10 responses from Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West)
1. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 24 Mar 2011 18:58:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (3 of 5) Ulverston South
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
R689ULVM
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
I strongly recommend that this area of land is taken out of the Land Allocations Development Plan Document. I have always believed that the stone wall on Urswick Road is the natural boundary between Swarthmoor and Ulverston (The Green Gap), any encroachment in this area would create a president for the future. This green gap is very important for the two communities and should be kept at all costs. I also believe the owners of the land the Quaker Society do not wish to sell the land, therefor it is pointless to include in the LADPD.
2. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 24 Mar 2011 20:14:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (3 of 5) Ulverston South
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
M11M
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Support in part
Retail
Oppose
Open space
Support in part
Please explain your reasons
This land off the A590 at the Bee Hive is designated for a High Tech Business Park in the LADPD, I am very concerned that SLDC has not approached the Government run Highways Authority (not the County Council, they have no responsibility over this road) as thers is no safe access for the site. The A590 is a very busy road particularly at this point, it's an accident black spot. If another access was found and the site was to be developed, it must be done sensitively taking into account the residents on Woodland Road, Mayfield Drive over the railway line and residents of the Bee Hive and The Knoll.
3. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 24 Mar 2011 20:24:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (3 of 5) Ulverston South
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN3
Housing
Support in part
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support in part
Please explain your reasons
This small parcel of land is off Stockbridge Lane. I would personally rather see this field as open space, supporting the VERY IMPORTANT OPEN SPACE around this site at Stonecross Mansions. Stonecross Mansions and its surrounding land is an area of important open space and should remain so.
4. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 24 Mar 2011 20:50:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (3 of 5) Ulverston South
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
R690ULV
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
This area should be deleted from the Land Allocations Development Plan.(1) I have seen pictures showing serious flooding. (2) Since the High Carley Development took place several years ago there have been many problems with the sewerage system in this area, it runs along Urswick Road and sewerage has been coming up in back gardens along this area.(3) The local Infant and Primary schools in the area (Croftlands and Pennington)have very little room to expand and our Secondary School would also need to cater for an increase in pupils.
5. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 24 Mar 2011 21:03:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (3 of 5) Ulverston South
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN184
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
This area should be deleted from the LAPDP. (1) I am lead to believe it floods and stands in water. (2 Since the development at High Carley, we have had many sewarage problems in the area of Urswick Road with sewerage, smells from sewerage in back gardens along Urswick Road. (3)Schools in the area Infant, Primary and Secondary will need to expand to cater for extra pupils. (4) Access to this site could be a problem.
6. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 6 Apr 2011 19:03:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (3 of 5) Ulverston South
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
R126M/R691ULV
Housing
Support in part
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support in part
Please explain your reasons
If any development has to take place behind Westhills Drive and Bigland Drive, it should be done in a liner fashion R697M, R242 and R126M being developed first with R691ULV following. If developed the community should have a say in any development brief, I would also strongly urge that any buildings built on R126M and R691ULV should replicate the properties in the surrounding area, they should be no more that one and a half stories high. Any development should be well laied out with plenty of open space. I feel very strongly that 1200 houses suggested for Ulverston is far to many, we do need some homes for the future. Ulverston has a special feel and character. 1200 homes would put huge pressure on our services and infrastructure and would change the Town forever.
7. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 6 Apr 2011 19:12:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (1 of 5) Ulverston Main Proposals
If none of the above then please state here what your comment is about
Land opposite AS67-field behind the Quaker Meeting House off Meeting House Lane
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
I would like to see this land behind the Quaker Meeting Rooms on Meeting House Lane an area designated as Amenity Open Space (no public access). It needs to be protected from development.
8. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 6 Apr 2011 19:23:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (2 of 5) Ulverston North
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN193
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
This area of land should be designated Amenity Open Space (no public access). Gill Banks, the start of The Cumbrian Way are very important to the Community of Ulverston and they do not want to see land within in the surrounding area developed, like site R234 was just recently.
9. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 6 Apr 2011 19:29:00
Settlement
Ulverston
Map Number
35 (2 of 5) Ulverston North
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN178
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Support
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
This area of land at Ford Park should remain an importand area of Open Space for the Community any pressure to develop it should be resisted.
10. Cllr. Janette Jenkinson, South Lakeland District Council (Ulverston West) : 6 Apr 2011 19:47:00
Settlement
Swarthmoor
Map Number
41 Swarthmoor
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN109M and R687SW
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Oppose
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
To suggest this area of land for Housing Development is totally ridiculous. It is sited across a very, very busy A590, isolated from the main part of the village, the primary school is full. The very siting in this area would isolate any residents from the community of Swarthmoor and place huge, huge burdens on the infrastructure at a cost to the environment and area.
