2 responses from Mr & Mrs David and Julie Bowler (Individual)
1. Mr & Mrs David and Julie Bowler (Individual) : 4 Sep 2011 22:30:00
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Kendal
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN299# (formerly RM169M)
Please indicate below whether you support, support in part or oppose the suggestion that this site be included in the Land Allocations document.
Oppose
Please explain your reasons/add your comments below
Lane Foot Farmhouse
Windermere Road
Kendal
Cumbria
LA9 5RY
4th September 2011
Dear Sir or Madam,
SOUTH LAKELAND LAND ALLOCATIONS - FURTHER CONSULTATION 29th JULY 2011 – SITE RN299#
In response to the further consultation announced on 29th July 2011 in respect of the emerging options for development within the Local Development Framework, we would like to submit our comments.
Specifically our comments are in relation to site RM169M, which since the previous consultation has been re-labelled as RN299#.
The history of this site is instructive in that in the first LDF documents it was shown with a relatively small development for employment, it then was shown with a potential development for housing and has most recently almost doubled in size, once again it is indicated the development of housing.
Presumably the scale of the new proposed development is required to make it commercially viable for the landowner and developers as considerable civil and highway works will be required to make the site work. The presumed high cost of this proposed development raises the serious question of the number of affordable properties that it would yield. For example, previous consultation papers indicate that significant investment would be required to deliver utility services to the site.
The proposed site has been cleverly labelled, in several documents, as ‘adjacent to the present development boundary of Kendal’, this misses the more critical point that the site is outside the development boundary and is in the green gap between Kendal and Burneside. If this development was to proceed it could well be the start of coalescence between these two population areas.
Development of this site would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the area and now extends to the top of a drumlin feature which would make the development visible from many points in and around the town of Kendal.
It is well documented that the land between Lane Foot and Burneside suffers from flooding due to run-off and the proposed development would result in considerable hard surface areas which would only add further to this problem. In addition the site extends over several open water courses, and also a number of hidden water courses, these flow into tributaries of the river Kent, some of which contain native crayfish.
The proposed site crosses a public footpath and more significantly is on land that is protected by a covenant made between Edwin Ellis and the National Trust in 1944, which restricts development of the land surrounding Lane Foot Farm. This covenant has been applied very strictly to present occupiers of properties in the Lane Foot ‘hamlet’.
Documents submitted on behalf of the land owners, indicate that the residents of the proposed development will be able to travel to their jobs, to schools and to healthcare facilities by using the Windermere Road route into Kendal town centre. However, the final version of the Kendal Traffic Assessment, prepared by Atkins and published in June 2009, indicates that the congestion on Windermere Road will worsen and could potentially require, for example, the signalisation of the Windermere Road/Queen’s Road junction. There is no mention in that report of a development at RN299# (or RM169M) and therefore the conclusion must be that development on the scale proposed would put immense traffic pressure on Windermere Road and the linked road network, leading to expensive highway engineering requirements.
In conclusion we would like to register our opposition to the development of site RN299#, the proposal is completely out of reasonable proportion, the proposed housing density is high, it will destroy the visual amenity of the local landscape and would erode the green gap between areas of habitation.
Yours sincerely
D A and J L Bowler
Please indicate whether you support, support in part or oppose a reduction in the time span of the Land Allocations document
No view
Please indicate which of the options for the future housing and employment land needs of small villages, hamlets and open countryside you would support.
Option B - Communities and/or developers bringing forward sites for housing and employment for consideration under relevant Core Strategy policies, through neighbourhood plans and/or other local initiatives
2. Mr & Mrs David and Julie Bowler (Individual) : 17 Oct 2011 14:00:00
A typed or handwritten document was submitted. This has been scanned and can be downloaded below:
Settlement (e.g., Natland)
Kendal
Site reference number (e.g., RN298#)
RN299#
