The latest line used by LARA to try to stop the Lynnsport development really doesn’t hold water. Lynnsport is in Lynn, which means it’s on a flood plain. The vast bulk of the town is at the same level of risk, as it’s on the same plain.
Comparing it to a site on the other side of the river, where the defences are not arranged the same way will not work as a planning objection. Flood risk if anything actually makes a case for building on Lynnsport, since the site is not only protected by all the defences which already protect the rest of the town, but one of the projects going on at the same time is putting in a new pumping station and making drainage improvements, so the site and the rest of Lynn will be even safer. As a councillor I have considerable sympathy with LARA, but if a site is to be rejected under planning law it needs to be shown to be unsuitable. Flood risk won’t stick as a reason.
Councillor for Gaywood North Bank Ward