Response from Mr and Mrs Gordon J. and D. Biddle (Individual)
1. Mr and Mrs Gordon J. and D. Biddle (Individual) : 26 Apr 2012 09:49:00
Policy/Site No.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - RN121M-mod LEVENS FORMER POULTRY SHEDS, BRIGSTEER ROAD
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
No
1.2 If NO please identify which test of legal compliance your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 1.3.
The processes of community involvement in developing the DPD are not in general accordance of the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
The DPD has not been prepared in accordance with the Town & County Planning Regulations 2004 (as amended)
1.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD legally compliant, having regard to the test you have identified at question 1.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
1. Inadequate consultation re RN121M-mod
2. Failure to ascertain whether site is available
3. An isolated pocket of development immediately outside and visible from national park - as existing and even more when extended
4. Could be start of later 'creeping development' to even greater detriment of landscape and village
5. wooded site - some of it ancient woodland containing protected species - and very steeply sloping
6. inadequate road accessand non-existent services ie water, surface drainage, fould drainage
7. out of keeping with surroundings
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
No
2.2 If NO please identify which test of soundness your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 2.3.
The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
The DPD is not effective in that the document is not deliverable, flexible or capable of being monitored.
2.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 2.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
Land use should continue to be agricultural and SLDC should exercise its powers to have derelict poulty sheds repaired (or preferably removed) and site cleaned up.
If it can be clearly proved that employment land is needed I would accept B1 (as SLDC originally proposed) provided tree screening is adequately maintained.
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
NO, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination
3.2 If you wish to participate in the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary.
To emphasise the serious flaws in SLDC's strategy with regard to site RN121M-mod
