3 responses from M & A Hawthorn (Individual)
1. M & A Hawthorn (Individual) : 27 Apr 2012 14:19:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
Paragraph No.
1.10
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.
Of nearly 3000 responses to the land allocations document (DPD) consultation in the
Kendal area, 98% opposed the sites included in the document. Therefore these
proposals cannot be considered 'sound'. True sustainability, when considering an
application, gives equal weight to the interests of people, prosperity and places. The
views of the local residents and the huge environmental impact appear to have been
totally ignored.
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
2. M & A Hawthorn (Individual) : 27 Apr 2012 14:21:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
Policy/Site No.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - RN169M+ RN299# KENDAL WEST OF HIGH SPARROWMIRE
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.
There are many issues of concern for Site RN1 69M and RN2991\:
It boasts glorious views across to the Lakeland Fells and is widely visible from the
surrounding hills of the National Park and many other vantage points both North and
East as well as providing an essential Green Gap between Kendal and neighbouring
Burneside. This green field site, like so many others that have been proposed, gives
Kendal much of its charm. It is irreplaceable. Once built on they will be gone forever.
The increase of traffic flow both along Windermere Road and also through the Hallgarth
estate are of serious concern. The estate wasn't built with so much traffic in mind and is
already coping with large amounts of traffic - often racing through at high speed in spite
of speed control measures having been put in place. An increase in traffic on the estate
would increase the danger for residents, not to mention the major road works that would
be necessary in order to facilitate appropriate access. This would swallow up even more
vital green field sites and crucial wildlife habitats in the process.
There is currently no provision for mains gas, sewage and I presume, other amenities
too, for this site. Installing a sewage network would increase pressure on the existing
sewage network that may lead to overload and pollution of the River Kent. This could be
an environmental disaster and be very costly.
Drainage of this site is currently very poor. Some sort of drainage would therefore be
imperative in order to avert problems with flooding. This, however, would certainly affect
the delicate ecosystem of the area, for which I have grave concerns.
And where are the new schools and places of employment?
I support the need for more affordable housing in the district but there are alternative
ways of meeting this need rather than through this Developers' Charter. The DPD, if it is
approved, will lead to housing sprawl around our towns and villages, worse traffic, air
quality and flooding problems and the destruction of important animal and bird habitats.
With the current global constraints regarding oil and food production and with our
increased awareness and need for sustainable living, we must consider very carefully the
overall cost of exploiting our fragile landscape.
We must first make creative use of brown field sites that are dotted around Kendal,
currently unused, as well as making use of the unused housing stock to meet this
housing need. Through proper consultation with local people and proper application of
the principles of sustainability, well informed decisions can be made.
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
3. M & A Hawthorn (Individual) : 27 Apr 2012 14:24:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
Paragraph No.
3.14
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.
There are many issues of concern for Site RN1 69M and RN2991\:
It boasts glorious views across to the Lakeland Fells and is widely visible from the
surrounding hills of the National Park and many other vantage points both North and
East as well as providing an essential Green Gap between Kendal and neighbouring
Burneside. This green field site, like so many others that have been proposed, gives
Kendal much of its charm. It is irreplaceable. Once built on they will be gone forever.
The increase of traffic flow both along Windermere Road and also through the Hallgarth
estate are of serious concern. The estate wasn't built with so much traffic in mind and is
already coping with large amounts of traffic - often racing through at high speed in spite
of speed control measures having been put in place. An increase in traffic on the estate
would increase the danger for residents, not to mention the major road works that would
be necessary in order to facilitate appropriate access. This would swallow up even more
vital green field sites and crucial wildlife habitats in the process.
There is currently no provision for mains gas, sewage and I presume, other amenities
too, for this site. Installing a sewage network would increase pressure on the existing
sewage network that may lead to overload and pollution of the River Kent. This could be
an environmental disaster and be very costly.
Drainage of this site is currently very poor. Some sort of drainage would therefore be
imperative in order to avert problems with flooding. This, however, would certainly affect
the delicate ecosystem of the area, for which I have grave concerns.
And where are the new schools and places of employment?
I support the need for more affordable housing in the district but there are alternative
ways of meeting this need rather than through this Developers' Charter. The DPD, if it is
approved, will lead to housing sprawl around our towns and villages, worse traffic, air
quality and flooding problems and the destruction of important animal and bird habitats.
With the current global constraints regarding oil and food production and with our
increased awareness and need for sustainable living, we must consider very carefully the
overall cost of exploiting our fragile landscape.
We must first make creative use of brown field sites that are dotted around Kendal,
currently unused, as well as making use of the unused housing stock to meet this
housing need. Through proper consultation with local people and proper application of
the principles of sustainability, well informed decisions can be made.
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
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
