Response from Mr Graham Rivers (Individual)
1. Mr Graham Rivers (Individual) : 3 Apr 2011 18:42:00
Settlement
Cark & Flookburgh
Map Number
32 Cark & Flookburgh (with Ravenstown/Moor Lane)
If none of the above then please state here what your comment is about
Late plans submitted by Lower Holker to develop Site RN229
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Support
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
I support the original SLDC plans for this site, and strongly oppose the late plans submitted by Lower Holker to develop this site on the following grounds:
1) The proposed site, RN229, is a prominent hillside between Cark and Flookburgh. The proposed large development of over 100 properties would have an overbearing impact particularly in terms of noise and privacy on many of the existing properties and businesses along Main Street and Station Road. It would be visible from the existing routes into the villages, and would have a major adverse impact on the view from the top of Applebury Hill (surely one of the finest viewpoints on the Cartmel peninsular).
2) It would result in an almost continuous line of development from Cark Hall north of Cark to Ravenstown south of Flookburgh (other than small gaps at the railway and by Mireside Farm on Winder Lane). Two villages with important but markedly different histories would be merged into one.
3) The proposed new access road would have a very negative impact on safety on other roads in the villages. There are already safety issues in Cark on the B5278 as a result of parked vehicles outside The Cabin convenience store, and due to the speed of traffic emerging from Ravenstown into Main Street Flookburgh. The additional volume of traffic from the finished development would make both situations worse, and particularly during the building phase as a result of the access required by large vehicles.
4) There is considerable concern in the villages about the large number of 2nd homes. The road for the RN229 development would immediately open up access for further planning consent being sought for huge further numbers of static and tourer caravans on the current green space between the west of the villages and the sea. As static caravans are almost always 2nd homes there would be a surge in the existing numbers of 2nd home owners. Vehicle movement as a result of further static and tourer caravan development would exacerbate the road safety issues previously mentioned.
5) The prevailing winds in the region are from the South West. The large amount of dust generated during the development phase would be carried directly onto the South Lakeland Garden Centre. It would damage stock there, and have a consequent severely damaging impact on what is probably the area's 2nd most successful business (in terms of both turnover, and drawing in visitors to the area). The associated Cafe business would be similarly impacted.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that the people most affected by this have had no opportunity to view the proposals as it was not on your original plan. They were unlikely to have attended the Public meeting where this private proposal was raised as they were not impacted by the original SLDC plans. Details of this late proposal are still not available on your site, so many of those affected are ignorant of it and consequently do not have an opportunity to comment.
