3 responses from Mr Roger Rushton (Individual)
1. Mr Roger Rushton (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 07:34:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
KIRKBY-IN-FURNESS
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN330#
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Oppose
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
This field would represent a new area of building development and could not be considered "rounding off" or "filling in" a space in an existing settlement.
Traffic is an issue if this site is developed for housing - if an access road were created onto Askew Gate Brow the increased volume of traffic would represent a danger; if a road were made onto the A595 the danger would be even greater.
When taken in addition to the "Emerging Consultations" proposal, the development area proposed on farmland between Sandside and the A590 represents far too big an area. A survey of residents by Kirkby Housing Action Group shows support for not more than 25 new dwellings in the village as a whole, and I understand this is the policy of the Parish Council.
Good farmland should not be lost to housing: planning should ensure that development of only small scale sites of infill or use of brown field sites are allowed.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
Support
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
Local people and their representatives should have more say in land allocations, and presumably a shorter period would allow this.
Please indicate which of the options for the future housing and employment land needs of small villages, hamlets and open countryside you would support.
Option B - Communities and/or developers bringing forward sites for housing and employment for consideration under relevant Core Strategy policies, through neighbourhood plans and/or other local initiatives
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
The recognised need in a village like ours is for low cost or starter homes for local young people and these are not most efficiently delivered by developers who are interested in profit, but by housing associations working with local groups. Presumably Option B would facilitate more local influence.
2. Mr Roger Rushton (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 07:40:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
KIRKBY-IN-FURNESS
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
EN58#
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Oppose
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
This field is being put forward as Employment Land, but there seems to be no evidence of a need for employment in the village, nor that any employers want to provide it. The site is not owned by the proposer of the field for employment.
The site is a hill behind the shop at the centre of the village and any development on this hill would inevitably dominate the skyline from all along the A595 and the roads around Four Lane Ends.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
Support
Please indicate which of the options for the future housing and employment land needs of small villages, hamlets and open countryside you would support.
Option B - Communities and/or developers bringing forward sites for housing and employment for consideration under relevant Core Strategy policies, through neighbourhood plans and/or other local initiatives
3. Mr Roger Rushton (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 07:53:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
KIRKBY-IN-FURNESS
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN13#
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Oppose
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
The road from Four Lane Ends to and through Beckside is extremely narrow and already carries too much traffic. Nothing can be done about widening the road through Beckside or near the junction to Ulverston. Adding to the traffic emerging onto the A595 by the shop would be disasterous.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
Support
Please indicate which of the options for the future housing and employment land needs of small villages, hamlets and open countryside you would support.
Option B - Communities and/or developers bringing forward sites for housing and employment for consideration under relevant Core Strategy policies, through neighbourhood plans and/or other local initiatives
