According to Arthur Stenvik in the HA on 8 April, politicians made a “huge mistake in the housing policy of the time” when Oreid 2 was taken out of the spatial plan and returned to the LNF. What does this “housing policy blunder” mean? Yes, this meant that a valuable and popular nature and outdoor area were preserved from being built upon, much to the delight of a large number of surrounding residents.
Stenvik points out that a new residential property on these hills, which has a wonderful view, will be very attractive. Yes, it is undoubtedly attractive to those who want to sell expensive homes here and to those who can afford them. There should also be drawings of taller apartment complexes so that more people can fit on the viewing platform.
That the landscape is in danger of being destroyed is bad enough. But what's worse is that the area will lose significant value to everyone else. Once developed and inhabited, it will not be attractive to others.
The surrounding charities have long fought for the area to be a resource for the general public, i.e. for everyone, for walkers from Öberg, Somero, Grenda, Dansberget, Voldskog and other surrounding residential areas, and for those already established in Orødgrenda, for “green” kindergartens. The popular Espera and more.
It is a natural area for a local population of 2-3 thousand people who can walk here without first having to take a car! This is “sustainability” in practice. This is the last remaining green hiking area in our local environment. To take this away from us would be downright anti-environmental policy and a slap in the face to local people.
As part of the previous local regime, Labor adopted the current area plan with Oread 2 exempt from development. Is it really possible for Labor to enter into a “horse trade” with its new local government partner and support the Tories’ demand for an Oread 2 rematch? The Labor Party, which otherwise pretends to be the party of society, which says it puts the needs and interests of the public first!
I, and many others with me, hope for the longest time that these are false rumours. From the Oreid gravel pit and the Øberg landfill (with waste from Saugbrugs), we have had to put up with worsening environmental problems for several decades: noise from crushing and transport plants, dust, fly ash, and the stench of rotting bark and other fill materials. We were thrilled when the landfill in particular was rehabilitated and the area was regulated as a Border Patrol Force area in 1988. But it didn't take long before developers signed on and political parties changed their minds – or vice versa. Oride 1 was developed in several stages.
So far, charities have mostly accepted such development – that is, as long as it is carried out on public roads and other existing infrastructure. But there is also a limit.
For the reasons stated above, we opposed the “I want 2” project, i.e. development on the plateau, above elevation 155. This natural area must be preserved as a shared resource, as a benefit to the public.
“Explorer. Unapologetic entrepreneur. Alcohol fanatic. Certified writer. Wannabe tv evangelist. Twitter fanatic. Student. Web scholar. Travel buff.”
