Local Development Framework Consultation

Having read the documents, I feel that the Brief does not adequately take account of the wider community concerns. These have been clearly set out in the Holme Community Led Plan, which though not a statutory planning document, does contain ample reference to the aspirations of the community, developed from public consultation. In particular, we
recognise that there may not be an opportunity to substantially redraft the document to take account of our concerns.

That being so, we will prepare a more detailed reply which will be formulated as the public consultation proceeds.

Immediately, I forward comments regarding specific issues relating to a Community Hall, Open Space and Recreation Provision, Road Design and Footpaths.

Community Hall

In the detailed discussions which we had, one of the principal issues of concern to the Holme Parish community is the identification of possible land for a new community hall. While it was explained that this could not be a specific proposal within the Brief, it does not appear to have been mentioned. I would have expected it to appear under Other Guidance in Appendix 1, where I think we must insist on a specific mention of the Holme CLP and its proposals.
The issues which should be included are: -

- The need to make provision, given the planned development within Holme, of a suitable community building ( the details of 'how', need not be part of the brief)

- The fact that such a building would be considered appropriate within the area identified for 'Informal Open Space' - this would be in principal, and subject to specific negotiations with the developer, and the local planning authority, but must not be contrary to any approved planning policies for SLDC

- An indication of the manner in which any such building could be located with appropriate access and parking

Open Space and Recreation Provision

Again, this was part of a detailed discussion. In my view, it was quite clear that the 'kick about' area could not, without considerable investment, ever be a useable 'active recreation' space, as well as being too small for a full size football pitch. It is therefore part of the target '25%' open space, which makes the community hall proposal more feasible.

Specific mention should perhaps be made of the tenure for the whole of the space shown - would it be owned/managed by SLDC, or the Parish Council?

Road Design

There is, I believe, a specific term for a design which gives priority to pedestrians but I have not noticed any such suggestion that, at the point where the access road enters the development area, it is made clear that pedestrians take priority over motor vehicles. This to me is a must, if this road is not to become a dangerous rat run. Pear Tree Park now
suffers from inappropriate speeds which cause great concern.

Footpath and Cycle Links

These should be identified and specified as an important part of the brief to encourage easy access and healthy exercise to all parts of the village, especially the School, Post Office, Shop, Church and Smithy Inn.

We draw to your attention to the fact that there is no contiguous footpath along the length of Milnthorpe Road from the identified exit point along to "The Crescent". Though the brief indicates that pedestrian links exist to the village centre via Mayfield, it seems likely that residents of any new development would use Milnthorpe Road, particularly as this gives direct access to local buses ( 555 service)., and the community sports field. In view of the increased danger that would arise if this proves so, we consider it prudent to indicate an upgraded footpath within the brief along Milnthorpe Road to "The Crescent".

I trust these observations will be both useful and helpful in the coming consultation period.