1. Councillors may well feel they were not elected to destroy the District's foremost historic town. They will ask - what alternative development plan for East Grinstead is available? What should Councillors look for in a sustainable alternative? What should its priorities be?

2. A sustainable alternative must:

* make more use of Previously Developed Land. The Council Leadership has now published details of over 100 small sites, which between them are capable of accommodating some thousands of dwellings. Government policy requires Previously Developed Land to be given priority. It does not allow development sprawling into the countryside while there is brownfield land available, there can be no. We explain the scope for this in subsequent briefs.

* provide homes close to where the jobs are. The Structure Plan requires local plans to "ensure that sites are allocated in the vicinity of Crawley/Gatwick to meet the strategic requirements of the Crawley/Gatwick economy". No explanation has ever been given for the desire to reverse this policy in favour of a location at distant East Grinstead, which separates homes from jobs by many miles. We enlarge on this point in subsequent briefs.

* minimise commuting. The County Structure Plan makes clear that "one of the objects of the plan is to reduce the need to travel". No explanation has ever been given for the Council Leadership's wish to ignore this policy, and to prefer instead to transform East Grinstead into a commuter satellite of Crawley, perhaps more than doubling commuter traffic between the two towns. We enlarge on this point in subsequent briefs.

* enhance the historic town. The Structure Plan requires District Planning Authorities to defend "the overall perception of each historic town as an entity". So the scale of development must be right. Not anonymous suburban expansion of the District's foremost historic town by 47%. We enlarge on this point in subsequent briefs.

* allow environmentally acceptable traffic relief. Congestion in East Grinstead can only be aggravated by bringing 7,000 new cars into the town. Their impact cannot be offset by a "relief" road. The planners' own traffic modelling studies now prove to bring no relief. With fewer additional cars, improvements to existing roads have a better chance. We enlarge on the scope for this in subsequent briefs.

* be delivered more quickly. The Council Leadership's timetable for their East Grinstead scheme keeps slipping because new obstacles keep appearing. This looks set to continue. A sustainable alternative must be different - it must be deliverable. It therefore requires more assured financing, unburdened by unaffordable road-building. It needs to respect the environment and the law. It requires willing landowners, prepared to welcome development without endless and possibly futile struggles for compulsory purchase orders against a host of determined and well-advised opponents.

3. In other words a sustainable alternative should embrace all the planning principles that the Council Leadership's scheme rejects. These principles are not inapplicable to East Grinstead. The Council Leadership just seems to have different priorities. Planning priorities must be restored.