4 responses from Mr. Philip Jones (Individual)
1. Mr. Philip Jones (Individual) : 15 Apr 2012 00:37:00
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.
LA1.1 Development Boundaries- ENDMOOR
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 had regard to national policy and does not conform generally with the adopted Core Strategy and (until it is abolished) the Regional Spatial 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.
The consultation which took place was based on a plan for 62 houses at site M41-mod (land to the north of Sycamore Close). The plan now is for 100 homes but there has been no consultation based on this number. If this really is considered to be "legally compliant" I suggest that we need to take another look at the meaning of the words. There should now be a proper and full consultation based on the DPD which ought first to be amended to reflect a more accurate assessment of the actual level of need in the community. At the moment the DPD looks very much like an ill-considered and badly researched "stick on" determined in a most arbitrary manner which does not in any way reflect the actual level of need. Instead the DPD appears to be a rather clumsy attempt to provide plans which satisfy the broad brush approach of HMG. I acknowledge the need for the village to be allowed to grow but not by 30% in area at a stroke. The scale of the growth should not be allowed to rob Endmoor of its village status by turning it into a small town without the services normally associated with a small town.
The DPD does not accord with the following principles set out in The Core Strategy;
CS1.1.1; CS1.1.2; CS1.1.3; CS1.1.6; CS1.1.7; CS1.1.8; CS1.1.9; CS1.1.11;
In general terms, the DPD does not enhance the the resilience of the natural environment, nor does it minimise the use of non-renewable resources. It fails to protect the countryside for its intrinsic beauty etc.. It most certainly fails to minimise the need for travel. On the contrary, it serves only to guarantee the need for even more travel and the consequent increase in the use of fuel. Endmoor lacks the necessary services, infrastructure and employment opportunities to support such a large development. It is, quite simply, too much too fast.
1.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
I fully recognise the need for SOME new homes in the village but the level of need has not been properly quantified. The DPD figures are clumsily prepared and applied from without the community and do not reflect the actual need.
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.
The DPD for both housing and commercial sites is not sound because there is no clear strategy with regard to waste water treatment.The infrastructure is not in place for such a large increase in the number houses and this makes the DPD unsustainable and undeliverable. The DPD alludes (without being specific) to a new sewage treatment plant at Low Park; the general assumption among local people is that SLDC mean this to be a massive enlargement of the existing plant and yet the landowner has not been consulted.
The road network is incapable of safely supporting the increase in traffic which would be expected if the mixed commercial site is developed at sites EN20 and EN33; this brings me to my objection to these developments on the grounds that there is no demonstrable demand for more commercial premises in this locality; there is already unused commercial capacity at Summerlands, Gatebeck Business Park and in the ongoing development at Jct. 36. The whole enterprise seems to assume a level of demand which does not exist. With spare commercial capacity already available in the village it would be nonsensical to provide even more to the great detriment of the greenfield areas and the wonderful drumlin landscape. Once this landscape is covered in units of one sort or another it is lost forever and to achieve what? An even greater surplus of unwanted premises.
In order to make the DPD acceptable the following steps should be taken;
Fresh consultations with local people to consider the DPD as it looks after these changes are made
Assess the real level of need for new housing whilst bearing in mind the parlous state of the economy, the available infrastructure and level of services.
Reduce the density and number of houses and incorporate in the design green recreational areas and stipulate that each new dwelling must have sufficient off-road parking so as to allow service and emergency vehicles proper access.
Set a much more reasonable limit (the DPD seeks to increase it by 30%) on the amount by which the footprint of the village can be increased. This to protect the character of Endmoor and its status as a village.
Abandon the plans to provide any more commercial premises because there are no reasonable grounds for believing that these are required.
Consider (and consult locally) more suitable alternatives for the siting of the proposed new sewage treatment plant.
2.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
I cannot support the DPD in its present form.
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. Mr. Philip Jones (Individual) : 15 May 2012 14:56:00
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 - All Endmoor sites
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 had regard to national policy and does not conform generally with the adopted Core Strategy and (until it is abolished) the Regional Spatial 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.
The consultation which took place was based on a plan for 62 houses at site M41-mod (land to the north of Sycamore Close). The plan now is for 100 homes but there has been no consultation based on this number. If this really is considered to be "legally compliant" I suggest that we need to take another look at the meaning of the words. There should now be a proper and full consultation based on the DPD which ought first to be amended to reflect a more accurate assessment of the actual level of need in the community. At the moment the DPD looks very much like an ill-considered and badly researched "stick on" determined in a most arbitrary manner which does not in any way reflect the actual level of need. Instead the DPD appears to be a rather clumsy attempt to provide plans which satisfy the broad brush approach of HMG. I acknowledge the need for the village to be allowed to grow but not by 30% in area at a stroke. The scale of the growth should not be allowed to rob Endmoor of its village status by turning it into a small town without the services normally associated with a small town.
The DPD does not accord with the following principles set out in The Core Strategy;
CS1.1.1; CS1.1.2; CS1.1.3; CS1.1.6; CS1.1.7; CS1.1.8; CS1.1.9; CS1.1.11;
In general terms, the DPD does not enhance the the resilience of the natural environment, nor does it minimise the use of non-renewable resources. It fails to protect the countryside for its intrinsic beauty etc.. It most certainly fails to minimise the need for travel. On the contrary, it serves only to guarantee the need for even more travel and the consequent increase in the use of fuel. Endmoor lacks the necessary services, infrastructure and employment opportunities to support such a large development. It is, quite simply, too much too fast.
1.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
I fully recognise the need for SOME new homes in the village but the level of need has not been properly quantified. The DPD figures are clumsily prepared and applied from without the community and do not reflect the actual need.
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.
The DPD for both housing and commercial sites is not sound because there is no clear strategy with regard to waste water treatment.The infrastructure is not in place for such a large increase in the number houses and this makes the DPD unsustainable and undeliverable. The DPD alludes (without being specific) to a new sewage treatment plant at Low Park; the general assumption among local people is that SLDC mean this to be a massive enlargement of the existing plant and yet the landowner has not been consulted.
The road network is incapable of safely supporting the increase in traffic which would be expected if the mixed commercial site is developed at sites EN20 and EN33; this brings me to my objection to these developments on the grounds that there is no demonstrable demand for more commercial premises in this locality; there is already unused commercial capacity at Summerlands, Gatebeck Business Park and in the ongoing development at Jct. 36. The whole enterprise seems to assume a level of demand which does not exist. With spare commercial capacity already available in the village it would be nonsensical to provide even more to the great detriment of the greenfield areas and the wonderful drumlin landscape. Once this landscape is covered in units of one sort or another it is lost forever and to achieve what? An even greater surplus of unwanted premises.
In order to make the DPD acceptable the following steps should be taken;
Fresh consultations with local people to consider the DPD as it looks after these changes are made
Assess the real level of need for new housing whilst bearing in mind the parlous state of the economy, the available infrastructure and level of services.
Reduce the density and number of houses and incorporate in the design green recreational areas and stipulate that each new dwelling must have sufficient off-road parking so as to allow service and emergency vehicles proper access.
Set a much more reasonable limit (the DPD seeks to increase it by 30%) on the amount by which the footprint of the village can be increased. This to protect the character of Endmoor and its status as a village.
Abandon the plans to provide any more commercial premises because there are no reasonable grounds for believing that these are required.
Consider (and consult locally) more suitable alternatives for the siting of the proposed new sewage treatment plant.
2.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
I cannot support the DPD in its present form.
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. Mr. Philip Jones (Individual) : 15 May 2012 15:04:00
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 - M41M ENDMOOR NORTH OF SYCAMORE DRIVE
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 had regard to national policy and does not conform generally with the adopted Core Strategy and (until it is abolished) the Regional Spatial 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.
The consultation which took place was based on a plan for 62 houses at site M41-mod (land to the north of Sycamore Close). The plan now is for 100 homes but there has been no consultation based on this number. If this really is considered to be "legally compliant" I suggest that we need to take another look at the meaning of the words. There should now be a proper and full consultation based on the DPD which ought first to be amended to reflect a more accurate assessment of the actual level of need in the community. At the moment the DPD looks very much like an ill-considered and badly researched "stick on" determined in a most arbitrary manner which does not in any way reflect the actual level of need. Instead the DPD appears to be a rather clumsy attempt to provide plans which satisfy the broad brush approach of HMG. I acknowledge the need for the village to be allowed to grow but not by 30% in area at a stroke. The scale of the growth should not be allowed to rob Endmoor of its village status by turning it into a small town without the services normally associated with a small town.
1.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
I cannot support the DPD in its present form.
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.
The DPD for both housing and commercial sites is not sound because there is no clear strategy with regard to waste water treatment.The infrastructure is not in place for such a large increase in the number houses and this makes the DPD unsustainable and undeliverable. The DPD alludes (without being specific) to a new sewage treatment plant at Low Park; the general assumption among local people is that SLDC mean this to be a massive enlargement of the existing plant and yet the landowner has not been consulted.
In order to make the DPD acceptable the following steps should be taken;
Fresh consultations with local people to consider the DPD as it looks after these changes are made
Assess the real level of need for new housing whilst bearing in mind the parlous state of the economy, the available infrastructure and level of services.
Reduce the density and number of houses and incorporate in the design green recreational areas and stipulate that each new dwelling must have sufficient off-road parking so as to allow service and emergency vehicles proper access.
Set a much more reasonable limit (the DPD seeks to increase it by 30%) on the amount by which the footprint of the village can be increased. This to protect the character of Endmoor and its status as a village.
Abandon the plans to provide any more commercial premises because there are no reasonable grounds for believing that these are required.
Consider (and consult locally) more suitable alternatives for the siting of the proposed new sewage treatment plant.
2.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
I cannot support the DPD in its present form.
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
4. Mr. Philip Jones (Individual) : 15 May 2012 15:12:00
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.
LA1.8 Local Employment Allocations - EN20, EN33# ENDMOOR LAND NORTH OF GATEBECK LANE, GATEBECK
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 had regard to national policy and does not conform generally with the adopted Core Strategy and (until it is abolished) the Regional Spatial Strategy
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.
The road network is incapable of safely supporting the increase in traffic which would be expected if the mixed commercial site is developed at sites EN20 and EN33; this brings me to my objection to these developments on the grounds that there is no demonstrable demand for more commercial premises in this locality; there is already unused commercial capacity at Summerlands, Gatebeck Business Park and in the ongoing development at Jct. 36. The whole enterprise seems to assume a level of demand which does not exist. With spare commercial capacity already available in the village it would be nonsensical to provide even more to the great detriment of the greenfield areas and the wonderful drumlin landscape. Once this landscape is covered in units of one sort or another it is lost forever and to achieve what? An even greater surplus of unwanted premises.
In order to make the DPD acceptable the following steps should be taken;
Fresh consultations with local people to consider the DPD as it looks after these changes are made
Assess the real level of need for new housing whilst bearing in mind the parlous state of the economy, the available infrastructure and level of services.
Reduce the density and number of houses and incorporate in the design green recreational areas and stipulate that each new dwelling must have sufficient off-road parking so as to allow service and emergency vehicles proper access.
Set a much more reasonable limit (the DPD seeks to increase it by 30%) on the amount by which the footprint of the village can be increased. This to protect the character of Endmoor and its status as a village.
Abandon the plans to provide any more commercial premises because there are no reasonable grounds for believing that these are required.
Consider (and consult locally) more suitable alternatives for the siting of the proposed new sewage treatment plant.
2.4 Use this space to explain your support for the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD.
I cannot support the DPD in its present form.
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