Dynamo has objected to the following planning applications:
Holiday village at Ellel (20/01453/OUT) with up to 450 holiday lodges:
Dynamo objects to the application as it does not provide safe routes for cyclists.
It’s a major development yet Lancaster City Council’s policy DM29 (“Maximise opportunities for cycling and walking linkages through and to/from a site to promote sustainable healthy travel”) regarding accessibility to the site is side-stepped.
There is still no safe way for cyclists to access the proposed holiday village, as Sections 2.8 and 5.8 of the Travel Plan confirm:
“There are currently no cycle routes directly serving the site, but cyclists are permitted to use bridleways” – without saying that bridleways are unlit and generally only usable on dry days.
We are still waiting for the Cycling Superhighway and may be doing so for some years more, so this is not a route that can be relied on (even if it went as far as the proposed site).
70 houses on Ashton Road, Lancaster (22/00885) – the developer is appealing against the decision to refuse. Dynamo objected to the original application and is making the same comments to the appeal.
200 houses off Powderhouse Lane, Torrisholme (23/01384/OUT)
Lancaster City Council’s policy DM29 (“Maximise opportunities for cycling and walking linkages through and to/from a site to promote sustainable healthy travel”) is not adequately covered in the developer’s current plan.
Although access to the development via Powderhouse Lane looks reasonable on paper, the reality is different. The lane is narrow, pedestrians have to squash themselves into the hedge when a car passes, and it is used as a rat run in the mornings. From the Design and Access Statement, it seems as if part of the lane is to be for active travel only, but this is not enough to usefully and safely link the development to the rest of the district – particularly since an extra 200 houses (and how many car journeys?) will have an impact on surrounding roads.
Lancaster Dynamo Cycle Campaign 