3 responses from Mrs Patricia A Kilshaw (Individual)
1. Mrs Patricia A Kilshaw (Individual) : 4 May 2012 17:04:00
Policy/Site No.
LA1.7 Business and Science Park Sites - M11M - Mod ULVERSTON LAND AT LIGHTBURN ROAD
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.
M11M
The site should remain part of green gap between Ulverston and Swarthmoor. I disagree with SLDC assessment of loss of identity between Ulverston and Swarthmoor. The land forms a significant area of green field and any building would necessarily change the sky line
The site is bounded by railway line and major trunk road A590, therefore the only access is via the major trunk road.
See CS 10.1 & 10.2 highways impact on trunk roads, Managing impact of new development.
Reference was noted to a forthcoming Transport Study - not yet carried out.
There is already evidence of traffic accidents in this area therefore site is not suitable.
CS7.2 set out employment land requirements. Ther are already unoccupied office premises on nearby business sites.
Water Drainage: Extra use on this site would lead to considerable extra need for water drainage which is not practical, also it would lead to extra risk of flooding further south, which is a current problem.
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 Patricia A Kilshaw (Individual) : 8 May 2012 15:12:00
Policy/Site No.
LA1.9 Green Gaps between - ULVERSTON and SWARTHMOOR
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 site should remain part of Green Gap between Ulverston & Swarthmoor.
I disagree with SLDC assessment on loss of identity between Ulverston & Swarthmoor.
This land forms a significant area of green field & any building would necessarilt change the sky-line.
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. Mrs Patricia A Kilshaw (Individual) : 15 May 2012 14:10:00
Policy/Site No.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - RN250 ULVERSTON STONE CROSS MANSION
1.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
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 site should remain part of green gap between Ulverston and Swarthmoor. I disagree with SLDC assessment of loss of identity between Ulverston and Swarthmoor. The land forms a significant area of green field and any building would necessarily change the sky line
The site is bounded by railway line and major trunk road A590, therefore the only access is via the major trunk road.
See CS 10.1 & 10.2 highways impact on trunk roads, Managing impact of new development.
Reference was noted to a forthcoming Transport Study - not yet carried out.
There is already evidence of traffic accidents in this area therefore site is not suitable.
CS7.2 set out employment land requirements. Ther are already unoccupied office premises on nearby business sites.
Water Drainage: Extra use on this site would lead to considerable extra need for water drainage which is not practical, also it would lead to extra risk of flooding further south, which is a current problem.
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
