Have a think about this. How many of you actually believe that we on the East Coast are at a high risk of flooding? The last time it happened was 1953. When was the time before that?
Should we not put the possible risk, depending on what you believe it is, in perspective? Should we really be held to ransom by the fear of flooding, because that is the situation we are in at the moment.
No new houses to be built in the town for several kilometers from the shore-line. The Environment Agency have made it totally clear that they will oppose any new developments. Where will the growing population of the area live? Is this decision making investment into our area, both domestic housing and commercial/business investment more or less likely? I think that is pretty much a silly question. Of course it is going to put investors off. Where does that leave us?
There is light at the end of the tunnel however. A planning decision has been made in the South of the county, within the apparent flood-blighted area, has gone in favour of the applicant and against the wishes of the Environment Agency. This is excellent news as it gives hope to any other planning applicant to get a positive outcome.
In addition the MP for Boston and Skegnss, Mark Simmonds, is firmly on the side of those of us that believe that the Environment Agency are being far too cautious regarding the risks. It would also appear that the government is also viewing this risk-assessment by the Environment Agency with some scepticism.
Hopefully then, we will be able to climb out from under the Environment Agencies risk assessment which has the potenial to damage our town and make our town a more vibrant place that investors can view as being a worthwhile and viable place to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment