Kew wildlife habitat loss and serious flooding problems were something that was fully predicted years ago.
For years (since at least 2005), I campaigned vigorously on the SSGB (Save Southport's Greenbelt) website against the vast stupidity of destroying precious wildlife habitat at, flood-prone, Kew for housing development.
I had articles printed and letters in the local media. I even highlighted the issue in my book ‘Dirty Politics’.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dirty-Politics-Mr-Pat-Regan/dp/1482031248
For my sincere concerns, I was greeted with some hostile political and developmental opposition yet found support with Phil Rodwell of SGB website. Like me, Phil could see the foolishness of building on Kew's wetlands. In January 2008 I asked the following...
“Will they listen? Parts of Kew housing estate are already clearly highlighted on the Flood Map produced by the Environment Agency so why do Sefton Council apparently want to 'increase' this hazard, via further developments, to families that currently dwell in this area? In the event of a genuine flood, the following Kew roads could be worst hit, according to the EA Flood Map.
Motherwell Crescent
Bracebridge Drive
Colchester Road
Wollaton Drive
Glaisdale Drive
Handsworth Walk
In the extent of 'extreme' floods, these following roads may be affected.
Markham Drive
Ruddington Road
Nutall Road
Redhill Drive
Folkestone Road
Kempton Park Fold
Town Lane
Heanor Drive
Ayr Close
Aintree Crescent
Adjacent properties may also be at risk. Any further developments could amplify this flooding danger greatly. It takes only inches of water to destroy properties and their contents, making this issue an insurance nightmare.
Sefton's white elephant
Sefton Council’s inglorious white elephant (crime against nature) at Kew appears to have finally introduced itself to most people now. However, the authorities were warned years ago not to undertake this absurd folly on Southport’s answer to the Everglades!
Changing the ground structure by concreting over large areas of Blowick Moss countryside could perhaps also have an adverse effect on 'other' previously developed areas of Kew. If ground-water alone is prevented from running into the earth on Blowick Moss then it will have to soak in elsewhere, hence the FLASH-FLOODING danger!”
History testifies that they did NOT listen.
In January 2016 OTS News reported that one resident of Ruddington Road said:
“The water level keeps going up and down, the diggers have created a moat supposedly to take the water away, my neighbours had one of the workmen peering over her fence when she asked him what he was doing he said…. “Just checking to see if your garden has flooded yet?”
https://www.otsnews.co.uk/flooding-fears-at-kew-housing-development-southport-otsnews-tv/
Back in 2005 SSGB stated:
'The Council's destruction of valuable wildlife habitat at Kew continues regardless of the fact that they are partners in the ‘North Merseyside Action Plan’ – a vital eco-initiative set in place to conserve wildlife and their habitats. Contrary to the views of belligerent council planners, our countryside is not a disposable commodity that we can simply wipe out at a moment's notice (or at least it shouldn't be!) We would like to thank Phil Rodwell of SGB website for helping us to keep this appalling situation in the public eye.'
The latest (Feb. 2019) news from the Kew swamp simply gives additional; confirmation of what I was chasing up all those years ago – so no, they failed to listen and are NOW reaping what they sowed…
Dream home turns to house of horrors in Kew
https://www.otsnews.co.uk/dream-home-turns-to-house-of-horrors-in-kew/
I reiterate they (the politicians, planners and assorted experts) would never listen…
The ground itself, an old landfill site, is contaminated. Naturally, seepage of toxic gases and also possible flooding risk were something that I accentuated numerous times before. Many reasons made the land unfit for human habitation, but would they listen? No, they just palmed me off as just another eco-warrior with an axe to grind…
SSGB was even informed by the Environment Agency that with respect to water voles on the Kew Business Park location, their Biodiversity Team has records of this legally-protected species on Fine Janes Brook down 600m stream of the site.
They also informed us that they believed the site to have a “Biodiversity value” with some un-common wetland plant species being recorded. The biodiversity team has also observed feeding stations next to Fine Janes Brook of the correct size to mark evidence of water voles. The E.A. also tells us that Sefton ecologists are also interested in the site. The Environment Agency thanked SSGB for bringing the situation to their attention and assured us that they will do all they can to protect the biodiversity of the site with the powers available to them.
I have personally seen and heard water voles at this site both alive and dead and it is wrong and illegal for this special place to be devastated in the name of fat-cat business profits. The native wildlife was in place long before man came along with his bulldozers and technological eco-vandalism!
Kew Flooding Dangers
Just because a part of the countryside was earmarked for development many moons ago, by some uppity grey-suited executive with a map and a biro, did not mean that its obliteration was a fine idea.
Of course, the authorities that make up the regulations on the native UK landscape can't find it in their cold hearts to accommodate a little room for our green spaces that are essential to so many species of wildlife.
Reports in the local press previously indicated that the high cost of treating this contaminated ground to a development level could leave the Council without any profit for it. Furthermore, I previously wrote that only 23 out of the proposed 650 houses planned would be available to first-time buyers under the affordable homes arrangement. Have these latter points changed?
Why build more properties on a clearly defined flood zone when many of the houses in town are not selling? The authoritarian building ploy at Kew seems to have been based on: ‘Let’s see how much concrete we can get down before anyone notices and moans about the loss of countryside and flooding, etc?’
However, they were fully warned MANY TIMES; they failed to listen to common sense and are now seeing the result it seems.
In 2012 I blogged the following…
SSGB have been informed that so-called 'development' land at Blowick Moss may be 'uninsurable' for future homeowners, due to potential flood risk.
We pointed out several Kew areas that already appear on the Environmental Agency (EA) flood maps and one insurer that told us:
“Looking at the EA map of your postcode area there are some streets that would seem to be affected from rivers without sea defences if a flood occurred.”
This reference to local watercourses apparently indicates that housing people on any new developments in the region could create an insurance nightmare for many families. The insurer added:
“If we decline cover, but you object as you live at the top of a hill (as an example) you would be requested to get a report from the EA, send it to us and we would reconsider our decision.”
The only consolation offered by this one insurer was:
“If we do offer cover, your premium would probably be higher than normal by approximately 10%.”
Source of quotes: Norwich Union.
Clearly, after previous season’s UK flooding, insurers are understandably not very eager to take risks on families housed on areas that may flood. Sefton Council and their development supporters seem to to have dismissed all this from the onset.
SSGB have already accentuated the dangers of developing on this part of our countryside.
The Crossens catchment was previously mainly under water until it was claimed from the sea over a hundred years ago. It has since been drained by a system of watercourses pumped by various pumping stations in the area, the main one being Crossens Pumping Station. If the EA were to stop pumping and remove defences, or if they were to ‘fail’, the land would unquestionably flood once again and devastate the housing infrastructure. This is why the EA is required to indicate this risk on their flood mapping system. So to recap any development in this area is:
• Ecologically obscene
• Risk to legally-protected species (such as water voles) resident in this area
• Potentially a risk to human health or even life
• Illogical as many large in-town plots are empty, abandoned and unused
• Based on fat - cat profiteering
• Prone to serious flooding risk
• A potential traffic gridlock disaster
• An overcrowding problem that can only get worse
When are the authorities that be going to come clean over the Kew issue?
See also
THE RAPE OF SOUTHPORT’S OLD COUNTRYSIDE
https://pat-regan.blogspot.com/2012/04/rape-of-southports-old-countryside.html
Pat Regan ©
NB. land at Kew was not officially designated as Greenbelt and this has been made clear several times in the past. Nevertheless, the area is a rich haven for birds and animals, which utilise it for survival.
Southport's old heritage
In his 1923 work, BLOWICK: THE NAME AND THE PLACE, F. H. Cheetham, F.S.A. wrote about the ancient heritage of Blowick Moss.
https://www.otsnews.co.uk/kews-housing-estate-swamp-fiasco/
No comments:
Post a Comment