Response from Mr Andrew Brannon (Individual)
1. Mr Andrew Brannon (Individual) : 9 Apr 2011 08:59:00
Settlement
High Carley
Map Number
47 High Carley / Pennington & Rowe Head
Site reference number (e.g. R62) - If your comment is about a specific site you must indicate the correct site reference.
RN6 High Carley/Birkrigg Park
Housing
Oppose
Employment
Oppose
Retail
Oppose
Community uses
Support in part
Open space
Support
Please explain your reasons
Reading through the proposals this land was never identified as a potential location for development to meet the future needs of the area and supporting documents that suggest that the Birkrigg Park Association support recreational area in the context of this development is misleading as this “was not” submitted as part of the development. The Association support the use of the land as being for the public recreation expressing the desire for developments such as community orchard.
The land is a haven for wildlife, greater spotted woodpecker and many bats, hedgehogs to name a few live and use this field as a home/feeding ground.
Getting around without cars is a big safety issue at Birkrigg Park as there are no pavements connecting any facilities and the narrow lanes to the nearest local shops have very poor visibility for pedestrian walking with many blind corners and a national speed limit to make things worse. It is very dangerous for children even letting them go the local shop is a big worry so cars are essential there is also no regular bus route, the very limited services are due to be stopped I believe.
The traffic speed restriction which is 30mph at the crossroads where Red Lane, Carley Lane, Green Lane and Horse Close lane meet, is NEVER enforced and hardly ever adhered to. Road users already use these narrow roads as cut through in order to avoid the A590. Further development would mean increased cars, I believe, would have a huge impact regarding traffic safety.
The argument that this development will round off the existing estate in none existent the current development fits within mature tree boundaries this new proposal will stick out prominently from the existing dwellings.
There is a big question mark over whether the sewerage system can cope with more dwellings.
Residents adjacent to the area will be subject to negative changes to their views, reduction in privacy.
Highways access is inadequate and over land owned by SLDC
Do you think that your area needs new or improved community facilities? If so, what sort of facilities and where?
Please explain the types of improved and/or new community facilities your community may need in the next 15 years
There is a need for pavements to the development so adults and children can safely get to local shop/post office.
