Local Development Framework Consultation

Allithwaite

RN339#

Oppose

I oppose the inclusion of R339# in the Land Allocation Plan for the following reasons.
(i) R339# provides an open aspect near the centre of the northern part of the village of Allithwaite; this is particularly welcoming when one approaches the village along Boarbank Lane from Cark. If R339# was built up to maximum capacity, then there would be a really 'solid' lump of housing at the north end of the village.
(ii) R339# in its present agricultural state allows good views to the south and west from Meadow Bank (in Green Lane) and to the south from upper windows in some of the terraced houses in Green Lane; it also allows views of Wart Barrow and Fell End from upper windows in Heather Bank and Fairfield (in Vicarage Lane). (The views across R339# from some bungalows in Green Lane are currently obstructed by some tall trees that have been allowed to grow up in the hedge between R339# and Green Lane.)
(iii) Green Lane and Vicarage Lane are narrow: it seems to me to be essential that, if R339# (with or without R73#) is used for housing, then part of those areas should be used for widening Green Lane and Vicarage Lane, and for providing pedestrian footways. Even so, it seems difficult to widen Green Lane between Meadow Bank and Church Road, and difficult to widen the lower part of Vicarage Lane. It should also be borne in mind that at least one person living in a terraced house in Green Lane currently 'garages' a car on Green Lane, and this would add an extra complication if building were allowed on R339#.
(iv) R339# appears to be viable agricultural land where food crops are grown. As the effects of Peak Oil become clearer, and transport and distribution costs escalate, it will, I believe, become (before 2025) more important for food crops to be grown locally where possible. For this reason, I think R339# should be kept as agricultural land.

I have heard that United Utilities might only upgrade the sewerage system in Allithwaite for developments of c.40 (or more) houses. If that really is the case, then I think only larger sites should be included in the Land Allocation Plan for Allithwaite. However, 40 houses on R339# would be rather cramped together, and would not allow the occupants much in the way of gardens: I think new houses should have reasonable gardens (or access to allotments) so that the occupants can grow some of their own food. I therefore support the inclusion of R69M between Wart Barrow Lane and Cartmel Road and R343M behind Church Road, as originally proposed by SLDC in the first consultation, or (perhaps part of) RN230#, and not R339#.

If it is thought essential to include RN339# in the Land Allocation Plan, then perhaps a partial housing development of just bungalows could be planned, with a village green in the corner where Vicarage Lane and Green Lane meet, RN73# used as allotments until it is needed for extension of the graveyard, and a footway provided through the middle of R339# from the Vicarage Lane/Green Lane corner to the Church/School, so that the views mentioned under (ii) above would be preserved and children could walk more safely to school.

Oppose

I oppose the suggestion that the Land Allocations document should cover a shorter period to an earlier end date. The main reasons for my opposition are (i) my unease about the changes proposed by the coalition government to the UK's planning regime, (ii) my feeling that the hard work already undertaken by my local Parish Council should be rewarded by a long period of validity for the resulting plan, and (iii) my concerns about difficult circumstances that might face the UK in the 2020s.

(i) Apparently, the coalition government's new legislation about planning will introduce a presumption of 'yes' as a response to most planning applications, and I therefore feel that formal adoption of the Land Allocation document for the period from 2011 until 2025 could provide South Lakeland with some measure of protection against vigorous development. The sentence 'Planning permission should be granted where relevant policies are out of date, for example where a local authority cannot demonstrate an up-to-date five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.' in paragraph 110 of the Draft National Planning Policy Framework document aggravates my concerns.

(ii) Conversations with a member of the local Parish Council indicate that a great deal of work has gone into consideration of the Land Allocation Plan for Allithwaite.

(iii) By 2020, there could be more manifestations in the UK of the effects of climate change. For example, there might be substantial, and quite legal, immigration to the UK by climate change refugees from hot countries in the south of the EU. This could put increased strain on the UK's housing resources, and SLDC's Land Allocation document would mean that South Lakeland, while able to welcome some such refugees, would not be overrun during that document's period of validity.

Allithwaite

RN72#

Support in part

I think the character of the village of Allithwaite would be best preserved if additional housing were restricted to small 'infill' sites, rather than concentrated in large groupings, provided that the combined developments in Allithwaite under the Land Allocation Plan are accompanied by commensurate improvements in the village's infrastructure (sewerage, water, electricity and gas supplies, road widening, provision of pedestrian footways) appropriate for a 10% increase in the village's population. RN72# is a possible small 'infill' site, and I would support its inclusion in the Land Allocation Plan provided that
(i) only one row of new houses is permitted on it, and those houses follow the building lines of the neighbouring Greystones, Heather Bank and Fairfield;
(ii) the sea-side boundary of the new houses' back gardens (is as on the plan and) continues the corresponding boundary for Heather Bank;
(iii) part of RN72# is used to widen Vicarage Lane and provide a pedestrian footway where RN72# fronts onto the lane;
(iv) the new houses are allocated reasonable-sized gardens, so that the occupants can grow some of their own food;
(v) the new houses are provided with garages and/or parking space, so that overnight parking does not occur on Vicarage Lane;
(vi) the present access (for the farmer) from Vicarage Lane to some fields on the sea side of RN72# is maintained; and
(vii) (as stated above) the combined developments in Allithwaite under the Land Allocation Plan are accompanied by commensurate improvements in the village's infrastructure (sewerage, water, electricity and gas supplies, road widening, provision of pedestrian footways) appropriate for a 10% increase in the village's population.

However, I have heard that United Utilities might only upgrade the sewerage system in Allithwaite for developments of c.40 (or more) houses; if that really is the case, then I would not after all support the idea of providing c.80 new homes by using several small 'infill' sites, and instead I would support the inclusion of one or two larger sites only, such as R69M between Wart Barrow Lane and Cartmel Road and R343M behind Church Road, as originally proposed by SLDC in the first consultation. There is no point in having a pretty village if its sewers don't work properly!

Allithwaite

RN290#

Oppose

I oppose the inclusion of RN290# in the Land Allocation Plan because building thereon would obstruct views to the north from houses on the north side of Templand Park.

Allithwaite

RN262#

Oppose

I oppose the inclusion of RN262# in the Land Allocation Plan beacuse the site could become more susceptible to flooding as the effects of climate change become more pronounced in the 2020s.

Allithwaite

RN261#

Oppose

I oppose the inclusion of RN261# in the Land Allocation Plan because the site could become more susceptible to flooding as the effects of climate change become more pronounced in the 2020s.

Allithwaite

RN230#

Support in part

I support the idea of a small 'ribbon development' of new housing at the south end of RN230#, provided that it is accompanied by a new pedestrian footway from the end of the footway in Holme Lane, along the western edge of RN230#, and leading to Quarry Lane.

Allithwaite

RN84#

Support in part

I support the inclusion of RN84# in the Land Allocation Plan provided the new houses follow the building lines of the existing houses in Holme Lane and there is a new roundabout at the junction of Kirkhead Road, Jack Hill and the B5277.

Allithwaite

RN79#

Support in part

Given that the views northwards from the existing houses in the upper part of Jack Hill are obscured by a high hedge, I support the inclusion of RN79# in the Land Allocation Plan provided there is a new roundabout at the junction of Kirkhead Road, Jack Hill and the B5277.

Allithwaite

RN82#

Support in part

I support the inclusion of RN82# in the Land Allocation Plan provided there is a new roundabout at the junction of Kirkhead Road, Jack Hill and the B5277.

Allithwaite

RN86#

Support in part

I support the inclusion of RN86# in the Land Allocation Plan provided there are new traffic lights to control 'the Narrows' and there is a new pedestrian footway from houses behind 'the Narrows', via M32#, to somewhere near the centre of the village, with a branch to the 'Pheasant'.

Allithwaite

RN224#

Support in part

I support the inclusion of RN224# in the Land Allocation Plan provided there are new traffic lights to control 'the Narrows' and there is a new pedestrian footway from houses behind 'the Narrows' , via M32#, to somewhere near the centre of the village, with a branch to the 'Pheasant'.

Allithwaite

RN195#

Support in part

I support the inclusion of RN195# in the Land Allocation Plan provided there are new traffic lights to control 'the Narrows' and there is a new pedestrian footway from houses behind 'the Narrows' , via M32#, to somewhere near the centre of the village, with a branch to the 'Pheasant'.

Allithwaite

M32#

Support in part

I support the idea of some housing development on M32# provided there is a new pedestrian footway from houses behind 'the Narrows' , via M32#, to somewhere near the centre of the village, with a branch to the 'Pheasant'.