3 responses from Mr Peter Jones (Individual)
1. Mr Peter Jones (Individual) : 10 Apr 2012 13:52:00
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.
0.0 Whole Document
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
No
1.2 If NO please identify which test of legal compliance your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 1.3.
The processes of community involvement in developing the DPD are not in general accordance of the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
1.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD legally compliant, having regard to the test you have identified at question 1.2 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 Statement of Community Involvement adopted on 13th September 2006, promised to inform the community throughout negotiations,allowing for early and on-going input at stages where responses can make a difference and selecting methods/techniques and venues which maximise the opportunity for all groups to take part and respond including the "hard to reach" groups. Community involvement has been negligible in our part of the village. The proposal put forward to include land marked M32#Mod which forms a boundary to our property only came to our attention on Monday 25th March 2012. We learnt this information by way of a single A4 piece of paper entitled Lower Allithwaite Parish Council Issue no.28 newsletter which was posted through our letterbox. This form of communication with regards to a hugely important matter is not acceptable. We understand that the parcel of land (M32) was submitted in September 2011 and was highlighted as being suitable for mixed residential/employment. However, it was later withdrawn, modified and re-submitted half its original size in January 2012 as being suitable for residential land. When we had the opportunity of looking at the draft copy on Sunday 1st April 2012, no mention was given to land behind Almond Bank (M32). This was because the draft copy referred to the land incorrectly as being land at Lane End which results in confusion! We also understand that of the many sites examined for these proposals, Allithwaite Parish Council had a strong preference for a piece of land marked RN230 but this was overruled by the SLDC. Understanding that the Government is committed to decision making at local level I find it inconceivable that after 3 years of research that we have not been directly invited to participate in these proposals.
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 effective in that the document is not deliverable, flexible or capable of being monitored.
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.
Brown field sites within the community have not been used. There is not a demonstrable case for building on greenfield sites in ths area. The plans are not deliverable without major changes to the infrastructure - water, electricity, sewerage, transport and most importantly roads. M32#Mod is situated on a twisty piece of road with its entrance being on the a-pex of a blind corner. This is an extremely busy road forming the major route between Grange-Over-Sands, Flookburgh, Cark and Ravenstown and has both narrows to negotiate and no pedestrian footpath possibilities. With regards to the access, we cannot understand how the Highways Authority could have considered this access as being suitable for 11 dwellings when planning permission was turned down for dwellings on the opposite side of the road to the field M32 on the grounds as dangerous access!! An important factor is the suitability of the site M32 for families when there is no pavement running through this part of the village.
We also understand that there may well be historical archeological significance with regard to this land.
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
2. Mr Peter Jones (Individual) : 15 May 2012 12:29:00
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 - M32#-mod ALLITHWAITE LAND AT LANE ENDS
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
No
1.2 If NO please identify which test of legal compliance your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 1.3.
The processes of community involvement in developing the DPD are not in general accordance of the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
1.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD legally compliant, having regard to the test you have identified at question 1.2 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 Statement of Community Involvement adopted on 13th September 2006, promised to inform the community throughout negotiations,allowing for early and on-going input at stages where responses can make a difference and selecting methods/techniques and venues which maximise the opportunity for all groups to take part and respond including the "hard to reach" groups. Community involvement has been negligible in our part of the village. The proposal put forward to include land marked M32#Mod which forms a boundary to our property only came to our attention on Monday 25th March 2012. We learnt this information by way of a single A4 piece of paper entitled Lower Allithwaite Parish Council Issue no.28 newsletter which was posted through our letterbox. This form of communication with regards to a hugely important matter is not acceptable. We understand that the parcel of land (M32) was submitted in September 2011 and was highlighted as being suitable for mixed residential/employment. However, it was later withdrawn, modified and re-submitted half its original size in January 2012 as being suitable for residential land. When we had the opportunity of looking at the draft copy on Sunday 1st April 2012, no mention was given to land behind Almond Bank (M32). This was because the draft copy referred to the land incorrectly as being land at Lane End which results in confusion! We also understand that of the many sites examined for these proposals, Allithwaite Parish Council had a strong preference for a piece of land marked RN230 but this was overruled by the SLDC. Understanding that the Government is committed to decision making at local level I find it inconceivable that after 3 years of research that we have not been directly invited to participate in these proposals.
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 effective in that the document is not deliverable, flexible or capable of being monitored.
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.
Brown field sites within the community have not been used. There is not a demonstrable case for building on greenfield sites in ths area. The plans are not deliverable without major changes to the infrastructure - water, electricity, sewerage, transport and most importantly roads. M32#Mod is situated on a twisty piece of road with its entrance being on the a-pex of a blind corner. This is an extremely busy road forming the major route between Grange-Over-Sands, Flookburgh, Cark and Ravenstown and has both narrows to negotiate and no pedestrian footpath possibilities. With regards to the access, we cannot understand how the Highways Authority could have considered this access as being suitable for 11 dwellings when planning permission was turned down for dwellings on the opposite side of the road to the field M32 on the grounds as dangerous access!! An important factor is the suitability of the site M32 for families when there is no pavement running through this part of the village.
We also understand that there may well be historical archeological significance with regard to this land.
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
3. Mr Peter Jones (Individual) : 15 May 2012 12:34:00
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.
1.9
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
No
1.2 If NO please identify which test of legal compliance your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 1.3.
The processes of community involvement in developing the DPD are not in general accordance of the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
1.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD legally compliant, having regard to the test you have identified at question 1.2 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 Statement of Community Involvement adopted on 13th September 2006, promised to inform the community throughout negotiations,allowing for early and on-going input at stages where responses can make a difference and selecting methods/techniques and venues which maximise the opportunity for all groups to take part and respond including the "hard to reach" groups. Community involvement has been negligible in our part of the village. The proposal put forward to include land marked M32#Mod which forms a boundary to our property only came to our attention on Monday 25th March 2012. We learnt this information by way of a single A4 piece of paper entitled Lower Allithwaite Parish Council Issue no.28 newsletter which was posted through our letterbox. This form of communication with regards to a hugely important matter is not acceptable. We understand that the parcel of land (M32) was submitted in September 2011 and was highlighted as being suitable for mixed residential/employment. However, it was later withdrawn, modified and re-submitted half its original size in January 2012 as being suitable for residential land. When we had the opportunity of looking at the draft copy on Sunday 1st April 2012, no mention was given to land behind Almond Bank (M32). This was because the draft copy referred to the land incorrectly as being land at Lane End which results in confusion! We also understand that of the many sites examined for these proposals, Allithwaite Parish Council had a strong preference for a piece of land marked RN230 but this was overruled by the SLDC. Understanding that the Government is committed to decision making at local level I find it inconceivable that after 3 years of research that we have not been directly invited to participate in these proposals.
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
