Response from Mr Stephen Matthewman (Individual)
1. Mr Stephen Matthewman (Individual) : 15 May 2017 11:52:00
Have we identified the right key issues for this site? Are there any we have missed? What key aspects would you like to see delivered on the site? What do you value?
Key issues have been clearly identified but will they be delivered? Key aspects, which we would like to see delivered are:
• to ensure the site’s existing biodiversity value is protected and enhanced and opportunities to increase biodiversity value are fully realised.
• to ensure development mitigates flood risk and provides sustainable urban drainage system.
• to ensure the layout, design and positioning of development is sensitive to existing levels of residential amenity provided to neighbouring residential properties.
We particularly value the biodiversity of the site and feel that this could be further enhanced by sensitive development.
What do you think the overall vision for the site should be?
The overall vision for the site should include a design and layout that responds sensitively to the site’s edge of Holme/open countryside setting and existing green features.
The vision should also aim to provide a mix of well-designed and energy efficient homes meeting current and future local housing needs (including some affordable housing reserved for local needs).
What do you think this brief should seek to deliver in terms of landscape, open space, green infrastructure or biodiversity?
We totally agree with the aspiration for an area of public open space in the Pear Tree Park area but this should not simply be a grassy area with a few ornamental trees. There are lots of these in Holme!
The open space should enhance the biodiversity of the site. We have personally recorded over 40 species of bird on the site, 17 of which are listed as being of conservation concern (8 are red listed, as being of global concern and 9 are amber listed, as being of local concern). In the winter of 2016/7 a barn owl was regularly seen hunting over the area. The site is also important for small mammals, such as hedgehogs (30% decline in the last 10 years (Wildlife Trusts)) and voles (an important food source for barn owls). The brief should seek to improve the green infrastructure in order to enhance this biodiversity. Specifically the brief should protect the existing trees and hedgerow on the site, which form a crucial wildlife corridor.
The brief could also take advantage of the waterlogged nature of the eastern part (field) of the allocation site and around the mature hedgerow which separates the larger two fields by developing a wetland/pond, which would both enhance the biodiversity and potentially ease flooding issues in other parts of the site (currently in the gardens of neighbouring properties).
What approach do you think this brief should take to transport, movement and access into and through the site - including for cyclists and pedestrians?
The brief should aim to promote safe active travel from and through the site. 73 houses are proposed for the site and assuming each household has an average of 2 cars and that the majority of residents will travel by car to work and shop and for leisure purposes, this will generate a large number of journeys and extra traffic. Measures such as traffic calming, separation of cars and cyclists/pedestrians, safe routes for children to cycle/walk to the primary school and for residents to cycle/walk into the village should all be taken into account. Sufficient car parking (for residents and visitors) should be provided and roads should be wide enough (with separate pavements) so that cars are not parked on pavements.
What do you think this brief should seek to address in terms of infrastructure and utilities?
The brief should pay particular attention to the current flood risk on the site and ensure development mitigates flood risk and provides a sustainable urban drainage system. There is currently an area of both low and medium surface water flooding within the south eastern part of the most eastern part (field) of the allocation site. In addition, the field boundary area, between the most easterly field and the fields allocated to the west, are at risk from surface water flooding.
73 houses and the associated drives, roads and pavements will increase the surface run off and increase the existing flood risk. The brief must address this issue and not simply allow development to occur and leave the problems to be dealt with later.
Have you any comments or suggestions on aspects of land-use (including housing and employment mix and type), layout and design principles that this brief should seek to promote?
The site actually extends beyond the existing village envelope (on Milnthorpe Road) and is in clear view from neighbouring hills such as Farleton Knott and Dalton Crags. Therefore it is crucial that the brief should seek to promote a design and layout that responds sensitively to the edge of Holme/open countryside setting and the existing green features. In particular it should aim to provide a mix of well-designed and energy efficient homes. Moreover the development should be sufficiently spaced out so that there is room for parking and separation of vehicles and cyclists/pedestrians (unlike in the existing Peartree Park development, where the houses are squashed together and the roads are narrow with insufficient space for parking, resulting in vehicles being parked on pavements and increased traffic risks).
Have you any comments or suggestions on community infrastructure and facilities required locally that could potentially be delivered through this brief?
As previously stated we totally agree with the aspiration for an area of public open space in the Pear Tree Park area but this should not simply be a grassy area with a few ornamental trees. There are lots of these in Holme!
The open space should enhance the biodiversity of the site. Specifically a wetland/wildlife area would be a welcome asset for the village.
Have you any other comments, including on the Proposals Document?
The brief should give specific guidance on issues such as:
• the constraints and opportunities for the site
• consideration of flood risk issues
• environmental Sustainability
