Response from Mrs Janet Crowe (Individual)
1. Mrs Janet Crowe (Individual) : 22 Aug 2011 16:56:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
North Lonsdale Road, Ulverston
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
Plot ON43
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 is beyond belief that the above site is being considered for any sort of development following the catastrophic flooding which occurred during November 2009, which devasted the homes of many residents (council tax payers one and all) for almost 2 years and caused untold misery.
Having read the document, it appears that SLDC are in agreement that the land falls in Zone 3a - at high probability of flooding. Common sense should prevail at this juncture - MORE DEVELOPMENTS MEAN LESS NATURAL DRAINAGE; unbelievably however, the document goes on to say that the floor level of any planned structure should be at 800mm (nearly 3 feet) above potential flood level. In other words, SLDC seek to protect these industrial units at the expense of residents' homes, where inevitably the flood water will find its way. This is both an abhorrent and unscrupulous state of affairs.
Another disturbing line in the document was that this plot could form open space which may possibly be used by travellers and gypsies. Due to the flooding it is already proving impossible for North Lonsdale Road residents to sell their homes, a fact I can personally vouch for since my home has been on the market for quite some time. Does the Council seriously intend to rub salt into our wounds by allowing further desecration of the area by allowing these people within feet of an established and respectable residential area!?
Another line in the document raised concerns about the drainage of any proposed developments into Ulverston Canal, causing a problem with pollution. The Canal is one of Ulverston's beauty spots and a thriving haven for numerous species of wildlife - this cannot be allowed to happen! Notwithstanding that the Canal belongs to the Glaxo Company who would almost certainly refuse the willful pollution of their property.
The last thing to say about further industrial development in South Ulverston is that there are still plenty of factory units available on both Cross Lane and at the former tannery site which have been vacant for a protracted period of time. Does SLDC need another white elephant?
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
No view
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
We have no comment about this - our only concern is that good old common sense and decency prevails, and that no further developments are allowed to take place on North Lonsdale Road, Ulverston.
The recent flooding has forced North Lonsdale Road residents to endure a miserable time, and this is now essentially a MORAL issue.
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
We feel unable to comment since the population of Ulverston has remained static for many years. We do not believe more housing is necessary, and whilst employment is always important, as mentioned earlier there are already industrial units available which have not been filled - the priority should be persuading companies to utilise these before further development is even considered.
In any case, any future developments should only be considered for brownfield sites - there can be no justification for using any greenfield sites in and around the market town of Ulverston.
