THE Echo reports the house building company Dudsbury Homes has had plans to construct 1,700 new houses at Alderholt turned down “on nine different accounts by Dorset Council”, yet it is still going to appeal against the latest refusal.

An unnamed employee of the company has said: “We would like to highlight the importance of the Alderholt Meadows project which will deliver much needed homes including up to 595 affordable homes addressing the acute housing shortage in Dorset amidst outdated local plans. Beyond housing, Alderholt Meadows will provide significant investment to enhance the sustainability of Alderholt . . .”

The current population of Alderholt is some 3,262 inhabitants. At two adults per house, Dudsbury Homes’s plan would add some 3,400 new residents to what is now a large village, altering its semi-rural character forever and turning it into a fair-sized town.

Why do house builders latch on to such names as 'Alderholt Meadows' to refer to the destruction of many acres of fertile countryside and farmland, to be replaced by sterile housing estates, bland roads and other areas of concrete and tarmac?

And why the use of the meaningless term “affordable homes”.

Anything is “affordable” to those with the money. If Dudsbury Homes means social housing, then say so.

Where would the newcomers work? Where would any children go to school? Is Dudsbury Homes going to build and staff a new school? There is already a shortage of doctors, dentists, etc countrywide. Where would the health workers for some 3,000 plus new residents be found? Is Dudsbury Homes going to build a new medical centre and train them?

At a time when the whole country is supposed to be aiming at ‘net zero’ in all sorts of ways, this plan is completely the opposite.

As for "Alderholt Meadows' will provide significant investment to enhance the sustainability of Alderholt", this Dorset village is doing very nicely at present.

It does not need doubling in size to have its “sustainability” “enhanced”.

Charles Durrant

Sovereign Close