2 responses from Miss Helen Rice (Individual)
1. Miss Helen Rice (Individual) : 21 May 2008 22:13:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
4.33 - 4.41 Policy Context and Justification
Please state as clearly as you can the exact part of the Report you are commenting on by quoting the page number (if known), paragraph number, option name or number, or the number of the map, figure or table.
paragraph 4.33 and table 4 in connection with residential development of Ulverston
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Oppose
Please write your comment or explain your reasons for supporting or opposing this part of the Report. You may also wish to refer to the tests of soundess in the glossary of the Preferred Options document before making your comments.
I am against the extensive residential development of Ulverston particularly with regard to another large estate built to the south of Croftlands.
1. I think this urban sprawl would make Ulverston less attractive as a tourist destination, therefore causing more unemployment.
2. A residential area of this size is likely to engender antisocial behaviour, as has been the case in many such developments across the country.
3. The close proximity of an urban development is likely to spoil Birkrigg Common, with its wildlife and ancient stone circle.
4. The distance from the town centre will encourage many residents to drive to the shops, causing pollution and congestion.
5. This area is a very windy site, especially in winter - it would make a suitable site for a wind farm.
I think the number of houses planned for Ulverston is far too high considering the high unemployment in the area. The fact is that Ulverston is remote from the country's infrastructure, ie. motorways and mainline railways. Perhaps it would be better to estimate future employment levels realistically before building extensively and destroying the countryside.
Please use this space if you wish to set out a new option for consideration.
I favour the building of apartments in or within walking distance of the town centre.
1. All property would be affordable.
2. Less 'green' land would be developed.
3. Communal gardens or allotments could be provided for residents.
Please indicate if you wish to be notified when the Core Strategy has been:
Submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination
Adopted by the District Council
2. Miss Helen Rice (Individual) : 21 May 2008 22:25:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
4.28 - 4.32 PO12 - Ulverston Functional Area 2025 -You Told Us and Introduction
Please state as clearly as you can the exact part of the Report you are commenting on by quoting the page number (if known), paragraph number, option name or number, or the number of the map, figure or table.
Paragraph 2 - green gap between Ulverston and Swarthmoor
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Neither support nor oppose - just want to comment
Please write your comment or explain your reasons for supporting or opposing this part of the Report. You may also wish to refer to the tests of soundess in the glossary of the Preferred Options document before making your comments.
Why is it important to isolate Swarthmoor from Ulverston? I think potential house buyers are put off from buying in Swarthmoor because of the lack of facilities. Wouldn't Swarthmoor benefit from being linked to Ulverston, or alternatively, be provided with local amenities to make it more independant.