W(C)C has now wasted around 5 million pounds on its eastern bypass project.
Inappropriate pressure had been put on the public by an eastern bypass being presented as a foregone conclusion (with our
tax cash now gone on its design), any objection to which would leave Westbury without any traffic improvement.
The A350 villages of Yarnbrook and West Ashton, which have awful congestion and long tailbacks at their cross-roads, are now
being left with these problems, because county funding went into a dud bypass scheme to make things worse.
Despite it so obviously being in the wrong position, environmentally disastrous, contrary to UK national policy and
overwhelmingly unpopular, a few still want to have a new main road driven through an area of particular natural beauty.
The fact is that new houses are often built on the land next to new highways.
Some say that it is necessary that local road schemes are done hand-in-hand with property developers.
It is said that this is to overall advantage. Maybe, except where the best green landscape is built over
and the new road is not in the most useful place. Anyway, this possibility should be there for all to see.
UK Planning Regulations do not allow individuals or companies to put up homes regardless of anyone else or the impact
on the country or wherever they wish.
Because of this, house-building land is much more valuable than open land.
Planning policy is set by the councils. Land is designated for housing, farming, or as areas of outstanding
beauty and special landscapes for all of us to enjoy.
A new road can often be the catalyst for a change of planning designation.
To make redundant land available for new housing is a reasonable objective. New homes have to be somewhere.
But it is not right that the loveliest land, which should be for the enjoyment of everyone, is misused for narrow reasons.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
W(C)C's eastern bypass would have barged through the area of this old scene.
It would have crossed the road under the
White Horse (pictured) on a flyover.
On top of the 6m high embanked flyover, a 7m high bat gantry was proposed.
W(C)C also intended a 10m height elevated bridge over the nearby railway.
Do not let them fool you that an eastern
bypass would not have been seen.