Local Development Framework Consultation

To Mr Simon Berkeley Inspector
Examination of South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD
Response to the SLDC Further Highways - Supporting Technical Note 12th July 13

This paper is submitted on behalf of the South Kendal Preservation Association (SKPA), which represents the interests of Helsington Laithes, Lumley Road, the Bellingham Estate and surrounding area residents. This is in response to the above referenced Technical note, with particular regard to E4M and M41KM. The soundness of the DPD is challenged by reference to the following extracts, with SKPA response in italics:

Westmorland MP Tim Farron has released proposals to refocus A&E Services for S Lakeland at Westmorland (Kendal) Hospital away from current provision at Barrow and Lancaster
This will be severely compromised by the congestion caused by these proposed developments, at the main A6 Kendal entrance. The same concerns have been expressed regarding the impact on Kendal tourism and high street businesses. Who will take responsibility for these consequences, SLDC, the Developer or both? SKPA will make it known who the perpetrators are, in response to the inevitable complaints.

AECOM Technical Note Ex104 12 July 13.
further comments – clarification essential and desirable
access requirements where necessary

“The extension of the 30mph speed limit is not a requirement at this stage, and a developer would be required to demonstrate that safe access can be achieved. It is likely that the site will require a major junction to accommodate safe access which will have a speed reducing effect and likely to trigger a change to the speed limit, removing the requirement for this to be included in the policy. “

This further demonstrates the lack of understanding on the impact such a junction and increased traffic flows will have on the entrance to Kendal. How can a “major junction” not have an major impact on the already congested main route into Kendal? “No further modelling done”. Surely this Laissez-faire approach further undermines the credibility of these proposed Developments?

The previous Main Modifications included the following:

Further Highway Evidence to Support Submission SLDC Land Allocations DPD AECOM March 13
Kendal – Land adjacent to Scroggs Wood site reference E4M

CCC and AECOM comments Page 71
Land at Scroggs Wood

Satisfactory access can be achieved from Milnthorpe Road. A signalised junction would be the most straightforward design for a single access into this area. Other designs for accesses may be appropriate. The site would be accessed directly from the A6 via a new signalised junction south of the existing access to Helsington Laithes . A study undertaken by Atkins in 2009 (Kendal Transport Assessment June 2009) suggests that this access should be signalised with a right turn pocket for vehicles turning into the site from the south. No further modelling work has been undertaken.
A secondary access point was considered from the south which would involve the reconfiguration of the roundabout on the A6, however this would be very costly and as a single access point would not help to integrate the site into the surrounding area and is therefore not recommended. Given the size of the site it may be beneficial in the long term to have a secondary access to prevent the site becoming an extended cul-de-sac. This potential access point could be via the roundabout. The road is 40mph along the site boundary, dropping to 30mph to the north of the site, close to the junction of Kent Park Avenue. It is recommended that the 30mph zone is extended further south to include the new junction.

The soundness of the above report is challenged, on the basis that the addition of a signalised junction and increased traffic will exacerbate the already overloaded A6 entrance to Kendal. This will cause substantial traffic congestion, pollution, dangerous back up onto the bypass and consequent damage to tourism and local business. This is clearly not a sustainable deliverable long term solution, with no regard for the essential Northern Relief Road.

The absence of further modelling is noteworthy in undermining the E4M viability and lack of a credible traffic solution. There is also disagreement between reports on the details of the junction required.

The SLDC rationale that Kendal residents will walk to an E4M business park is not accepted and it is also likely that users will travel from elsewhere. This was the central argument presented by SLDC at the hearing, which is challenged on this basis and the contradictory plan to develop the M6 corridor

The impact of vehicles (including heavy goods vehicles) travelling from the M6 into Kendal is surely more environmentally damaging , than employees travelling from Kendal out to J36. The lack of public transport links can easily be addressed by the provision of bus services

Whether the majority of employees is likely to come from the closer Kendal area will depend on the types of activity undertaken. There is no guarantee that people working on this site would live in Kendal – many might live in other South Lakeland communities, or further afield, accessing the E4M site via a variety of routes other than the A6 out of Kendal. Residents of villages and towns substantially distant from Kendal, in whatever direction, eg in the wider Lake District, the Furness Peninsula, or perhaps northern Lancashire, might be attracted to the employment opportunities provided. Many such employees will be obliged to drive to their place of work. In particular, B1(b) [Research and Development] activity is likely to attract people residing across a larger area.

Why is there no mention of the Northern Relief Road to link the northern end of the bypass from Plumgarth’s roundabout to Shap Road?– Cumbria’s top priority road scheme according to published reports. The following extract from a recent Town Council meeting raises this issue in the wider context of Kendal’s traffic problems.

Kendal Town Council Meeting 18th June 12

083/12/13 TRAFFIC CONGESTION
Councillor Giles Archibald had asked for this item to be placed on the agenda. Having studied the Cumbria County Council Transport Plan Document, he was concerned about the dire predictions for traffic congestion in Kendal by 2022.

Councillor Willshaw asked when the last proper traffic survey had been carried out in the town. When told it was 15 years ago, he suggested that it was time for a new one…… He felt that the talk of “relief roads” was misleading. What should be considered is a (northern) Development Route with links to the Local Development.

Extract from 06 Infrastructure Position Statement
Transport issues within settlements
Kendal
4.5 In the case of Kendal, there are significant constraints on the town highway network with a number of junctions already at capacity. Kendal suffers from traffic congestion which is resulting in air quality problems in its town centre. This is having a detrimental impact on the town’s economy and the quality of life of its residents.

The above statement supports the argument that further pressure at the main entrance to Kendal, created by E4M is not sustainable.