Local Development Framework Consultation

Levens

RN295

Support

This site comprises two sets of derelict buildings, a riding stable & a poultry unit. It would be a service to the community to build some houses on here & get rid of the mess.

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

Levens

RN291

Oppose

This is even worse than R682LVM, three times as big, destroying an unrivalled prospect from a public road through the village. This is the last remaining such prospect not obstructed by buildings. It is a public amenity enjoyed by all who pass by. Development of this site is opposed by over 80% of respondents to our recent survey of parishioners re. potential development sites, regardless of whether they live near it.

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

Levens

R105

Oppose

Another unnecessary grab at agricultural land when we face the need to produce more food in this country. Development of this large site would bring too much additional traffic through the congested parts of the village as well as the Greengate estate itself. It would also be a bulge of develooment protruding into the surrounding landscape.

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

Levens

R680LV

Oppose

Loss of productive agricultural land. In any case I understand that this site is not available

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

Levens

RN123

Support

A derelict carpet warehouse & shop. Eyesore in middle of village. Could contain a row of small starter homes. Parking could be provided by using some adjoining open space near the bus stop.

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

Levens

R142

Oppose

It is an enormous site that if fully developed would be ruinous tho the character of Levens as a rural village, and I can't see how a small er development could be done sympathetically - it would have to be impossibly inconspicuous.

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

Levens

RN127

Support in part

it is at least accessible without going through the rest of the village, and is consistent with the village plan which aims for small-scale developments.

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

Levens

EN45

Support

I understand that the owners, PV Dobson & Sons, want to regularise their existing use of this site (equipment storage) under the heading of industrial rather than agricultural land. If this site were to be fully developed as a commercial venture (industrial units), I would oppose it because the result would be out of place in the Lyth Valley: In any case the site is only accessible via a very narrow road & 3 narrow hump-back bridges. I imagine it would not be economically viable to rebuild the whole road to give access to the site for HGVs.

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue

see response about RN282 for my views on this issue