Is £140,000 cost really ‘affordable’?

I READ with interest your article on “Benchmark” and the planning fiasco.

I was amazed to see the affordable housing part, it’s the first time I’ve heard the affordable bit mentioned, do they mean the “Sands” part and if so is “from £140,000 + considered to be affordable housing?

While on the subject of the “Sands”, I remember reading in your paper about the gentleman who was running “Marvels” saying to the council that if they would give him two years he would spend money on the site to improve it and keep the facility.

No such help was given by the council and it was closed and allowed to fall into decay, that was three years ago and nothing has been done giving the North Bay, one less attraction thanks to the “Sands”!

To sum up – no Corner Complex, no Kinderland, no money in the council coffers, and less visitors to the North side as there is nothing to do when they get there!

It strikes me that there should be a lot more than 50 jobs lost at the council but not from the workforce but from the officers that allowed this folly to happen in the first place!

Mick Miller

Weaponness Valley Road