2 responses from Mr Alan Davies (Individual)
1. Mr Alan Davies (Individual) : 23 Jan 2011 20:19:00
Settlement
Brigsteer
Map Number
17 Brigsteer
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN213, RN214
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Support in part
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
The sites are designated for affordable housing, but are unsuitable for the following reasons:
1) There are no local employment opportunities or schools (the nearest would be in Kendal).
2) There is no adequate public transport, so any new housing would generate more traffic on narrow, badly aligned roads.
3) The exits from the proposed sites are on blind bends.
4) In bad weather, the roads are not gritted or cleared, making access difficult.
5) There is no main sewerage, and a package sewage station would be required. Any waste water from this would discharge into a stream flowing through a nearby garden.
6) Additional surface water runoff would also be a problem.
7) The existing water and electricity supplies fail regularly. Additional housing would put a further strain on these.
8) An overhead power cable supplying part of the village crosses site RN213. This would need to be relocated.
9) There is no mains gas supply.
10) The sites are in the proposed extension to the National Park, which would probably not favour development.
11) The sites are "greenfield" sites and any development would remove mature trees and reduce the rural appearance of the village, as well as being un-neighbourly for those living nearby.
2. Mr Alan Davies (Individual) : 19 Feb 2011 20:46:00
Settlement
Brigsteer
Map Number
17 Brigsteer
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN227
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Support in part
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
The site is designated for affordable housing, but is unsuitable for the following reasons:
1) There are no local employment opportunities or schools (the nearest would be in Kendal).
2) There is no adequate public transport, so any new housing would generate more traffic on narrow, badly aligned roads.
3) In bad weather, the roads are not gritted or cleared, making access difficult. This is particularly true of this site, which can only be accessed by a very steep, very narrow lane.
4) There is no main sewerage, and a package sewage station would be required. Any waste water from this would discharge into a nearby stream.
5) The existing water and electricity supplies fail regularly. Additional housing would put a further strain on these.
6) There is no mains gas supply.
7) The site is in the proposed extension to the National Park, which would probably not favour development.
8) The site is a "greenfield" site and any development would reduce the rural appearance of the village, as well as being un-neighbourly for those living nearby.
9) Part of the site is very steep, and includes a large septic tank serving several nearby properties.
10) The remainder of the site is flat, low-lying and very wet. It borders an existing flood plain, and, when the Lyth Valley drainage pumps are switched off in 2012, is likely to flood.
11) The site also borders a recently created wildlife reserve, and is the nesting site of bats and barn-owls.
