Response from Mrs Karen Dockery (Individual)
1. Mrs Karen Dockery (Individual) : 28 May 2008 18:38:00
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.
P139 - P149
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
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 oppose this scheme for the following reasons;
The area proposed is prone to flooding (even after a couple of hours of rain)
The area is loosing jobs and not creating any quality jobs to justify this amount of houses in the area.
The appeal of Ulverston is that it is a small market town not a large town like Barrow/Kendal.
There are no decent schools in the area or enough school places to accommodate this amount of houses.
Traffic in the area will increase to dangerous levels around an already busy estate especially Birchwood and Mountbarrow Road. This in turn will cause a danger for school children at Croftlands Infants School as this is already dangerous caused by speed and a blind bend.
Sewage. Where will it go? There is already a problem with this particularly near the quarry area.
There are no recreational facilities now particularly for smaller children and teenagers where will they go? Crime, vandalism in the area may go up caused by this.
The houses in the immediate vicinity will be affected dramatically. Who is going to buy a house next to a proposed building site that may last 10-15 years.
Unfair to build local authority houses amounts private houses. Who is going to buy them in the middle of rented accommodation?
The area proposed is a green belt the next step to Birkrigg commom (crown land) this is going to spoil the entire area as you are basically stepping into the country from the Lancastrian pub and may spoil the protected land with more traffic and people and wildlife will inevitably be effected.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
Reduce the number of houses proposed for one particular area dramatically. To build an area one fifth the size of Ulverston in one small area is unfair, unrealistic, unsustainable, unnecessary and unfeasible given the surrounding factors and bigger issues that need taking into account. There is a lot more to the proposed development than owners being prepared to sell their land!
Please use this space if you wish to set out a new option for consideration.
The brown areas around the Tannery area is a much better site there are no residential areas that the building works would disrupt, the area is in need of improvement and it is not spoiling green areas which people enjoy there is also better access from Priory Road and other minor roads.
South Ulverston (expanding Lund Farm) is also a better option as there are fields there surrounded by houses - Ulverstons Green Belt would not need to be expanded here.
Between (Urswick Road and Swarthmoor) there is no reason to keep the two areas separate as the proposed plan is developing Ulverston to almost Urswick. There are plenty of non residential areas between the two to keep the separation anyway.
The canal areas would also be a better option since that is up for proposed improvement. The access for that amount of houses is far better and it is served already by a supermarket and trunk road.
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