Response from Mrs Beryl Mansbridge (Individual)
1. Mrs Beryl Mansbridge (Individual) : 16 Apr 2012 08:07:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
Policy/Site No.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - RN213-mod BRIGSTEER LAND OPPOSITE THE WHEATSHEAF
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.
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 main reason for including the site RN213 in Brigsteer is because of the 'degree of community involvement and support.' This is unsound because:
1) In December 2010 residents of the parish were invited to a meeting to hear about developments planned on two pieces of woodland in Brigsteer which had been proposed for affordable homes by a Community Land Trust steering group. This was quite a shock for residents of the village as it was the first time they had heard of a CLT being formed. A further meeting was promised for early 2011. This has not yet taken place in spite of repeated requests for democratic communication and consultation with the community.
2) An opinion survey was carried out in March 2011 by a group of local residents. Over half of Brigsteer residents responded, 78% being opposed to the proposed development of RN213. A Parish Meeting followed this survey and was attended by Alastair McNeill and Iain Withington. The opinions expressed agreed with this survey and the results were included in a formal consultation response from the Helsington Parish Council.
3) The initial consultation response from the Parish Council gave only conditional support for development of RN213. It asked for smaller scale alternatives and use of existing buildings and schemes such as 'Home on the Farm' to be explored before any potential development of RN213 in the second phase of the Land Allocation Plan.
4) In September 2011 Helsington Parish Council considered their response to the consultation as to whether sites for development should be allocated in small villages and hamlets. It was unanimously resolved that the policies in the Core Strategy supported by Neighbourhood Plans would be a more appropriate way of identifying and meeting development needs in small villages and hamlets. This was their official response to SLDC.
5) A Helsington Parish Meeting was held on April 10th 2012 at which members of the electorate confirmed their rejection of proposals to develop site RN213 and asked the Parish Council to respond to SLDC accordingly.
It is therefore not sound to assert that the development of site RN213 has sufficient community support to justify exceptional allocation. I would like Brigsteer to be treated in the same way as other small villages and hamlets with RN213 removed from the DPD.
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
NO, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination
