Response from Mr P Brindle (Individual)
1. Mr P Brindle (Individual) : 17 Dec 2015 10:37:00
Discussion Paper section
5. Policy Issues
Please make your comments below on the section you have selected. Where appropriate, make reference to the paragraph number you are referring to, your preferred option, the question number asked in the Discussion Paper and the reference number of the site you are commenting on.
Q23
Infrastructure ie effluent drainage currently in Silverdale is solely by septic tanks, is this environmentally sustainable in an area of such fragile natural beauty that the AONB is supposedly to look after. Surely any major developments is likely to impact on this.
Q15
Road Access into SIlverdale is only by narrow roads all of which have pinch points and the need for passing places exacerbated in summer with increased volumes of traffic.North Lancashire rural roads are already known to have higher than average numbers of rta`s. Therefore any further development of houses, caravan sites and leisure facilities will make these matters even more of a concern.
There is no room for parking in Silverdale village centre at the moment further numbers of vehicles from development will pose further problems in this area.
As one of the main aims of AONB "is to meet the needs of the quiet enjoyment of the countryside" all these proposed developments will surely impinge on this for nature lovers, ramblers, cyclists and all those who are encouraged to come to this area to enjoy and experience the quality of the area. Again development is at odds with these policy aims which are promoted by local authoristes for the health and wellbeing of their public.
Q17 Further development of caravan sites again is at odds with the ethos of the AONB as it will further encroach into areas of natural woodland and grassland at the detriment of wildlife.
Are there any topics or issues that you think we have missed or that you wish to raise?
Q27
tS43 and S50. These appear to be more than 10 dwelling houses ie a major development as referred to in paras 2.17 and 2.18. These would not be appropriate in the AONB as according to national guidelines AONBs are considered to have such natural beauty it is desirable that they are conserved and enhanced, and that LA`s must take into account the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of AONBs. Such development would surely be in breach of these principles. this also applies to site A2.
Q31
One of the criteria of AONB is that it is "area of outstanding landscape and whose distinct character and natural beauty are so precious it is in the nations interest to protect them" and they were created "because of their fragile natural beauty and the primary aim is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the landscape". we fail to understand how all this proposed development in this area meets this criteria, without impacting detrimentally on what it is supposed to be protecting. Even small adhoc development s can interrupt and fragment vital natural corridors/environs for all sorts of wildlife.
The AONB is currently undertaking projects to encourage endangered species (red squirrels, various butterfly species) into the area, further encroachment into the woodland and grassland will be at odds to these aims.
I wold like to comment that as lay persons my wife and I have found it very difficult to have to read all the documentation and try to respond coherently. A lot of the language used is hardly encouraging for the general public to respond and engag.e in this consultation process