Local Development Framework Consultation

Ulverston

35 (1 of 5) Ulverston Main Proposals

RN178

Support

No view

No view

Oppose

Oppose

Enabling development

Support

Ford Park is owned by a community group and registered charity who are committed to retaining the parkland and gardens as a public amenity for the benefit of the whole community. However, in order to do this and to secure the park into the future they need to become financially self-sufficient and less dependant on grant-aid. RN178 is a .7 acre plot which has little use with residential properties on both sides. Ford Park covers 9 acres making RN178 less than 8% of the total area. By allowing an enabling development on this site the rest of the park can be secured and retained as open space for the towns outdoor events and for informal recreation. For more than a decade, the group has managed the site as a permissive park, developing and enhancing the landscape by planting over 150 trees, 15,000 bulbs, installing a new pond, bringing the mature gardens back into production, grass-cutting and generally maintaining the grounds. They employ 5 staff and have over 160 members with 60 or so active volunteers. As well as maintaining the parkland and gardens the group organise an annual programme of activities and events, manage community facilities in the buildings and operate a volunteer support programme for disadvantaged individuals who are referred from a number of support agencies.
The Fact File identifies RN178 as a 'Non-starter' and I will respond to the comments as follows:
1. Potential cumulative negative adverse impact on the A590 - our community group does not envisage a large development but something more in line with the low impact development on neighbouring Willow Close which is a low impact development of bungalows for older people. Impact on the A590 could be said of all potential housing land on either side of it so I think this argument is rather weak.
2. Sport England - 'it appears to be part of a playing field' - on google satellite maps it does show the old playing field from when it was part of the school but it has not been used for this purpose since the mid 1990s. The whole idea of allowing development on this site is so that the majority of the fields can be retained for their current use which is for events and informal recreation. RN178 forms a 'dog-leg' of land which has relatively low use as it is close to dwellings. Historically it was used as a paddock and a bridleway separated it from the main estate land - Estate Plan of 1886 (CRO(B) BD TB/SP 5/10 1886) shows this.
3. Mature Beech Tree protected by TPO - this tree is close to the boundary and would not be affected by any development. When Willow Close was developed, Poplar Grove needed to be widened and we lost two mature trees after they were damaged by the contractors. SLDC lifted the TPOs immediately so they could be felled. We would not like to see the loss of this tree but there does seem to be some double standards going on here.
4. Other trees planted (not mature) - these trees were planted by the community group two years ago and the majority could be included in any future proposals. At present they are young enough to be relocated.
5. Impact on Grade II listed buildings - there would be no impact on Ford House at all as the site in question is not in front of the house and is 200 metres from it. As for Sunderland Terrace, I cannot see how a development on this site could have any negative impact. This is certainly not true of the social flats on the opposite side of Hart Street.
Ford Park is central to community life in Ulvertson and the community group continues to grow and develop. They will soon be developing the parkland further by installing a natural play scheme funded by a Playbuilder grant administered through SLDC and CCC. They are also about to begin a project to restore, extend and develop the Coach House into a new low carbon and fit-for-purpose community building. For this major project the group secured government funding under the Community Builders programme which is a package of loan and grant (60-40). The loan element is over £400K and will have to be repaid within ten years. Allowing RN178 to be allocated as land for housing would enable the group to repay the loan within the term and become financially secure so that they could continue to manage this important park and community resource into the future.

As mentioned in my comments above, our community group is committed to providing and developing beneficial community facilities in Ulverston. Supporting our proposal to allocate RN178 as land for housing will be an 'enabling' development to help us achieve our aims.