3 responses from Mr R K Hare (Individual)
1. Mr R K Hare (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 10:23:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Ulverston
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
M11M#
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
I am strongly opposed to the proposed change of use of this parcel of land to include food retail for the reasons:
- an aggressive supermarket development (it would be aggressive no matter how the wolf is dressed up in sheep's clothing) would destroy the lively market town character of Ulverston. The centre of town small traders would fail, exactly as their counterparts have done throughout the length and breadth of the country where such developments have been approved and implemented. The sourcing of local produce will die with these businesses. Promises of additional employment are baseless, in reality replacing the full time jobs of businesses lost with a mix of poorly paid often temporary appointments , mostly part time. Business decision making, currently owner and therefore largely community based will be replaced by directives from executives in London or Birmingham. This would be a retrograde step for Ulverston.
- a supermarket would encourage even more car travel on the already congested A590, and the scale of development with its attendant traffic management demand would ruin the currently attractive western entrance to the town.
- ideally this greenfield expanse at the edge of the town should remain as a green breathing space between the town and its neighbour Swarthmoor. The alternative is continued creep and urban sprawl whereby both the town and the village will lose part of their character and identities.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
No view
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
Any process which secures greater involvement of local communities in decision making has to be a good thing.
2. Mr R K Hare (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 10:46:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Ulverston
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN178
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Support
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
This enabling development will be key in securing the future of Ford Park as a vital recreational asset for the community of Ulverston. As a trustee of the Ford Park Community Group I cannot stress too highly how important it is to include this site in the Land Allocations document.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
No view
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 R K Hare (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 11:14:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Ulverston
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN244#
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
It would be a travesty to allow further encroachment towards the site of historic Swarthmoor Hall. This oasis of tranquility should be preserved at all cost. Any development of RN244 would inevitably mean losing the lane to provide increased access with attendant traffic and noise pollution. This is unthinkable.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
No view
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