Response from Mrs Bernadette Yare (Individual)
1. Mrs Bernadette Yare (Individual) : 7 Sep 2011 21:58:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Grayrigg
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN257# and RN258#
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
The village of Grayrigg has a small population with single depth houses running down either side of the main road (with the exception of half a dozen houses situated on a side lane). Below, are my outlined objections regarding any proposal for development within the surrounding countryside, as depicted in RN257# and RN258#.
* The infrastucture of Grayrigg is insufficient to deal with an influx in population.
* The local community will not benefit by an increase in housing. infact, existing resources would
be stretched.
* An increase in housing/population is insustainable. There is no local employment other than
farming (which in itself is suffering a financial decline). Public transport is limited. Combine
these facts and it leads to the necessity for home-owners to own a vehicle. This increases the
cost of living in the village of Grayrigg and in turn makes a nonsense of the Governments'
proposals to ease housing development plans in green-belt areas.
* The school (the ONLY amenity in the village), has limited capacity, is situated on the main road
and has only road-side parking. Any increase in volumes of traffic and attendance would bring
with it, an increased risk to the Health and Safety of pedestrians.
* The countryside, it's flora, fauna and wildlife spill into many of the gardens which back onto
the 'proposed alternative areas for development'. Some households have actively encouraged this
and have helped increase numbers and varieties of a range of wildlife inhabiting the local area.
Some of the visiting birds use this 'proposed area' as a 'corridor' to feeding sites in gardens.
One particular household, who's garden backs onto the 'proposed area', houses bats (a protected
species) which feed in the fields proposed for development.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
Support
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
As it stands, the period is too long and does not cater for changes which could occur.
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
Local communities are the experts regarding the life and workings of their particular environment. To decide any land allocation via a paper exercise and disregard local knowledge would be fool-hardy.
