2 responses from Mr Peter Ashby (Individual)
1. Mr Peter Ashby (Individual) : 8 Feb 2011 21:05:00
Settlement
Bowston
Map Number
16 Bowston and Cowan Head
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
R664 and R664M
Housing
Oppose
Please explain your reasons
The site is only put forward at the behest of the landowner - presumably for pecuniary gain.
It has not been chosen as a result of any analysis as to where additional development could best take place in Bowston which would minimise visual harm.
There has not been any analysis that I am aware of which has assessed the level of need for additional housing in Bowston or other settlements of this size and therefore there is no justification for requiring the development of this particular site.
There appears to be no assessment as to the impact that windfall housing sites in the settlement would have on meeting any local needs. There is land within residential curtilages and an industrial site which has the potential to create nuisance given its proximity to adjacent dwellings which could provide additional housing within the existing settlement envelope.
If the housing sites in Burneside come forward it is not likely that additional housing land will be required in Bowston.
The site would by reason of being outside the envelope of the hamlet be visually intrusive and constitute ribbon development which has, I gather, been resisted successfully in the past.
All of the reasons for discounting the larger R664 site apply in equal measure to the smaller R664M site.
Given that the proposal is for just affordable housing there would be low economic returns which would likely result in a high density scheme with scarce resources for "quality" landscaping and materials which would make any development more out of keeping in this countryside setting.
Any housing land releases should be based on a sequential approach whereby sites are brought forward in settlements where there is greater infrastructure and community facilities rather than in locations which are less sustainable and where there is no identified local need.
In conclusion there is no justification for the release of the site which would outweigh the considerable visual harm which would result were the site to be developed.
2. Mr Peter Ashby (Individual) : 17 Mar 2011 21:53:00
Settlement
Burneside
Map Number
6 Burneside
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
E32M
Housing
No view
Employment
Support in part
Please explain your reasons
I am concerned about the visual impact and harm to the Dales Way route.
The proposal would only be acceptable if a substantial mounded wide landscaped strip were to be planted along the open countryside boundary to be planted BEFORE the commencement of other site works such strip to replicate that existing.
The opportunity should be taken to reroute the whole of the Dales Way link around Croppers such that it is on the outside of the planted strip.
Dark materials to be used for roofing and walls.
