2 responses from Mrs Margaret Kelly (Individual)
1. Mrs Margaret Kelly (Individual) : 10 May 2012 12:08:00
A typed or handwritten document was submitted. This has been scanned and can be downloaded below:
Paragraph No.
3.67
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
No
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.
Following a phone conversation with Mr McNeill I understand he consulted you with regard
to my property. This has now created an amendment to Site No RN 57 that states that the
use of single storey dwellings may be necessary.
I bought the above property from plan approximately 24 years ago, as you will see from the
enclosed plan my property is immediately adjacent to No 9 St Anthonys Close.
The developer at that time was instructed by SLDC Planning Department that 6,7,8 and 9 St
Anthonys Close should be 70ft away window to window from Kirkhead to the South to
protect the privacy of existing council properties.
Permitting development immediately to the East of my property will block it in on all sides
with reduction of light and privacy. I request that the amendment is extended to state that
only single storey development would be permitted allowing a reasonable distance
between existing and proposed properties.
I was informed by the LDF team that all sites had been inspected, if this had been the case
the points I have made would have been obvious. This is a modern estate designed to follow
the contour of the hillside, further development will not enhance the overall appearance of
the village.
(see attached plan)
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.
I am not confident that all objections raised in writing will in fact be reviewed by the appointed Inspector.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
2. Mrs Margaret Kelly (Individual) : 10 May 2012 12:18:00
Policy/Site No.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - RN57M MILNTHORPE ADJ. TO ST ANTHONY'S CLOSE
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 Land Allocations Document (DPD) is not within the Local Development Scheme and the key stages have not been followed
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 had regard to the Sustainable Community Strategy
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.
Core Strategy does not make clear how it intends to ensure 28% of housing development takes place on previously developed land & buildings (brown field sites). This has not made clear any definite plans to achieve this target.
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.
Please see attached sheet, in respect of difficulties with infrastructure. There are not enough information regarding this (text of attachment detailed below):
The core strategy has not complied with requirements, the proposals are simply a charter for the developers and landowners to cash in on sites that in many cases are located on greenfield sites where affordable housing will be built adjacent to present properties and the remainder will be built directly next to open countryside. There has not been enough
consideration by SLDC in respect of brown field sites being incorporated in the DPD.
Early options made it clear that the Council would not change their policy and that the
majority of sites would be included despite the outcome of consultations, indeed one Parish councillor informed me that "these sites local to our village will be included whether you like it or not" furthermore at the full council meeting on the 18th January 2012 the council voted in line with their political parties and not with any consideration of the views of their constituents.
The DPD plan is clearly unsound, as no firm and definite plans have been submitted in
respect of the ability of certain villages, in particular Milnthorpe to accommodate further
development. All information regarding the impact on schools, traffic management, sewage
disposal, and parking to access v ital services have met with only general and often vague
consideration. When I enquired of the LDF team how the access to St Anthonys Hill could
be expected to accommodate further traffic I was told the road and pavement would be
widened, when I pointed out that this would require compulsory purchase of several residents gardens and demolishing one garage I was met by silence!
Alternative sites in the area of Ackenthwaite have been dismissed very early in the
consultation. No reason was given, there is however a possible link to one of the Parish
councillors who may have strong reasons to influence discounting this site. Residents offered alternative suggestions for emerging sites however these were quickly dismissed by SLDC
SLDC has not honoured its commitment to ensure continued involvement of local
communities throughout the process, indeed quite the opposite.
The main thrust of the proposals is that affordable housing is required. This fact is not in
dispute however there is little employment in Milnthorpe. The new Booths supermarket we
were told would offer job opportunities to local people, however Booths are not required to
employ local staff, and indeed may find it difficult to find sufficient people willing to travel
from elsewhere given the high cost of travel. Likewise young people will find it difficult to
cover the cost of travel from Milnthorpe to larger areas of employment.
The cost of the Land Allocations Development Plan has not been made public. Clearly at
great expense many presentations and documentation have been produced, however of 3,000 responses in the Kendal area showed that 98% of residents opposed the proposals proposed by SLDC.
It also appears that the Publication Stage Representation Form and information provided have been made so complex as to deter many ordinary residents from venturing opinions or
objections.
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.
I am not confident that all objections raised in writing will in fact be reviewed by the appointed Inspector.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
