A letter in this weeks Tenbury Advertiser illustrates why protesters should really try to get their facts correct.
The letter claims that the proposed development will make flooding more likely, when in fact the opposite is true. The land in question has a clay sub soil, so the existing run off is incredibly fast (almost that of hard landscaping) but if the land is developed, the developer will be required to implement SUDS. These are measures designed to slow any run off & to stop flooding. So the risk will be much reduced.
The letter claims that all Tenbury is in a flood zone. This is incorrect as the EA map shows.
The letter claims that there are no jobs in Tenbury. Again untrue, we could do with more, but several employers in Burford are expanding and will require more staff.
The letter says that there are many houses for sale including 12 in Orchard Court, but of course there are age restrictions on who can buy in Orchard Court. There is actually quite a waiting list for Orchard Court, but the older people wishing to move there are "trapped" in their old houses as the housing market has stalled. This is due to the lack of suitable and affordable housing at the bottom end of the market. The very sector that this development is likely to address.
Whether this site is suitable for housing or a desirable development for Tenbury is another matter entirely, but the objections in this letter really don't "hold much water".
Posts
2 comments:
I said the very same thing here when I read the letter.
The development will have a drainage system, which is likely to improve the flood risk situation.
The developers made it clear from the outset that there would a comprehensive scheme to control water run off so that the flood risk is less that currently exists. However, one has to hope very fervently
that any further development of the site does not exascerbate the appalling vista now confronting
anyone driving past the new houses towards Tenbury. The solar panels really are an aesthetic
disaster.
Post a Comment