2 responses from Mrs Jacqueline M Barnfield (Individual)
1. Mrs Jacqueline M Barnfield (Individual) : 24 Apr 2012 09:57:00
Paragraph No.
5.21
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
Yes
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
No
2.2 If NO please identify which test of soundness your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 2.3.
The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
The DPD is not consistent with national policy.
2.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 2.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
The proposal does not indicate:
Management of ancient flood water meadows
Management of underground streams
Management of water table which floods after several hours of persistent rainfall
The proposed area has Flora & Fauna that is indicative of ancient water meadows and no reference to/or account has been taken of these facts.
The proposed area was subject to an enquiry in 1992 and the judgement ruled against using this agricultural land for building purposes as it provided a green barrier between the Croft lands' development and the ancient landmark of Brikrigg moors. As no-one has ever informed us as to when this ruling was overturned one has to assume that SLDC is simply ignoring the findings. This makes their decision unsafe and not a sound one.
The most recent development on the High Carley hospital site still has problems re sewage. There are days when I and other residents can smell sewer gas as the problem has to be regularly dealt with. Adding numerous homes to an already overworked sewage disposal system cannot possibly be sound!
To destroy good agricultural land for homes can never be sound. The world's population is increasing at an alarming rate and millions face food shortages and starvation. Removing productive land from food cultivation is unsound. We are on the earth as guardians for future generations, to take productive land for homes is short sighted and a blight for future generations. At present the land soaks up, like an enormous sponge, the vast quantities of rain we experience. Even then it floods as the underground aquifers are replenished. Build on this area and many future residents will concrete over their gardens and tarmac their drives adding enormous amounts of water to the drainage system which already struggles to cope.
Sadly no local planners seemed to be aware of this matter when the proposals were first muted. Their publicity materials say they have been addressed but no-one has seen any evidence of their resolutions. To me this is yet another example of the lack of soundness in this plan.
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
YES, I wish to participate at the oral examination
2. Mrs Jacqueline M Barnfield (Individual) : 24 Apr 2012 10:10:00
Paragraph No.
5.21
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
Yes
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
No
2.2 If NO please identify which test of soundness your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 2.3.
The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
The DPD is not consistent with national policy.
2.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 2.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
SLDC has not adopted many of the issues raised by local residents.
The proposal does not indicate:
Management of ancient flood water meadows
Management of underground streams
Management of water table which floods after several hours of persistent rainfall
The proposed area has Flora & Fauna that is indicative of ancient water meadows and no reference to/or account has been taken of these facts.
The proposed area was subject to an enquiry in 1990 and the judgement ruled against using this agricultural land for building purposes as it provided a green barrier between the Croft lands' development and the ancientlandmarkof Brikriggmoors.As such it was confirmed as an "Areaof Great Landscape Value''. As no-one has ever informed us as to when this ruling was overturned one has to assume that SLDC is simply ignoring the findings. This makes their decision unsafe and not a sound one.
The most recent development on the High Carley hospital site still has problems re sewage. There are days when I and other residents can smell sewer gas as the problem has to be regularly dealt with. Adding numerous homes to an already overworked sewage disposal system cannot possibly be sound!
To destroy good agricultural land for homes can never be sound. The world's population is increasing at an alarming rate and millions face food shortages and starvation. Removing productive land from food cultivation is unsound. We are on the earth as guardians for future generations, to take productive land for homes is short sighted and a blight for future generations. At present the land soaks up, like an enormous sponge, the vast quantities of rain we experience. Even then it floods as the underground aquifers are replenished. Build on this area and many future residents will concrete over their gardens and tarmac their drives adding enormous amounts of water to the drainage system which already struggles to cope.
Sadly no local planners seemed to be aware of this matter when the proposals were first muted. Their publicity materials say they have been addressed but no-one has seen any evidence of their resolutions. To me this is yet another example of the lack of soundness in this plan. Another indicator of the lack of soundness is the lack of provision for the development of the infrastructure should the plans succeeds. Already public transport has a difficult task to pass through
Croftlands given the number of homes who use the roads and pavements as additional parking spaces! Aly increase this problem and no thought or mention has been made of this in the plans. The current roads servicing the area are country lanes. We are led to believe that there will be no electrification of the railway line so train services provision will decline accordingly. This will impact upon the car usage. Nor are there any plans to improve the A590, the scene of numerous accidents resulting in fatalities and serious injuries. So it difficult to understand the logic that there will be more industries in Ulverston area: thus more work and more people. The proposed Glaxo development will result in more local work available but once it is up and running it will be highly educated professionals who move into the area and there will be limited posts available for the local workdorce. So one has to query the soundness of the thinking re sustainable housing!
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
YES, I wish to participate at the oral examination
3.2 If you wish to participate in the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary.
It is important for our concerns to be heard. Sadly because of the past behaviours of several politicians etc - one no longer trusts decision makers to make decision based on balanced information and not political gain.
