2 responses from Mr Chris Broad (Individual)
1. Mr Chris Broad (Individual) : 11 Apr 2012 10:11:00
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
Paragraph No.
2.21
If you have selected a ‘Site omission’ please enter the site reference or location and relevant policy below
Ulverston Winton House Phase 2 R271
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.
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.
A suitable site for residential development has been excluded in Ulverston.
Winton House Phase 2 R271 ? has not been taken forward probably due to an incorrect assessment of its suitability most likely due to a perception that access is difficult.However Poplar Grove was widened at significant expense to allow access to the Willow Tree Close development AND the layout of Willow Tree Close was designed to allow access to a further parcel of land R271 with a gap between houses and an appropriate road layout . R271 now appears to have been bundled with PS49.
R271 (unlike the rest of PS49) lies within a developed area well above the flood plane AND with access . It would be suitable for further development of a similar nature to Willow Tree Close which itself is regared as very desirable in the town. Clearly the provision of allotments is an important consideration but the loss of this relativly small parcel to residential development would not be material and could be compensated for elswhere using land that has for example limited access ,or is on a flood plane or is outside the developed envelope etc . .
The develpment of R271 for residential purposes was facilitated at some expense when Willow Tree Close was built and the benefits of that expenditure should now be realised by including R271 in the Plan .
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
2. Mr Chris Broad (Individual) : 11 May 2012 12:25:00
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 - Site Omission
If you have selected a ‘Site omission’ please enter the site reference or location and relevant policy below
Policy LA1.3 , Ulverston, site reference R271
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.
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.
A suitable site for residential development has been excluded in Ulverston.
Winton House Phase 2 R271 ? has not been taken forward probably due to an incorrect assessment of its suitability most likely due to a perception that access is difficult.However Poplar Grove was widened at significant expense to allow access to the Willow Tree Close development AND the layout of Willow Tree Close was designed to allow access to a further parcel of land R271 with a gap between houses and an appropriate road layout . R271 now appears to have been bundled with PS49.
R271 (unlike the rest of PS49) lies within a developed area well above the flood plane AND with access . It would be suitable for further development of a similar nature to Willow Tree Close which itself is regared as very desirable in the town. Clearly the provision of allotments is an important consideration but the loss of this relativly small parcel to residential development would not be material and could be compensated for elswhere using land that has for example limited access ,or is on a flood plane or is outside the developed envelope etc . .
The develpment of R271 for residential purposes was facilitated at some expense when Willow Tree Close was built and the benefits of that expenditure should now be realised by including R271 in the Plan .
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
