2 responses from Mr and Mrs David and Julie Barker (Individual)
1. Mr and Mrs David and Julie Barker (Individual) : 4 May 2012 15:53:00
Policy/Site No.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - R121M-mod KENDAL EAST OF CASTLE GREEN ROAD
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.
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.
R121M (housing) and R141 (access to housing):
We object to the proposed Land Allocation submission with regard to the above sites, deeming it to be unsound for the following reasons:
1) The site was deemed worthy of County Landscape designation in 1999, and SLDC's Local Plan of 2006 stated that "Development of higher hillsides further east (of R56) would be unduly prominent".
SLDC has subsequently stated that "Changing circumstances need to be taken into account. Past planning decisions may not be relevant ..." However, the site's prominance is unchanged and we have seen no firm evidence that the 60 houses proposed could not be relocated elsewhere in the 19 possible development sites with less landscape damage. Without such evidence available to the community, the claim of changed circumstances is unsound, in our opinion.
2) The map apparently continues to misrepresent the size of ponds, the gully, reed beds and the full extent of watercourses during high rainfall periods. The sumbission is unsound without an accurately plotted and labelled plan available for consultation.
3)There seems to be no fully detailed access proposal across site R141 with some vagueness about the width of Oak Tree Road. Being too narrow for 2-way traffic at its present 'nub end' a firm viable proposed alternative link road and junction with an existing road should be in the public domain.
4) There seems to be no firm proposal for extra foot / cycle access points from other roads. We consider these important for safety for a fairly isolated and potentially trapped community - e.g. if police had to close the road in an emergency - of 60 houses which otherwise have only one way in and out via a longish, presumably fenced or walled access road across a field to Castle Green Lane. There other access points would then need to be in the DPD and available for consultation and risk assessment. (e.g. if such an access was onto Sedbergh Road there would be an issue with the blind bend and lack of pavement)
5) The flooding and landslip risk due to run-off and springs on all the steep land below the main railway does not seem to have sound evidence of its assessment. In particular Prof. R Jackson's expert report apparently contains recommendations which have not been carried out.
Please could you confirm that these observations will be brought to the attention of the Inspector who will be appointed to review the process.
2. Mr and Mrs David and Julie Barker (Individual) : 4 May 2012 15:56:00
Paragraph No.
1.9
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 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.
We object to the proposed Land Allocation submission with regard to the above sites, deeming it to be unsound for the following reasons:
- If the Friends of the Lake District (CPRE) and Kendal Town Council (Galpin) reports were not accepted as part of the evidence base, the local community would not seem to have been fairly consulted
