2 responses from Ms Sarah Roberts (Individual)
1. Ms Sarah Roberts (Individual) : 3 Sep 2011 14:19:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Natland
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
ON51#, RN256#
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
In principle I would support either of these proposals as there is a demonstrable need for parking in the centre of the village, particularly for vehicles associated with the school, church and village hall. However, for the safety of hall users, vehicle access to any development should not be past the front of the village hall. (I am not sure whether this is currently a public byway, but there is certainly a right of access for 5 existing houses and the field gate, which already creates difficulties on occasion.) Any access to a car park under these proposals should be on Oxenholme Lane, with access also available from Natland Road for RN256#. I would also have concerns about the extent of RN256# frontage on Natland Road – frontage for an access road to the site would be necessary but I would not be in support of any housing which adjoined Natland Road.
The sites lie near the centre of the village and largely within the convex envelope defined by existing development so would not have significant visual impact. They also counter the trend for creeping expansion of the village particularly to the south and east.
The financial viability of ON51# as a proposal is doubtful as, unlike RN256# which includes some housing development, there is no mechanism for funding a car park.
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
Support for 'local' option B in respect of housing and employment land needs in villages and hamlets, but believe that there should be wider oversight in respect of open countryside.
2. Ms Sarah Roberts (Individual) : 3 Sep 2011 14:21:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Natland
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN298#, RN303#
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
RN298#
Oppose this proposal as it slices a little more off the green gap separating Natland from Oxenholme – creeping coalescence. Also there is no way this site could be developed without a road along the narrow site, and the narrowness means that there could probably be houses on one side only – leaving it highly likely that there would be calls for future development to the east on the other side of any road!
RN303#
Oppose this proposal as it substantially destroys the green gap between Natland and Oxenholme.
