6 responses from Dr Peter Edward (Individual)
1. Dr Peter Edward (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 13:32:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Levens
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN282#
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
As noted in earlier comments, a major characteristic of Levens which maintains its ‘village’ feel despite having expanded over the years towards the south east of the village centre (the area around the shop) is that most of the development has been away from the historic roads through the village in locations that neither impact on the views from those roads nor impact on views of the village from across the Lyth Valley. The most significant location which maintains the open, village atmosphere is the largely undeveloped tract of land running north of the village centre between the Brigsteer Road and the floor of the Lyth valley. This site, which is a large open grazing field, forms a large proportion of that tract. The development of the site would be totally out of keeping with the ‘lightly developed’ feel of the northern end of the village and would therefore dramatically change the atmosphere of Levens damaging the village atmosphere and replacing it with a more town-like or semi-urban character. Developing this site would both damage the most significant views from the village, namely those across open fields from the Brigsteer Road across the Lyth Valley and, because the site is highly visible from across the valley it would radically alter the view of the village from the west side of the valley. At present, because most development in the village has been to south and west it is largely hidden so that when viewed from the West across the picturesque Lyth valley Levens still retains the impression of being a small village in keeping with the other villages in the valley. Development of this site would adversely change that impression that the Lyth Valley is largely underdeveloped and rural.
This site is immediately adjacent to the limits of the proposed LDNP extension and its access is via a small country lane on a steep hill. The junction at the top of the hill is difficult to navigate, especially when turning left, and is very constrained by the steep topography of the location so that it would be difficult to modify the junction to handle any volume of traffic. Going down the hill leads into a small hamlet (Cotes/Underbarrow) and narrow winding lanes so that is not an access option either. Furthermore, in the last two winters this hill, which is probably the most susceptible to snow and ice in the entire village, has been impassable to all but tractors and 4-wheel drive for several weeks continuously in both directions (both uphill and downhill) from the access to this site.
Looking at access more generally, development of this site would probably mainly generate traffic heading over the hill east towards the A590 down Heaves Hill: a relatively narrow road leading to a difficult junction on the dual carriageway where, even with its relatively light use currently, there are regularly bad traffic accidents and a hill which again is notorious locally for being dangerous and impassable for much of the winter. The only other feasible access would be through the bottleneck of lanes at the village centre creating a significant extra hazard to pedestrians.
For these reasons (impact on the village atmosphere and on views across the Lyth valley, poor access and increase in traffic dangers, inappropriately large development that would destroy the largely rural feel of the village which has to date been skilfully retained by focusing major development to south and east of the village) I strongly oppose the development of this site.
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
Given the increasing localism and the uncertainty over long term estimates of future demand it seems unnecessary and potentially unwise to take decisions today about housing needs more than ten years away
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
2. Dr Peter Edward (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 13:34:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Levens
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN291#
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 site represents an extension of the adjacent site to the South (RN682LVM) which was in the earlier consultation and which I opposed, so the same reasons apply to this site as to that earlier consultation.
As noted in those earlier comments, a major characteristic of Levens which maintains its ‘village’ feel despite having expanded over the years towards the south east of the village centre (the area around the shop) is that most of the development has been away from the historic roads through the village in locations that neither impact on the views from those roads nor impact on views of the village from across the Lyth Valley. The most significant location which maintains the open, village atmosphere is the largely undeveloped tract of land running north of the village centre between the Brigsteer Road and the floor of the Lyth valley. This site, which is an open grazing field, forms a very prominent part of that tract as it lies immediately below the Brigsteer Road where the lanes in the village centre first open out into open country with extensive views across these fields towards the Lakeland fells. The development of the site would be totally out of keeping with the ‘lightly developed’ feel of the northern end of the village and would therefore dramatically change the atmosphere of Levens damaging the village atmosphere and replacing it with a more town-like or semi-urban character. Developing this site would both damage the most significant views from the village, namely those across open fields from the Brigsteer Road across the Lyth Valley and, because the site is highly visible from across the valley it would radically alter the view of the village from the west side of the valley. At present, because most development in the village has been to south and west it is largely hidden so that when viewed from the West across the picturesque Lyth valley Levens still retains the impression of being a small village in keeping with the other villages in the valley. Development of this site would adversely change that impression that the Lyth Valley is largely underdeveloped and rural.
Looking at access more generally, development of this site would probably mainly generate traffic heading over the hill east towards the A590 down Heaves Hill: a relatively narrow road leading to a difficult junction on the dual carriageway where, even with its relatively light use currently, there are regularly bad traffic accidents and a hill which again is notorious locally for being dangerous and impassable for much of the winter. The only other feasible access would be through the bottleneck of lanes at the village centre creating a significant extra hazard to pedestrians and traffic disruption in the confined village centre.
For these reasons (impact on the village atmosphere and on views across the Lyth valley, poor access and increase in traffic dangers, inappropriately large development that would destroy the largely rural feel of the village which has to date been skilfully retained by focusing major development to south and east of the village) I strongly oppose the development of this site. In fact, as stated in my earlier response, this is such a central site to the feel of the village that it beggars belief that it even made it onto the original consultation.
3. Dr Peter Edward (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 13:36:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Levens
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN295#
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 site represents an extension of the adjacent site to the South (RN121M) which was in the earlier consultation. In the earlier consultation I expressed the following opposition to development of this site: I am aware that while this site [RN121 on old map, now included as North end of RN295# on current map] is not included in the SLDC consultation it has been proposed for housing by the parish council in the past. As stated also in my response on R682LVM, there are two distinctive features which define the character of Levens village. One is the sweeping open views across agricultural land to the Lyth valley and the distant fells as you head north out of the village along the Brigsteer Road. The other is that when you look back at the village across the Lyth valley the village looks remarkably less built up, and therefore less intrusive on the view, than it actually is because most of the housing on the west side of the village is shielded behind trees. Development on this site, particularly since illegal felling of the trees below the site a few years ago which would otherwise have shielded the site from view from across the valley, would significantly intrude on both of those features. It would make the village look much more built up from across the valley and would remove what is one of the few and best views in the village down over the Lyth valley towards Morecambe Bay.
4. Dr Peter Edward (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 13:37:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Levens
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
R105#
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Support in part
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
Levens is a surprisingly large village although this is not apparent to most visitors because the main village ‘feel’ is provided by the compact village centre and its narrow streets which lead quickly on the northern side of the village to open views across fields (under consultation as RN291#, RN282#, R682LVM) towards the Lakeland fells and because views back across to the village from the west side of the Lyth valley make the village seem relatively undeveloped since those views take in this more open northern end but do not see the development to south and east of the village which is largely hidden behind the hill. In fact, development on this south and east corner is largely hidden from view from most directions (especially development on the east side of the village). Furthermore, this side of the village has ready access to the A590 so that traffic generated by the development will mainly be drawn away from the village rather than having to pass through the village centre and the narrow rural roads on the north and west of the village. For these reasons I would support development of this site subject to the caveat that consideration is given to improving the access road into the village from the south east (where the slip-road junction with the dual carriageway exists). If this access road is improved and the junction with the A590 remodelled to improve those turning west as they leave the village onto the A590, then this area might work well for housing development (it is also close to the village school and playing fields) without major detriment to the character of the village or to traffic through the village, and without generating significant extra traffic at the notoriously dangerous T-junction intersections of the other village roads out onto the A590 (i.e. the junction further west and those at Heaves Hotel and Gilpin Bridge).
5. Dr Peter Edward (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 13:38:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Levens
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
R680LV#
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Support in part
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
Levens is a surprisingly large village although this is not apparent to most visitors because the main village ‘feel’ is provided by the compact village centre and its narrow streets which lead quickly on the northern side of the village to open views across fields (under consultation as RN291#, RN282#, R682LVM) towards the Lakeland fells and because views back across to the village from the west side of the Lyth valley make the village seem relatively undeveloped since those views take in this more open northern end but do not see the development to south and east of the village which is largely hidden behind the hill. In fact, development on this south and east corner is largely hidden from view from most directions (especially development on the east side of the village). Furthermore, this side of the village has ready access to the A590 so that traffic generated by the development will mainly be drawn away from the village rather than having to pass through the village centre and the narrow rural roads on the north and west of the village. For these reasons I would support development of this site subject to the caveat that consideration is given to improving the access road into the village from the south east (where the slip-road junction with the dual carriageway exists). If this access road is improved and the junction with the A590 remodelled to improve those turning west as they leave the village onto the A590, then this area might work well for housing development (it is also close to the village school and playing fields) without major detriment to the character of the village or to traffic through the village, and without generating significant extra traffic at the notoriously dangerous T-junction intersections of the other village roads out onto the A590 (i.e. the junction further west and those at Heaves Hotel and Gilpin Bridge).
6. Dr Peter Edward (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 13:39:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Levens
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
R142#
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Support in part
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
Levens is a surprisingly large village although this is not apparent to most visitors because the main village ‘feel’ is provided by the compact village centre and its narrow streets which lead quickly on the northern side of the village to open views across fields (under consultation as RN291#, RN282#, R682LVM) towards the Lakeland fells and because views back across to the village from the west side of the Lyth valley make the village seem relatively undeveloped since those views take in this more open northern end but do not see the development to south and east of the village which is largely hidden behind the hill. In fact, development on this south and east corner is largely hidden from view from most directions (especially development on the east side of the village). Furthermore, this side of the village has ready access to the A590 so that traffic generated by the development will mainly be drawn away from the village rather than having to pass through the village centre and the narrow rural roads on the north and west of the village. For these reasons I would support development of this site subject to the caveat that consideration is given to improving the access road into the village from the south east (where the slip-road junction with the dual carriageway exists). If this access road is improved and the junction with the A590 remodelled to improve those turning west as they leave the village onto the A590, then this area might work well for housing development (it is also close to the village school and playing fields) without major detriment to the character of the village or to traffic through the village, and without generating significant extra traffic at the notoriously dangerous T-junction intersections of the other village roads out onto the A590 (i.e. the junction further west and those at Heaves Hotel and Gilpin Bridge).
