2 responses from Mr Richard Solomon (Individual)
1. Mr Richard Solomon (Individual) : 15 May 2008 22:01:00
Please state as clearly as you can the exact part of the Report you are commenting on by quoting the page number (if known), paragraph number, option name or number, or the number of the map, figure or table.
Core Strategy Preferred Options.
Figure 21, page 128, area 2c and Table 3, pages 133 to 137, area 2c.
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Oppose
Please write your comment or explain your reasons for supporting or opposing this part of the Report. You may also wish to refer to the tests of soundess in the glossary of the Preferred Options document before making your comments.
With the rejection of the Alternative proposal for knowledge based use south of Scroggs Wood, the Preferred Option has taken the easy option to show the new south developed boundary of Kendal as Scroggs Wood/Helsington Laithes thus denying Kendal the opportunity to preserve the existing outstanding approach to the town. The approach to Kendal from the south is on a gentle right hand curve which leads the eye to the land to the left of the road and the Green Gap between the existing town edge and Helsington Laithes. The cherry trees and field provide a stunning approach to the town, an approach which other towns would be very pleased to have and to preserve. The proposals stress the importance of Green Gaps between the town and adjacent villages, the green spaces within and defining the town provide an important asset and contribute their own value and character to the value and character of the town.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
To remove 2c development from the proposal and transfer the requirement for development to the north of the town where there is ample space, where the development will not alter the character of approach to the town and where there is a wealth of schools, retail and service enterprises and a choice of food outlets.
Please indicate if you wish to be notified when the Core Strategy has been:
Submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination
Adopted by the District Council
2. Mr Richard Solomon (Individual) : 15 May 2008 22:24:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
The Preferred Option - PO3 - Distribution of Development
Please state as clearly as you can the exact part of the Report you are commenting on by quoting the page number (if known), paragraph number, option name or number, or the number of the map, figure or table.
The whole paper
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Oppose
Please write your comment or explain your reasons for supporting or opposing this part of the Report. You may also wish to refer to the tests of soundess in the glossary of the Preferred Options document before making your comments.
I am concerned that the Core Strategy does not seem to adequately consider the need to provide for sport and recreation. The sport and recreation provision for the existing population is in need of enhancement. The housing required by the Regional Spatial Strategy will provide a considerable extra need for sport and recreation.
Where is this in the Core Strategy ? In PO7-Green Infrastructure 3.156, just four lines.
The Green Infrastructure quite rightly recognises the wonderful assets to be found in the whole area, quotes from the Community Strategy (3.146), lists a selection of designated areas and reminds us that 'Biodiversity and conservation should be given prominence in the document......'.
Yes, but four lines tucked away at the end of the section is, I think, just not good enough.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
Recognise and make proper provision for sport and recreation.
Please indicate if you wish to be notified when the Core Strategy has been:
Submitted to the Secretary of State for independent examination
Adopted by the District Council