2 responses from Mr & Mrs JT & DM Howard (Individual)
1. Mr & Mrs JT & DM Howard (Individual) : 23 Apr 2012 10:00:00
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.
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.
Subject: Invitation to m!tke representations on the SLDC Land Allocations DPD
proposed submission documents. Ref: R121M (Land behind Rowan Tree Crescent and
Oak Tree Road)
Thank you for the opportunity to offer feedback on the DPD. I have chosen to address
my concerns in a personal letter to the inspector rather than complete the designated
form, which I fmd rather restrictive. Also, I have some concerns that of the (hopefully
many) people who do complete the form a summary will be drafted for the inspector,
which may not incorporate the true strength of feeling against the planned development.
I will try to be succinct and express my views in layman's terms rather than refer to the
many and detailed documents that have been prepared by others. Hence the bullet point
format:
• The most important issue in any project is clarity of objective. This has not been
clearly articulated. Is the objective to provide low cost housing for local residents or
to bUild executive homes for those who can afford to buy them? ;The proposed
development is on prime land and the houses will not be built and sold cost
effectively for local residents. Is the objective to build houses to attract high-salaried
incomers?
• Flood prevention is a potential problem. My understanding is that the stock beck
scheme is at full capacity and there is no assurance that additional building will not
have an adverse effect.
• There are to my knowledge 51 houses on Oak Tree Road. This area appears to be
about the same size as the planned development of 60 houses. This would indicate
that even at the reduced proposal of 60 houses the area would be over developed.
How many houses of the 60 will be low cost housing, and what guarantee is there,
that after project approval the number of low cost houses will not be reduced by the
builder.
Will any of the houses be subject to 'Local Occupancy Clauses' to enable young
couples in Kendal to get onto the housing ladder.
Access to the proposed development will be difficult to achieve without traffic
congestion and noise pollution. If traffic is fed through Orchard Road there will be
real safety issues as the road is hardly wide enough for two cars to pass at present.
The proposed development is not sustainable. People occupying low cost housing
need public transport and local facilities much closer to their doorstep.
The proposed development is on prime, Greenfield land rising above Kendal town. It
will impact adversely in a visual sense on the whole surrounding community.
Wildlife and in particular the great Crested Newt need their ponds and habitats to
survive and the experts appear to believe this proposed development will destroy their habitat
2. Mr & Mrs JT & DM Howard (Individual) : 23 Apr 2012 10:03:00
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.
SLDC appear to have acted arbitrarily in dismissing and/or not considering the views
of the Town Council, the Friends of the Lake District or the independent Landscape
Character Assessment.
• SLDC disregard objections from residents who are affected by the developments.
Can this be true? If so, this suggests that SLDC considers that local residents are
driven by 'nimbyism'. This would be a cynical and wrong view. It is the local
residents who understand most of all the consequences of any development. Their
views through the (SOLEK) Save our landscape East Kendal forum should be
listened to.
To sum up the above points, I would say that to date SLDC has failed in clarity of
objectives, engaging the community, making evidence based decisions, ignoring expert
opinion and in integrating the proposed development into strategic policies that benefit
our community.
