Local Development Framework Consultation

Dear Sir or Madam

SLDC LAND ALLOCATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN – FURTHER MAIN MODIFICATION MM072U
SITE REF: RN193 LAND OFF UNION LANE, ULVERSTON, CUMBRIA

I would like to state that in my opinion the fields described above should remain as agricultural land and I would like the Development Plans Manager to consider the following comments in relation to the proposed reclassification of the above site from “agricultural land” to “land with some development potential” and its inclusion within the “development plan boundary” as shown in main modification MM072U being part of the SLDC Land Allocations Development Plan:

1. ACCESS TO UNION LANE FIELDS FROM MOWINGS LANE
The South Lakeland Local Development Framework Land Allocations Development plan document states under its “Site Visit” section that “there is potential access from the single track/lane adjoining the North East boundary. Though this is constrained and fairly narrow”.

a. This description is a complete underestimation of the difficulties involved in negotiating this track especially during wet conditions when rain pools in many parts of this track and during wintery conditions when this track is sometimes impassable for days. It is surprising how much difference the elevation makes. I have driven up Mowings Lane on many occasions with extreme care in snowy conditions only to find the top track completely impassable. The only way we manage to get out is with a huge team effort. The worst thing that happens is when non-resident owners of 4x4s decide they can negotiate it and their actions compact the snow. The owners of the properties in Mowings Lane know this and as a result they are out at first light clearing the road and no one ventures out until the lane is cleared. If the snow becomes compacted it can be almost impossible to remove and can take days to shift/thaw as it refreezes overnight

We have not been able to get our vehicles from Foxwood to High Mowhill on many occasions for over a week during the winter period. I cannot imagine if there were to be a significant number of extra residents trying to negotiate this track that safety would not be compromised for those trying to clear the lane of snow at these times. In addition it usually takes significant amounts of grit/rock salt and we take turns in purchasing this. Extreme care needs to be taken when applying this as the hedges on either side are close to the track and we have to be careful so that these do not suffer salt toxicity. If a significantly larger number of cars were to negotiate the lane then salt spray and lost hedgerows would result and the lane would lose a lot of its character and wildlife habitat. For your information the council grit wagon does not manage to get any further up the lane than where the cars park either side of the lane i.e. about 25 metres from the top of Mowings Lane and is the reason why we have a grit bin. In fact the gritter often does not even manage to come any further up Mowings Lane than the Garden Terrace junction. In addition, it is often not possible to get from the top of Mowings Lane (approx. 1 in 4 hill) down to the Garden Terrace junction due to the amount of snow and ice that adheres to this section and the fact that the residents along this section need to park many of their cars on either side of the street due to limited driveway space. As a result, if you lose control of your vehicle, even slightly, you can easily risk hitting one of these vehicles. I have seen many people on foot falling on the first section at the top of Mowings Lane (me included). Perhaps the Highways Agency should return after a -10 degree frost to fully appreciate the problem
b. The section of track past the footpath is private access as indicated by the sign in the lane. This section of track from the footpath to the field gate and the turning circle is owned jointly by the residents of Foxwood and Bayfield and the owners of the fields. Our deeds state that we must each bear one third of the cost of constructing and maintaining this section of roadway. I would like to state that the owners of Foxwood are not prepared to give up ownership of their third. I cannot speak for our neighbours but I would be surprised if they were not of the same opinion. Similarly if any access by foot was proposed then the current owners of Foxwood do not agree to this taking place within this section. Again, I do not believe that the Highways Agency have taken this into account when they suggest there is potential access from Mowings Lane
c. Currently there are small sections on each side of the track which are often used by pedestrians in order to get out of the way of vehicles negotiating the lane. These sections are privately owned and don’t form part of the track/ public right of way. If the owners of the lane decided that they would like to reclaim these sections then the width of the lane would be significantly reduced. I do not believe that the Highways Agency have taken this into account when they suggest there is potential access from Mowings Lane
d. I also do not think that the Highways Agency have considered that a very busy footpath crosses the end of Mowings Lane where visibility is extremely poor. I believe that if the volume of traffic was to be increased then the likelihood of accidents would certainly increase as excited children and dogs often run ahead of their guardians in this section as they enjoy their explorations

2. INCREASED FLOOD RISK FOR ULVERSTON RESIDENTS AND BUSINESS SITES ESPECIALLY IN THE SOUTH OF ULVERSTON

a. The two fields, which are immediately above the area currently being developed by Persimmon Homes are elevated from the town and according to the South Lakeland Local Development Framework Land Allocations Development Plan 2012 they are “poor in relation to air quality and flood risk”. Due to the elevation of this site and where it drains any removal of permeable surface (i.e. grass) is likely to not only affect the immediate area but could significantly impact further down the drainage network and as such increase the flooding risk for residents in areas such as Outcast
b. The slope of the land down to our property (Foxwood) means that we already experience runoff from the lane. If the fields were developed this will obviously increase
c. The flooding that has taken place near Tronic/GlaxoSmithKline in recent years may well discourage some of Ulverston’s main employers from further investment if things do not improve. I believe that if flooding in South Ulverston only gets worse there will come a time when the costs/uncertainties will outweigh the benefits of remaining in such a flood prone area, so putting both existing and future jobs in jeopardy. For instance, I am aware that over the last few years there has been several days when workers have had difficulty getting to the GlaxoSmithKline site

3. VISUAL/NOISE DISTURBANCE AND ITS EFFECT ON THE ADJOINING CONSERVATION AND HIGHLY VALUED GREENSPACE AREA OF GILL BANKS

a. Gill Banks is a popular area of greenspace accessible to all. Research shows that safe accessible greenspace (i.e. accessible regardless of age or disability) within the Ulverston area is rare. In fact SLDC acknowledge in their plan that natural/semi-natural greenspace and green corridors only cover small parts of the town. Currently you can sit on the seats in Gill Banks and enjoy the sound of the beck and birdsong. Developing the adjacent land especially with the pruning back of the boundary trees, as suggested in the Coates Associates Land Allocations DPD Submission, will mean that a large section of Gill Banks is then overlooked, subjected to light and noise pollution and as a result it will be far less beneficial as an area for relaxation, recuperation and adventure. Any additional traffic on Mowings Lane could also make it less likely that parents will allow their children to explore this area unaccompanied. At present a large number of children make their way up the footpath from Star Street and play on the informal swings, make dens in the area of woodland near the north- west boundary of the two fields and, from the shrieks and screams they emit, seem to thoroughly enjoy themselves. Such activity levels should only be encouraged in our young residents as this will in turn aid their long term physical and mental wellbeing. It is a safe area where their homes are not far away (usually Sun/Star Street, The Gill and Garden Terrace) but they can play largely unsupervised and independently. The character of this area and sense of adventure will change if homes overlook it

4. LOSS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND

a. Most recently these two fields were home to two horses and in a way they acted as a mini community farm with many local children patting and offering them handfuls of grass. Many children delighted in seeing the horses and rabbits especially in the top field. If this change of use goes ahead there may never be any livestock on this land ever again. Agriculture is important for many reasons, one of them being that we all need to eat but contact with animals is equally important because they can be extremely therapeutic for both adults and children alike

5. ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IN UNION AND MOWINGS LANES

a. The reason why it is proposed that the development plan boundary be amended to include these fields is because the Highways Agency believes these two fields can be accessed from the current development called Hoad View. I do not believe that access from Stanley Street/Union Lane would be able to cope with any more traffic. The only way construction traffic is accessing the site at present is through the goodwill of the health services. Should this goodwill be removed in future then any further development of the site will be far trickier.
b. Furthermore, if the Union Lane access is so much improved, as the Highways Agency has implied, why are alternative and even worse routes still included in you Development Pla n Document. I would like to request that the reference to access from Mowings Lane should be removed from the Land Allocations Development Plan Document or the entry amended as there is no access unless the owners of Bayfield and Foxwood agree to it and even then it would be completely unsuitable. The mere suggestion of changing our unique and lovely lane with all its charm, wildlife habitat and community spirit into potentially a super highway has caused a significant level of stress for all residents of the lane

6. LOSS OF VALUABLE WILDLIFE HABITAT

a. The two Union Lane fields currently support a large population of tawny/barn owls and bats which are dependent on the woodland edge to the west and north-west of this site in order to swoop and feed. If change of use arises and the site is subsequently developed the loss of habitat, as well as the additional light, noise and activity levels within the adjoining area of Gill Banks, will impact significantly on their ability to feed and thrive

I would like to ask you to reconsider your proposals that these two fields be reclassified in light of the important considerations above

Yours faithfully

Lynda White (Mrs)