6 responses from Mr Daniel Mason (Individual)
1. Mr Daniel Mason (Individual) : 17 Apr 2012 16:40:00
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.
Sustainability Appraisal has not been carried out and its baseline information and conclusions have not been used to inform the DPD
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 land allocations proposed for Endmoor are excessive compared to the size of Endmoor at this present time. The proposed site (M41M-mod) to the north of Sycamore Close could contain up to 100 houses. The village of Endmoor only contains just over 200 houses approximately and having an expansion of around 50% would be highly damaging for the community as well as being unsustainable.
(a) The primary school would very likely be too small for the resulting village, with the new housing leaving no room for any possible expansion of the school without losing some of its playing field.
(b) The sewage system is at its limit (although I understand there are plans to upgrade those)
(c) The sudden influx of 100 homes worth of people would be likely to destroy the Endmoor community as it is now. It has taken a while to naturally absorb the development of Sycamore Close (28 houses). Endmoor is not just a suburb of Kendal; it is and should remain a village.
(d) The visual impact from the A65 of a development on that site would be great. Sycamore close, a line of fairly nondescript white houses, is bad enough but the development boundary of site M41M-mod would be 3 times longer.
(e) Land Allocation favours the large housing estate builders which destroys any sort of local style and does not support small local builders or those who wish to build their own house and avoid the cost of profit.
(f) There is also an unsustainable boundary creep towards Low Park, resulting in the loss of open green space. Endmoor is becoming out of proportion (spreading far from the traditional centre of the pub, shop and bakery) but this urban sprawl is avoidable.
(g) In the Land Allocations Development Plan Document Endmoor Fact File the Sustainability Appraisal rated sites R660 (part of M41M-mod) and R670 the least well. However this seems to have been ignored when deciding on sites. Site R83, one of three to score best overall has not been included in the land allocation. What is the point in an Appraisal if the results are going to be ignored?
(h) On a broader level Endmoor and other settlements in the normal South Lakeland area are taking all the burden of housing allocation because such a large proportion of the District is in one of two national parks which seem to be taking none of the burden. The national park areas are ones with the highest second home rate and these are the areas that need affordable housing the most therefore they should take some of the burden of housing allocation.
There is a need for homes in Endmoor but not on the large scale proposed. Small scale building over a length of time would allow the community to absorb any new people at a natural and sustainable rate and also allow the burden of housing to be spread around the village.
Changes suggested:
(a) The use of sites R670-mod and R83 would provide smaller areas of housing over a longer period of time. Site R83 is also sustainably better than the other options as proven by South Lakelands own Sustainability Appraisal.
(b) Sites to the west of the A65 around the original centre of the village have not even been considered. Development on these areas (west of A65 between Endmoor Farm and the public clock) would create a more rounded village. A one directional urban sprawl towards Low Park could be curtailed and these sites would also create a steady and more natural expansion of housing in the village.
(c) If any sort of development was to happen on site M41M-mod, it needs to be far smaller and a substantial green space needs to be drawn into the plans at this stage to ensure that it is not dropped from any development. The land to the east of the A65 used to be a coppice called Long Wood therefore a wooded area to screen and contain any further development would be ideal. Any housing needs to be kept away from the school to allow any future expansion and the number of houses that could be absorbed into the community does not want to be any larger than 20-25 houses. However this site is one of the least successful in the Sustainability Appraisal and should only be approached as an option for land allocation when all others have been built upon, which they have not.
(d) On a boarder note more housing should be allocated with in the National Parks (i.e. a joint effort between SLDC and the Nat. Parks). The actions mentioned in the Community Strategy, regarding the raising of council tax on second homes, second home restriction and restriction of the Right To Buy, and should be implemented to effectively bring houses back into the local market. This should run alongside affordable housing allocation with in the Nat. Parks.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
2. Mr Daniel Mason (Individual) : 17 Apr 2012 16:54:00
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 - RN133M KENDAL WEST OF OXENHOLME ROAD
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
Yes
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.
Site RN133M and RN301M should be reduced in size as they restrict any future extension of the Hospital. At present the hospital building is under-used however with a growing local population and transport costs rising it is highly likley that Westmorland General Hospital will need to be extended at some future point. At least half the area of those sites nearest the hospital should be put aside or preferably labeled for hospital/health development. It is unsustainable to think that there will be no need to expand the hospital in the future.
3. Mr Daniel Mason (Individual) : 18 May 2012 15:31:00
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 - Site Omission
If you have selected a ‘Site omission’ please enter the site reference or location and relevant policy below
R83
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.
Sustainability Appraisal has not been carried out and its baseline information and conclusions have not been used to inform the DPD
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.
(g) In the Land Allocations Development Plan Document Endmoor Fact File the Sustainability Appraisal rated sites R660 (part of M41M-mod) and R670 the least well. However this seems to have been ignored when deciding on sites. Site R83, one of three to score best overall has not been included in the land allocation. What is the point in an Appraisal if the results are going to be ignored?
(a) The use of sites R670-mod and R83 would provide smaller areas of housing over a longer period of time. Site R83 is also sustainably better than the other options as proven by South Lakelands own Sustainability Appraisal.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
4. Mr Daniel Mason (Individual) : 18 May 2012 15:34:00
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.
Sustainability Appraisal has not been carried out and its baseline information and conclusions have not been used to inform the DPD
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 land allocations proposed for Endmoor are excessive compared to the size of Endmoor at this present time. The proposed site (M41M-mod) to the north of Sycamore Close could contain up to 100 houses. The village of Endmoor only contains just over 200 houses approximately and having an expansion of around 50% would be highly damaging for the community as well as being unsustainable.
(a) The primary school would very likely be too small for the resulting village, with the new housing leaving no room for any possible expansion of the school without losing some of its playing field.
(b) The sewage system is at its limit (although I understand there are plans to upgrade those)
(c) The sudden influx of 100 homes worth of people would be likely to destroy the Endmoor community as it is now. It has taken a while to naturally absorb the development of Sycamore Close (28 houses). Endmoor is not just a suburb of Kendal; it is and should remain a village.
(d) The visual impact from the A65 of a development on that site would be great. Sycamore close, a line of fairly nondescript white houses, is bad enough but the development boundary of site M41M-mod would be 3 times longer.
(e) Land Allocation favours the large housing estate builders which destroys any sort of local style and does not support small local builders or those who wish to build their own house and avoid the cost of profit.
(f) There is also an unsustainable boundary creep towards Low Park, resulting in the loss of open green space. Endmoor is becoming out of proportion (spreading far from the traditional centre of the pub, shop and bakery) but this urban sprawl is avoidable.
(g) In the Land Allocations Development Plan Document Endmoor Fact File the Sustainability Appraisal rated sites R660 (part of M41M-mod) and R670 the least well. However this seems to have been ignored when deciding on sites. Site R83, one of three to score best overall has not been included in the land allocation. What is the point in an Appraisal if the results are going to be ignored?
(c) If any sort of development was to happen on site M41M-mod, it needs to be far smaller and a substantial green space needs to be drawn into the plans at this stage to ensure that it is not dropped from any development. The land to the east of the A65 used to be a coppice called Long Wood therefore a wooded area to screen and contain any further development would be ideal. Any housing needs to be kept away from the school to allow any future expansion and the number of houses that could be absorbed into the community does not want to be any larger than 20-25 houses. However this site is one of the least successful in the Sustainability Appraisal and should only be approached as an option for land allocation when all others have been built upon, which they have not.
(d) On a boarder note more housing should be allocated with in the National Parks (i.e. a joint effort between SLDC and the Nat. Parks). The actions mentioned in the Community Strategy, regarding the raising of council tax on second homes, second home restriction and restriction of the Right To Buy, and should be implemented to effectively bring houses back into the local market. This should run alongside affordable housing allocation with in the Nat. Parks.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
5. Mr Daniel Mason (Individual) : 18 May 2012 15:37:00
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.
LA1.3 Housing Allocations - R670-mod ENDMOOR SOUTH OF BOWLING GREEN
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.
Sustainability Appraisal has not been carried out and its baseline information and conclusions have not been used to inform the DPD
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 land allocations proposed for Endmoor are excessive compared to the size of Endmoor at this present time. The proposed site (M41M-mod) to the north of Sycamore Close could contain up to 100 houses. The village of Endmoor only contains just over 200 houses approximately and having an expansion of around 50% would be highly damaging for the community as well as being unsustainable.
(a) The primary school would very likely be too small for the resulting village, with the new housing leaving no room for any possible expansion of the school without losing some of its playing field.
(b) The sewage system is at its limit (although I understand there are plans to upgrade those)
(c) The sudden influx of 100 homes worth of people would be likely to destroy the Endmoor community as it is now. It has taken a while to naturally absorb the development of Sycamore Close (28 houses). Endmoor is not just a suburb of Kendal; it is and should remain a village.
(d) The visual impact from the A65 of a development on that site would be great. Sycamore close, a line of fairly nondescript white houses, is bad enough but the development boundary of site M41M-mod would be 3 times longer.
(e) Land Allocation favours the large housing estate builders which destroys any sort of local style and does not support small local builders or those who wish to build their own house and avoid the cost of profit.
(f) There is also an unsustainable boundary creep towards Low Park, resulting in the loss of open green space. Endmoor is becoming out of proportion (spreading far from the traditional centre of the pub, shop and bakery) but this urban sprawl is avoidable.
(g) In the Land Allocations Development Plan Document Endmoor Fact File the Sustainability Appraisal rated sites R660 (part of M41M-mod) and R670 the least well. However this seems to have been ignored when deciding on sites. Site R83, one of three to score best overall has not been included in the land allocation. What is the point in an Appraisal if the results are going to be ignored?
(a) The use of sites R670-mod and R83 would provide smaller areas of housing over a longer period of time. Site R83 is also sustainably better than the other options as proven by South Lakelands own Sustainability Appraisal.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
6. Mr Daniel Mason (Individual) : 18 May 2012 15:45:00
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.
LA1.10 Existing Green Infrastructure
If you have selected a ‘Site omission’ please enter the site reference or location and relevant policy below
AS122
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.
Sustainability Appraisal has not been carried out and its baseline information and conclusions have not been used to inform the DPD
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.
(g) In the Land Allocations Development Plan Document Endmoor Fact File the Sustainability Appraisal rated sites R660 (part of M41M-mod) and R670 the least well. However this seems to have been ignored when deciding on sites. Site R83, one of three to score best overall has not been included in the land allocation. What is the point in an Appraisal if the results are going to be ignored?
(a) The use of sites R670-mod and R83 would provide smaller areas of housing over a longer period of time. Site R83 is also sustainably better than the other options as proven by South Lakelands own Sustainability Appraisal.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, published and adopted.
Please notify me
