When is a field not a field?

      When is a field not a field?

 Easy answer? When it has houses on it! 

Manor Road field

After watching the process of a planning appeal this week against Barrow Council's decision to turn down the development by Story Homes at Manor Road, I despair of local people ever having a voice. Don't get me wrong, the process is all very fair and the inspector diligent in ensuring all parties have a chance to put their cases. However, the rigidity of the process eliminates the chance to rebut certain aspects because it can be objected to in terms of "new" evidence. Of course it isn't new evidence, but it's classed as new because it hasn't been introduced in the mountains of files and paper  accrued since the screening stage of the debate. Our little protest group-who has been active since day one, said our piece, but  when trying to correct some blatant misinformation re the historic value of this little field, we were slapped down by the opposition flatly. Sadly, the objection was upheld and we were unable to correct this.

Naturally, the developer has appointed a costly barrister-who believe me is thorough and uncompromising-and good. The council have appointed a very competent young woman, and as good as she is, you can bet your life the council couldn't spend the same type of money that the developer has. So, we already have an unbalance. Allegedly.

Maybe the appeal will fail. So where does that leave us? Well-maybe the land owner and the developer will pack in then and there. After all, 38 houses -neither here nor there to a big company like Story Homes. However, There is a great deal at stake here-for a start the landowner allegedly stands to lose a huge sum; pension fund, self-interest-whats one paltry field? But let us examine... I am using barrister speak here... let us examine,the possibility that the 38 houses are merely a subterfuge, a test case, a blind. Maybe... other land owners are sitting waiting in the wings for payday too. Who knows? There are lots of fields round there and those don't have the annoyance of being part of a conservation area. These being adopted would finally urbanise the whole of Rating Lane up to and including Manor Farm and with some clever planning an enterprising speculative developer would sweep that site up and extend his greedy reach behind and beyond. Of course this is all in my fevered imagination... nothing more than a conspiracy theory... I am a writer after all. 

In our real world, it could never happen. After all the land is protected with being close to the abbey. Isn't it? But then with set backs, buffers and planting I'm sure any new builds in those locations would enhance and improve the scrappy fields. Let's face it-they are "urban edge" (whatever that means)-they have power lines and walls etc (watch out Lake District-you have pylons and power lines too). So the superior (definitely NOT standard houses-because they will have decorative roundels, gables and sandstone facing-and you KNOW Barrow is crying out for a better class of housing-because we all apparently live in slums) will improve all this field stuff! And of course-I am sure there are no landowners queuing up with their hands held out-most of them are guardians of the land and take care to conserve it for the future generations-don't they?

I'm glad we cleared that up! It would be unbearable if the future of our green fields, heritage and countryside was at risk from the highest bidder. It would be unthinkable that a massive, wealthy developer, who can fund litigation up to the highest level would be able to overcome extensive local opposition and even the council's rejection of their scheme wouldn't it? If the council win- surely the developer will cease - if its only for 38 houses-wouldn't be worth the while-they've made their point anyway? However, if it goes further- until they finally win-then one must wonder what comes next, because you can take a good bet that it won't stop at 38 houses... and if in the meantime if the council is bankrupted... well, hey... it's only Barrow!

But of course...none of this is true... is it? It's all in my imagination... isn't it? Oh... and put me down for the house that overlooks the abbey!

The blog has been amended to remove speculation about Sixth Form College-apparently this is not owned by the LA (Cumbria) and no plans are afoot to cease the use of the site for education despite amalgamation with another college. This was written as a speculative piece and I apologise for the inaccuracy of that comment. On the other hand, it is a great relief that this is so as it means further speculative development is less likely because of access; though of course not entirely impossible.

Time's little tricks

 With David Bowie's passing today it stirs a lot of memories and thoughts. I already hate January so maybe this melancholy turn of mind is just amplified with this news. I liked Bowie... I remember the first time I listened to Hunky Dory... when I didn't like him that much! On a rare occasion I skipped school (in Sixth form I might add) a girl called Melanie took me to her house for a cuppa. We weren't friends as such but we found refuge in each other's truancy. I was 16 and shy. She put on  a record (as we used to call it)-Hunky Dory... I had heard of it of course but was more of an Elton John fan-but I felt duty bound to listen and enthuse politely. It was a bit "far out" for me at the time and Bowie was one of the artistes on Top of the Pops who provoked the most expletives from my dad-who didn't really embrace the androgynous nature of David Bowie- or in fact any of those who dressed less than masculinely.

That said, my boyfriend who appeared the next year on, did like Bowie and we always shared music and often (with odd exceptions) adopted each others tastes. So Bowie then became the portfolio of our young adult lives. The significant songs matched to significant events and the memories attached. The excitement and familiarity of songs over the years passing to our children too-one of whom came to our 70s Pearl wedding dressed as Aladdin Sane! So, there is a catch in the throat and a small tear in the corner of the eye. Its not because he is a celebrity. Its because he has written the soundtrack to our and many others lives. Because he symbolises our lost youth and reminds us that we are all mortal! 

Bowie ever changing

Time plays a nasty little trick on us poor mortals-when we are young we hear our elders reminiscing about youth, which we dismiss. We have a quiet arrogance-we secretly believe we will not age or die. But suddenly, we wake up one day and we realise we have probably already had more years on earth than we are likely to have left. And its a shock! The death of someone immortalized on the screen or disc is a shock to us because it nudges our own mortality. When a young person dies its tragic and we acknowledge this-but we pretend its rare and unusual. Some of us say things like "only the good die young" to make it seem acceptable. But in this pretense that life goes on forever we feel the need to rationalize when it obviously doesn't! We trot out platitudes like "he had a good innings" or "he was getting on"- but it just isn't true-its never a good innings. All deaths are painful to those loved ones left behind and it matters not if you are 5 or 95! Life is precious and we want to hang on to it. Days like today just amplify the fact that death is one thing nobody-no matter how wealthy, successful, clever, beautiful or famous can avoid forever! And that's what makes it sad! That's what in the end is the great leveler and when we react or mourn-granted at different levels and extremes-to the death of someone like Bowie-its that human connection. We aren't just mourning him... we are mourning our own eventual demise too.
When a young person dies its tragic and we acknowledge this-but we pretend its rare and unusual.

Homage to Aladdin Sane