11 responses.
1. Mr Brian Abbott (Individual) : 13 Aug 2018 11:43:00
Please make your comments in the box below, making reference to the section(s) or paragraph number(s) you are referring to as appropriate.
Am I supposed to be impressed? There is nothing in there but what you should have been doing anyway. It does not address the problem that it is all too complicated for the man in the street, or on the Clapham omnibus as Denning LJ used to say, and when it does not suit your purpose you will disregard it anyway.
2. Mr Andrew Thomas (Individual) : 31 Jul 2018 11:46:00
Dear Sir or Madam
We welcome the opportunity to comment on the Draft Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).
In general we support the draft, in so far as it aims to comprehensively consult with the community on Local Plan documents and planning applications. We have always found staff in SLDC’s planning department to be helpful when we have contacted them.
However, there are several points we wish to make about the planning process in general, which we hope can be taken on board.
There have been proposals in recent months to limit the opportunities for members of the public to speak at planning committee meetings. I understand that these proposals were rejected. This is to be welcomed as, through personal experience, we know how important it is for the ‘voice’ of the local community to be heard by councillors when they are considering the more controversial planning applications, which have attracted strong local opposition.
In cases where there is significant local opposition to a proposal development, including from representative bodies such as town and parish councils and organisations such as Kendal Civic Society and Friends of the Lake District, we are concerned that the weight of such opposition is not always given enough sufficient emphasis at the planning committee stage. While we accept that all councillors can read letters of objection online, the agendas at the meetings tend to be a summary of what has been said and the level of opposition can sometimes be indicated during the meeting by comments from planning officers simply that, for example, ’there have been 65 letters of objection to the proposals’. This also reinforces the importance of giving local people to be given the opportunity to stand up at meetings and comment on applications that affect them. In some instances three minutes is not sufficient to summarise a community’s objections to a major planning application.
In general in the planning process, we feel that the ‘balance of power’ lies too much in the hands of developers. An applicant can apply to develop a piece of land and, even if it is opposed by large numbers of residents and local representative organisations and then rejected overwhelmingly by the planning authority, the developer can submit further similar plans for the same site as many times as they wish. Developers also have the right to appeal planning decisions, unlike those who oppose the plans. This means that communities can face years of uncertainty as speculative developments keep coming back, time and again. This can be extremely wearing for local residents and can cause considerable stress and anxiety for extended periods of time.
In theory, developers can use the planning process to wear down communities. We would urge South Lakeland District Council to lobby the Government to change planning rules so that developers cannot effectively hold communities to ransom in this way. There should be a defined period after a scheme has been rejected before the same developer can return with an amended, but essentially very similar, plan for the same site. If the site was not allocated for the proposed use on the Land Allocations Document then we feel that period should be at least five years.
Increased weight should also be given to the council’s Land Allocations Document. Preparing such plans is a long and detailed process, which involves huge amounts of consultation. Plans are then approved by a Planning Inspector and adopted by the local authority. The LAD allocates sufficient land for housing and business developments for many years. However, developers can still submit applications for sites that are not allocated. While we understand that some sites can become available as ‘windfall’ sites we believe there should be a strong presumption against developments of sites that are not allocated under the LAD, particularly when there is a high level of local opposition, unless an overriding and specific need can be demonstrated why such a site should be developed. If this is not the case, then the LAD appears to carry very little real weight.
Thank for the opportunity to comment.
Yours sincerely
Andrew and Anne Thomas
3. Mr Tim Bettany-Simmons, Canal & River Trust : 6 Sep 2018 09:12:00
Thank you for your consultation on the draft Statement of Community Involvement.
The Canal & River Trust (the Trust) is a statutory consultee in the development management process.
We are not a statutory consultee on planning policy, but we are keen to be engaged and comment on such documents where they may impact upon our waterways and assets.
Having reviewed the draft Statement of Community Involvement we would ask that the following matter/edit is considered.
Paragraph 5.4 relates to providing planning advice and sets out that engagement with the local community would be encouraged. We would suggest that it would be useful that this is extended to also encourage engagement with ‘relevant statutory consultees’ as well. The Trust offer a free pre-application service and we are keen to be engaged at an early stage on proposals which may impact our waterway.
I hope this is of assistance
Kind regards
Tim Bettany-Simmons BA (HONS), MSc, MRTPI
Area Planner / Cynlluniwr Ardal
4. Mr Andrew Hunton, Cumbria Constabulary and obo Police and Crime Commissioner : 14 Aug 2018 10:15:00
Item 1.1
1.1
'.......Within this area, South Lakeland District Council is responsible for preparing plans to guide new development and deciding whether or not to approve planning applications.
The Constabulary is grateful for the opportunity to comment on this consultation. By contributing to the planning process, the Constabulary seeks to encourage high quality design that contributes to the vibrancy and sustainability of South Lakeland, which is resistant to crime and anti-social activity.
It is timely that Government has recently published an updated National Planning Policy Framework and specifically refers to community safety issues:
New National Planning Policy Framework (July 2018)
8. Promoting healthy and safe communities
91. Planning policies and decisions should aim to achieve healthy, inclusive and safe places which:
b) are safe and accessible, so that crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion – for example through the use of clear and legible pedestrian routes, and high quality public space, which encourage the active and continual use of public areas;
12. Achieving well-designed places
124. The creation of high quality buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, creates better places in which to live and work and helps make development acceptable to communities. Being clear about design expectations, and how these will be tested, is essential for achieving this. So too is effective engagement between applicants, communities, local planning authorities and other interests throughout the process.
f) create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users; and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.
As NPPF must be taken into account in preparing local plans, thus there is an opportunity to provide guidance on the crime prevention measures SLDC wishes to be adopted in submitted proposals.
Presently, the South Lakeland Core Strategy refers to ‘crime’ in three instances (pages 6 and 128), but does not give guidance on how measures should be incorporated, by which proposals can be measured.
I shall be pleased to contribute to future policy consultations.
5. Mr Julian Oston, Dallam Tower Estate : 17 Aug 2018 09:39:00
South Lakeland District Council – Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)
It is of interest to me as I write this response to the invitation to comment upon the draft Statement of Community Involvement that since the consultation widow opened on the 26th July, some 23 days ago that only 4 parties have submitted comments. Of these 2 are from what I consider to be statutory consultees and 2 are from members of the public. There will perhaps be a rush of comments in the remaining 21 days of the consultation period. This response suggests a couple of things to me:
• The general public are becoming apathetic in connection with planning matters unless it directly effects them. There have after all been a raft of consultations over the last 5 years.
• The invitation to comment is not being communicated effectively so that people are aware that they have an opportunity to submit comments that will be considered by the Council.
Our experience as a landowner involved in the formulation of the recent Development Plan Document (DPD) and Land Allocation Document (LAD) is that the wider population were not generally aware of the consultation process, or if they were, did not engage with the process for a number of reasons:
• They were not immediately effected by proposed land allocations
• They did not understand the process or what the Council was seeking to achieve
• They did not think that their views would be considered by the Council
• A lot of the process was considered to be web based which a lot of people were not comfortable with
In section 2 of the draft SCI the Council acknowledges that there has been a shift to online services and correspondence by email and social media. Not all of the population are comfortable using such mediums to make their thoughts known. This is also acknowledged in Section 2 and it is suggested that the Council will continue to ensure that consultation materials are available in a number of formats. My experience of the public meetings in connection with the DPD was that they were not particularly well attended and that many people were not aware of the meeting. A number of parties who were aware of the meetings were of the opinion that it was pointless attending as “the Council would do what it wished anyway”. It was for this reason that we withdrew several sites from the DPD process as were not comfortable that the neighbours were aware of the process or if aware they felt that it was not worth submitting their comments.
Somehow the Council needs to encourage more engagement through creating greater awareness of the process and that creating a level of trust that the comments of the public will be given due consideration. I suggest that the Parish Councils are ideally placed to assist in this process.
Other specific points from the draft SCI are:
Section 4.13. In connection with local heritage assets I suggest that the Council should consult with the owners of such asset initially as they are not mentioned in this section.
Section 5.12. I see little point in having a notification period if the Council will take account of representations outside of this period. This simply adds further delay to the planning process, which is frustrating for individual applicants as well as larger developers some of whom are finding the planning process in SLDC more difficult that other council areas. If the Council wishes to deliver the sites allocated within the current DPD and encourage engagement in the revisions thereto the planning process needs to improve.
6. Mr Jeremy Pickup, Environment Agency : 5 Sep 2018 14:30:00
Thank you for consulting the Environment Agency on South Lakeland District Council’s Statement of Community Involvement which we received on 26 July 2018.
We have considered the draft document and on this occasion have no comments to make.
Yours sincerely,
Jeremy Pickup
Planning Advisor - Sustainable Places
7. Mrs Lorayne Woodend Wall, Friends of the Lake District : 28 Aug 2018 10:02:00
It would be useful to be able to see (or have a summary of) what the changes are that have been made to the SCI., particularly in relation to the methods of notifying people about planning applications.
Para. 4.13 Does this section need updating? Is it still intended to prepare Conservation Area Management Plans and a Heritage Strategy? There is no mention of the preparation of local lists or consultation on these.
4.17 states "this requirement has already been implemented". However, the requirement is not a one-off and will need to be made each time there is an application in the relevant area and it is therefore confusing to say it has already been done.
4.19 Is the 'Neighbourhood Planning Statement of Support to communities' the same thing as the Neighbourhood Planning protocol? If so, it would make things clearer to refer to it by the same name each time for consistency.
5.6 Separate lists of applications received and decided would be useful.
5.7 It would be helpful to give an indication of the circumstances in which each of the three methods of making people aware of applications would be used and also how and if this has changed as it is important that people are aware of any changes. Will any other measures be employed to ensure people know of the changes other than the SCI review ?
5.10 This is particularly welcomed as it is not the case with all Councils. A specific date(s) is most helpful.
5.13, 5.14 and 5.17 These paragraphs make several references to things the Council 'will do'. An indication of when would be useful.
6.3 Has this section been updated? It could usefully refer to the Placemaking workshops held by the Council as part of the Development brief process as experience from these could be built upon to inform future engagement activities.
8. Ms Barbara Hooper, Historic England : 10 Sep 2018 09:30:00
A typed or handwritten document was submitted. This has been scanned and can be downloaded below:
[SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT]
9. Sir / Madam , Natural England : 3 Sep 2018 12:52:00
Consultation on Statement of Community Involvement for South Lakeland District Council
Thank you for your consultation on the above dated 27 July 2018 which was received by Natural England on 27 July 2018.
Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.
We are supportive of the principle of meaningful and early engagement of the general community, community organisations and statutory bodies in local planning matters, both in terms of shaping policy and participating in the process of determining planning applications.
We regret we are unable to comment, in detail, on individual Statements of Community Involvement but information on the planning service we offer, including advice on how to consult us, can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/protected-species-and-sites-how-to-review-planning-proposals.
We now ask that all planning consultations are sent electronically to the central hub for our planning and development advisory service at the following address: consultations@naturalengland.org.uk. This system enables us to deliver the most efficient and effective service to our customers.
Yours sincerely
Carla Wright
Natural England
Technical Services
Consultations Team
10. Diane Clarke, Network Rail : 13 Aug 2018 11:46:00
South Lakeland - Draft Statement of Community Involvement
FAO Planning Policy team
As you are aware Network Rail is a statutory consultee for any planning applications within 10 metres of relevant railway land (as the Rail Infrastructure Managers for the railway, set out in Article 16 of the Development Management Procedure Order) and for any development likely to result in a material increase in the volume or a material change in the character of traffic using a level crossing over a railway (as the Rail Network Operators, set out in Schedule 4 (J) of the Development Management Procedure Order); in addition you are required to consult the Office of Rail and Road (ORR).
From
Diane Clarke
Town Planning Technician LNW
Network Rail
11. Mr Carl Bunnage, North Yorkshire County Council : 20 Aug 2018 12:27:00
Thank you for consulting North Yorkshire County Council of the Draft Statement of Community Involvement.
The County Council does not have any comments to make on the document. Our main interest relate to Cross Boundary Strategic Issues and as the County Council would be a Prescribed Body under the Duty to Cooperate for such matters, as far as they are relevant.
We look forward to receiving further consultations on the Local Plan and associated documents as these progress or are reviewed.
Regards
Michelle Saunders
Senior Policy Officer
North Yorkshire County Council