers proposing it". Now I know that a newspaper can print pretty much any views (so long as they are not those of the editor), but this is a front page headline article and these views are just plain wrong! What's more, and getting to the point, there are no other views reported to balance this opinion.
Nimby's manage to make their voices heard in this way, and motivate political action as a result, that those who would benefit from the plans cannot. Every house proposed will be someones home, every person served by any of the new facilities, including a country park, will benefit from them, and anyone employed in building and servicing this new suburb will earn a living. Yet these people are as yet anonymous and thus cannot be asked to comment. Thankfully money talks as they say, and whilst the beneficiaries are not able to voice their concern, their demand, as represented by 'the developers', speaks for itself.
Nonetheless, the public complains to politicians on one hand about the lack of jobs, facilities or affordable housing, and on the other hand they complain if anything is proposed near them. Whats more, often the complaints regarding a lack of such goods is made on a national level to MP's, whilst the opposition is made to local representatives and councillors. As a result politicians from different authorities are pitted against each other to hammer out a solution or not. Is this really the best way to organise ourselves?
As a final example of what I mean, the article does quote comments from the local councillor, Jayne Cowen, including "I haven't had one person support the scheme", "at the end of the day, I feel strongly we need to support the residents". Of course she means the existing residents in her area, but no one is representing the residents of the proposed new development. That a shabby publication such as the 'Xtra' furthers this vocal imbalance by running the story without any thought for the beneficiaries only exacerbates the problem.
If you would like to comment on this post, please click 'comments' below.
No comments:
Post a Comment