LINCOLNSHIRE MARSH PROTECTION GROUP

Eco-town archive
Home | Wind turbines | About us | Louth & Hubbard's Hills | Links | Images of the Marsh | Eco-town archive | Light pollution

Tapsellweb.jpg
Sir Peter Tapsell MP (standing) and Peter Dryburgh of the CPRE at our 13 June meeting

Georgeleeweb.jpg
Gainsborough businessman George Lee (standing) and Derek Turner at our 13 June meeting

This page contains anti eco-town arguments, plus campaign lterature and ideas that were used by the campaign against the eco-town at Manby. Some of it may conceivably be of use for other campaigning groups, and any such groups have our permission to use or adapt this material freely.

 

 CAMPAIGNS & EVENTS

  • An exploratory meeting was held at Louth Library on 8th May, and attendees agreed to found a campaign group, to be called the Lincolnshire Marsh Action Group, with three committee members - Derek Turner (Chairman), Clinton Smith (Secretary) and Alan Rogers (Treasurer).
  • At the first committee meeting on 16th May, Patrick Webb OBE accepted an invitation to join the committee. It was carried that the name be changed to the Lincolnshire Marsh Protection Group
  • LMPG supporters are now gathering signatures on petitions in local towns and villages. A downloadable PDF of the petition form is available on this site (see "Leaflets and downloads")
  • Our 10 Downing Street website e-petition is now available (19 May) for signing - visit http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/lincs-eco-towns Sign the petition, and ask your friends, family and neighbours to do the same
  • We are now leafleting local villages to inform them of our 25 June demonstration at Tedder Hall. A downloadable PDF of our leaflet is available on this site (see "Leaflets and downloads")
  • A very successful first public meeting was held on 13th June at Grimoldby Village Hall. An overflowing and cheering audience of almost 300 people heard denunciatory speeches by Sir Peter Tapsell MP, George Lee (standing in for Roger Helmer MEP) and Peter Dryburgh from the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England. The audience include several district councillors, ELDC's Strategic Director Jane Froggit (observer) and the singer Corinne Drewery.
  • We have now produced an A4 poster to be displayed in protestors' windows. A downloadable PDF is available at this site (see "Leaflets and downloads")
  • We encourage all site visitors to write to ELDC councillors (not just the ones in the immediate area) to set out your opposition to the town between now and 25th June (when they vote on the town). An outline text to give you some ideas may be found on the "Leaflets and downloads" page of this site
  • Our next event - Tedder Hall, Manby, 25 June from 5pm onwards, to greet ELDC councillors arriving to vote on the town proposal. We need a good turnout, as the media will be there. Bring banners, placards and flags
  • The government claims it wants eco-town input from people in the targeted areas. This should be detailed and technical - rather than just barbed - and needs to be in by 30th June. The address is Eco-Towns Team, Housing and Growth Programmes, Dept for Communities and Local Government, 2/H9 Eland House, Bressenden Place, London, SW1E 5DU. E-mail submissions may be sent to ecotowns@communities.gsi.gov.uk

COVERAGE

  • Initial public reactions to the news of the proposed developments and the proposal to form a new group were covered comprehensively in the Louth Leader of 16 April 2008 (“Eco Warriors to Battle New Town Bid”, page 1).
  • LMPG supporters have also had letters published in the Louth Leader Louth Target and Grimsby Telegraph
  • Articles have appeared in the local magazines Marshlander and Manby Village News
  • Featured 22nd May on BBC Radio Lincolnshire, the BBC Lincolnshire website and the BBC TV news programme Look North
  • Featured extensively on 13th-16th June on BBC Radio Lincolnshire, Lincs FM, Look North, Grimsby Telegraph, Louth Leader, Louth Target, Lincolnshire Echo
  • Featured extensively on 24th-27th June on BBC Radio Lincolnshire, Lincs FM, Look North, Grimsby Telegraph, Louth Leader, Louth Target, Lincolnshire Echo

ANTI-TOWN PROTESTORS LAUNCH CAMPAIGN

WITH LARGE AND ENTHUSIASTIC PROTEST MEETING

300 people from the Manby area crammed into Grimoldby Village Hall on the evening of Friday 13th June for a meeting protesting against the eco-town of 15,000 people proposed for Manby.

The first meeting of the newly-formed Lincolnshire Marsh Protection Group (LMPG) heard speeches by Louth & Horncastle MP Sir Peter Tapsell, Conservative Euro-parliamentary candidate George Lee and Peter Dryburgh from the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England.

Mr Dryburgh said that while the CPRE was not opposed to eco-towns in principle, the Manby site was unsuitable because of its relatively remote location, poor infrastructure and transport links, and the likely environmental impact. He also suggested that putting so many affordable homes together in one place would almost certainly lead to social problems.

Gainsborough businessman Mr Lee, standing in at the last moment for Euro MP Roger Helmer, said it would be almost impossible for the new town to attract and retain suitable employers, because of transportation problems and the structure of the local economy. While he understood that the council wanted to attract inward investment, and needed to address real housing shortages, this was not the way forward.

Sir Peter denounced the entire concept of the eco-town, saying that the site was utterly unsuitable and that local people clearly did not want it. He felt the bid for the town had not been thought through at all, and that ELDC’s “consultation process” had been deeply flawed. He also remarked on the foolishness of concreting over top quality farming land at a time of growing global food shortages.

Derek Turner of the LMPG promised that the Group would “hinder and harass” the eco-town bid all the way.

 

DEMONSTRATION AT TEDDER HALL, MANBY, 25TH JUNE

The next LMPG event will be a demonstration outside Tedder Hall from 5pm on 25th June, to coincide with the first full council meeting since the bid was announced. We plan a dignified and peaceful protest that is anti-planner but pro-councillor, anti-urbanization and pro-democracy. Banners, placards and Lincolnshire flags welcomed.

For more information, telephone Derek Turner on 01507 339056, e-mail info@lincolnshire-marsh.org or see www.lincolnshire-marsh.org

 

NATIONAL ANTI-TOWN PROTEST TO BE HELD

On 30th June, a national parliamentary lobby of anti eco-town groups will be held in London. The day's events will include a mass lobby of parliament, plus press interviews, plus a meeting in Committee Room 14 of the House of Commons, coordinated by shadow housing spokesman Grant Shapps, addressed by various MPs from the targeted areas. It is very short notice, but if any Lincolnshire-ites would like to make up a party to join in, please e-mail us at info@lincolnshire-marsh.org

Alternatively, for anyone who may wish to go independently, Those who wish to join the marchers should meet at College Green near the Palace of Westminster at 11.30am.

 

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN “ECO-TOWN”

East Lindsey District Council (ELDC) planners call the developments proposed for Manby and/or Strubby “eco-towns”, but that is a dishonest term used to disguise the fact that they want to put major urban developments into open and tranquil countryside. There is no such thing as an “eco-town”; all towns are intrinsically un-green.

 

The developments would mean thousands of nondescript buildings, built using thousands of tons of concrete and other un-green materials. It is estimated that construction of a new building means the release of 50 tons of CO2 - whereas refurbishment of an existing building gives rise to just 15 tons.

 

Construction would mean years of noise, lorry traffic and disruption for locals, and then permanently increased levels of noise and light pollution, even more traffic and even more pressure on local amenities.

 

At a very conservative estimate of 2.1 people per new house (the East Lindsey average), there would potentially be an extra 10,500 extra people trying to get appointments at your dentist, or queuing in front of you at your cashpoint – not to mention a minimum of 5,000 extra cars in front of you on the area’s narrow and winding roads.

 

The developments would require new or widened roads, new drainage, water and electricity provision and other infrastructure. They would change Strubby, Manby and Grimoldby from being attractive villages with community spirit into impersonal towns looking rather like a South Yorkshire industrial estate.

 

Whatever CO2 emission efficiency was achieved by the finished ‘carbon-neutral’ buildings would be more than outweighed by the construction process, the extra infrastructure, the extra traffic and the extra energy consumption caused by the increased population.

 

And if these new towns are allowed, there is also a new planning precedent for indefinite future ‘infill’ and development. In its Eco-towns Bid document, ELDC admits there would be “significant scope for future expansion” at both sites. The whole area for miles around could be effectively rezoned as suburban.

 

For some insight into how these towns would look, take a look at East Lindsey's town bid document here

http://www.e-lindsey.gov.uk/News/upload/bid.pdf

 

"AFFORDABLE HOUSING"

ELDC says that it needs “affordable housing”. But there is not this much demand (the requirement is for between 30-50% of the new housing to be ‘affordable’). In reality, there would be many empty properties – which would eventually be given or sold very cheaply to people from outside the area. At least some of the unwanted properties would very likely be given over to people from ‘sink estates’ elsewhere, who would bring with them not only population pressure, but also anti-social behaviour. New towns invariably mean new crimes.

 

What genuine local need there is could be met in other ways – such as through rent controls, refurbishing derelict properties or extending co-ownership schemes. The council could allow some of its own under-utilized buildings to be used for housing key workers. (ELDC leader Cllr Doreen Stephenson could set a moral example by making some of her garden available for development.) In any case, we are heading for a serious global downturn in the housing market.

 

The pressure on housing is a national problem, caused by over-population. We cannot expect ELDC to resolve national problems, but we can expect them to protect local people from London’s incompetence.

 

THE ECONOMIC ‘ARGUMENTS’

ELDC hope that they can make money by attracting aid from Whitehall, then by taxing the hoped-for new residents. But many of the new residents of the "affordable" and "social" houses would not be paying the full amount of council tax.

 

And the council (in other words, we) would also incur substantial - and ongoing - costs, because it would be compelled to spend council tax money on new roads and footpaths, drainage and sanitation, maintenance and lighting, healthcare, education, policing and other facilities for the new towns. Whatever one-off profit there may be from selling the sites would be cancelled out within a few years.

 

ELDC says the developments would provide jobs, but the opposite is more likely. The majority of the skilled tradesmen who would work on the developments would be brought in from outside the area. Whatever few local construction jobs were created would only last as long as the construction itself. After completion, there would then be thousands of new people in the district, who would themselves require employment. Inevitably, they would need to seek employment in Mablethorpe (where there is already substantial unemployment), Louth, Lincoln and perhaps even further away.

 

Increased urbanization could have a detrimental effect on the tourism that is so important in this area. Tourists visit the area because of its unspoilt charm, and its peace and quiet. The more the Marsh starts to look like Rotherham, the less interested they will be in coming here. Some of the money ELDC wants to spend on these new towns would be better spent on improving the appearance of towns like Mablethorpe, which badly need imaginative new investment.

 

And in an age of global overpopulation and increasingly expensive food, it is grossly irresponsible for local authorities to sacrifice rich farming land to building developers.

 

FLOOD RISKS

ELDC says it has a long term plan to move housing away from the coast so as to avoid projected future flooding from rising sea levels. But this is not an imminent danger in this area. The existing sea defences are generally in good condition, and surely the conurbation of Mablethorpe, Trusthorpe and Sutton-on-Sea should not be just gradually abandoned to the sea. (And if ELDC is really suggesting that Mablethorpe should be abandoned, then why is it still permitting building there?)

 

Mablethorpe is admittedly not the prettiest of towns (ELDC uses this an argument as to why the town should not be protected), but that is ELDC’s fault for permitting the ugly development in the first place.

 

Instead of leaving the people of Mablethorpe, Trusthorpe and Sutton-on-Sea to their fate, ELDC (and national government) should continue to maintain the sea defences, and they should be encouraging more attractive developments in the conurbation, including innovative building design and civil engineering that can cope with the possibility of future flooding.

 

QUALITY OF LIFE

People are drawn to the Lincolnshire Marsh because it is quiet, green, friendly and a little bit old-fashioned. Many of the present residents have moved from cities specifically to experience village life, and so can appreciate the Marsh’s charm perhaps even more than those who have always lived here and taken it for granted.

 

Knowing your neighbours, seeing the stars at night, watching a barn owl rising out of a misty dyke, seeing moonlight or glow-worms instead of street lights, walking along an empty beach at dawn, hearing cattle instead of cars, seeing a medieval church tower across a field – these are things that cannot be measured, but they are amongst the things that matter the most for the people who live here. But these are also very fragile, and very easy to lose, in an age which thinks there is nothing more important than making money.

 

If local people do not resist these proposals, they will find that a brand-new Croydon has furtively been built in their midst – with long term implications for their quality of life, their property prices and the local environment.

This page contains PDF files of

  • Anti-town petition forms
  • Advertising leaflets about the demonstration on 25th June
  • Anti-town posters for display in your windows

Please click on the links above, and download, duplicate, display and distribute these as widely as possible.

 

Template letters

Many of the people who are against the town are unaccustomed to lobbying councillors, and have contacted us to ask for advice as to what they could say in any letters. What follows is an outline letter, containing some of the key arguments, for you to personalize as you see fit. Please contact your councillor – and also councillors in other areas - TODAY. They are voting on this on 25 June, so must get it before then. And remember - many of them are already on our side.

To find your local councillor’s contact details, see

http://www.e-lindsey.gov.uk/committee/mgCommitteeMailingList.asp?ID=0

 

OUTLINE TEXT FOR LETTER TO DISTRICT COUNCILLORS

 

Dear Councillor xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,

 

I write to you because I am deeply concerned about the possibility that a town of over 5,000 houses has been proposed for Manby and/or Strubby.

 

I believe that a development of this size and type is utterly inappropriate for this area. It would alter the character of the Lincolnshire Marsh radically and permanently – turning it from a rural district to a suburban district. In the short term, it would mean years of construction noise, pollution and disturbance. In the longer term, it would adversely affect local residents’ quality of life, threaten nationally endangered species of animals and plants, and entail the loss of valuable agricultural land. It would depress property prices while also providing a dangerous precedent for large-scale future urban expansion.

 

I also feel that it is entirely impractical – as use of either site would require major investment to create or upgrade (and then maintain) roads, footpaths, lighting, wind turbines, public transport, water supply, sewerage, healthcare, industrial units, education, policing, leisure facilities, etc. Such major public works would have to be funded from taxpayers’ money. Employment opportunities are also scarce in this area, and likely to remain so.

 

I am also given to understand that the site has been offered to the government on the sole initiative of a small number of planners and executives within ELDC, without those planners and executives having consulted previously with district councillors, with Lincolnshire County Council, or with the general public. I was certainly entirely unaware of any such plans until they were announced in the local media. This is an obvious denial of democracy to the people who will be the worst affected by the plans. It would be a betrayal of everything that is best about Lincolnshire – its beauty, tranquillity, community spirit and relaxed pace of life.

 

Like the overwhelming majority of my family, friends and neighbours, I can see no benefits for local people in this scheme. I therefore hope you will both speak and vote against this proposal when it comes up on the agenda on 25th June. I would welcome your comments. Many thanks

Lincolnshire Marsh Protection Group

Protecting the character and culture of the Lincolnshire Marsh