I NOTE from Jim
Whitfield's letter last week that he mentions the "double benefit"
that comes to Beverley town from the decision to build the new hospital
on Swine-moor Lane.
By this he means that Beverley Consolidated Charity has sold fields it
owned to the Health Service and will use the money to increase its complement
of Charity owned houses.
The windfall of money for Beverley Consolidated Charity is, as Mr Whitfield
says, not relevant to the outline planning decision given to the NHS to
put its new hospital on Swinemoor Lane.
Yet those who have followed the progress of the planning decision, as
I have, will remember this benefit to Beverley Consolidated Charity mentioned
again and again and always with the disclaimer about the issue not being
relevant to the planning permission being sought.
Outline planning permission for the hospital was given for the Swinemoor
Lane site despite its being known to be in a high flood risk zone, despite
the weight of traffic on Swinemoor Lane and despite the adverse consequences
on Swinemoor ecology.
Now, the point of all the planning work was to choose the best site for
the new hospital. There were credible sites to choose from, such as near
the new ambulance station. The desire to get this so called "double
benefit" means that the residents of the East Riding get their new
hospital in the wrong place, in consequence.