Response from Mr Mark Tennant (Individual)
1. Mr Mark Tennant (Individual) : 8 Sep 2011 17:46:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Cartmel
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
R689
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
There is need for Low Cost Housing in order for the community to be sustainable.
Younger people and families need homes in order to address the demographic shift to older people in the village
There is a need for affordable homes in order to provide accommodation for those working in the service industries and other low paid employment in the area.
However:
The size of the proposed development is out of proportion with the village. The plan would potentially double the population of the village on its own without other proposed sites.
The infrastructure of the village is not developed to cope with the increase in a) traffic (potentially 160 extra VEHICLES)
Schools are at capacity in the village
Pavements and street lighting around this site are inadequate. Pavements do not accommodate wheelchairs or pushchairs. Increased traffic will make it dangerous for wheelchairs/scooters elderly pedestrians and pushchairs / young children.
Roads are badly congested at peak times already around pinch points in the road network of the village.
Part of the site is raised and housing would dominate over the surrounding property and the village.
Adjoining land and houses at Orchard Close are already subject to flooding in times of heavy rainfall as water descends down the slope toward them.There would be additional problems created with run off from extensive building.
There is no indication in the plan of the nature of the housing. Is it to Rent or buy and what proportion of the housing will be low cost. Allocating land to a social landlord will provide some but does not indicate what numbers of houses are going to be low cost in the main site.
The muted 85 homes along with other sites will provide a workforce substantially larger than local employment opportunities this will result in excessive travel to get to work which will by the nature of its location involve cars and the subsequent environmental impact. Unless the intention is to build more expensive retirement or second homes for the village to accommodate older generations and become a retirement center.
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
Oppose
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
Reducing the time span allows for too quick development and the potential to increase numbers even more in 2020.
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
Care will however have to be taken that communities have democratically worked out local plans in order to avoid rampant development poorly opposed or supported.
