A Case of Deja Vu?
- Category: Blog
- Published on Tuesday, 29 December 2015 22:10
- Written by Stanwick VRG
- Hits: 3596
We found a good word recently. It is a word that refers to action seen as burdensome, irritating, unnecessary and frustrating by one person upon another. The word is 'vexacious' and we think it perfectly fits the new application made to ENDC to build 198 units on the land north of West Street. The timing could not be more irksome, causing distress and concern for many at Christmas and New Year but nevertheless we are cranking the handle yet again to make our voices heard by ENDC.
We believe the developer will be ready for anything and whatever we do or say will already have an argument to the contrary from them but let's ponder one point that no-one can deny. Only a few months ago, ENDC heard our objections, understood and accepted the feelings and logical feedback from the village and unanimously rejected Gladman's application to build 230 homes. For months, nothing happened; the silence was deafening. Meanwhile the appeal had already started within the Gladman machine and at the very last moment, the appeal was lodged - almost under the carpet.
Now, appeals cost money, lots of money; money that we all pay through our local taxes but ENDC were ready for this and by rejecting the application showed their commitment to Stanwick. That was in September.
It is now December and we expect that ENDC often see scaled down re-applications from aggrieved developers as a way to 'get round' the rejection process so we hope that this second application fails just as spectacularly as the first one did.
We suspect that Gladman are hoping that, by reducing the unit count from 230 to 198, they will appease ENDC this time round. We can only hope that common sense will prevail again and that the council see through this vexacious attempt by Gladman to avoid the delays (and costs) incurred by having going to full appeal and, we hope, losing.
Our efforts now are focused over the new year in bringing together our team to co-ordinate input into the objection process, just as we did last time - yes Gladman, if you are reading our pages, we don't plan to roll over - and we have until January 11th 2016 to make our views known. Nothing much changes, losing 32 homes is a minimal reduction and will not affect the strength of our voices.
And finally, think on this. We are no scientists but the land in question drains water down through the soil and toward the natural water courses. Building homes on this land, covering this capacity to absorb rain water means the quantity soaking away will be massively reduced and if it cannot go down through the soil only has one alternative - to stay on the surface until it can be absorbed.
That could be a significant volume in extreme weather conditions which we are seeing more often. If the rain has nowhere to go, we can easily foresee a significant risk of flooding on land that is already questionable when it comes dealing with flooding. Think on my friends, think on.