Response from Mr David Mainwaring (Individual)
1. Mr David Mainwaring (Individual) : 26 May 2008 22:49:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
Alternative options : Options 1 - 3
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.
Option 3 - Alternative Directions of Growth
Paragraph 13. South Oxenholme
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
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.
This option states that there is 'good access and potential for development at the end of Fell Close'.
I disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
1. Fell Close is only 4.8 metres wide, and is therefore too narrow to be considered as a suitable access for further development.
2. The Junction of Fell Close and the A65 has very limited visibility to the south, and is therefore unsafe as an access for further development.
3. Development in this area would adversly affect the views across to Scout Scar and the Lake District fells, from the summit of The Helm.
4. The presence of underground drainage pathways from the Helm to the east, and the West Coast Mainline railway embankment to the west, have resulted in previous flooding in this area.
5. The fields and hedgerows are used extensively by bats as a foraging area.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
Option 3 - Paragraph 13 should not be considered for 'The Preferred Option - PO11 - Kendal Functional Area'
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