Local Development Framework Consultation

PO1 & PO3: REASON FOR OPPOSING Environmental Impact to KendalThe reason we are opposing this is that 43% of development in the Kendal area would be a growth rate double that of the last 40 years. I would suggest Kendal’s population in 1968 to be around 20,000. 40 years on, this population has now reached 29,000. If this size of development were to go ahead, I would estimate this would increase Kendal’s population by 8,300 over the next 20 years. This would very nearly be double the growth rate of the previous 40 years. We are unconvinced there is adequate justification for this level of expansion and see it as hugely detrimental to Kendal’s environment.
Challenges to the Soundnessa) The damage to Kendal’s environment in terms of a 43% development growth in the next 20 years is, we would suggest, unfair and unacceptable. We feel there is a duty of care to protect Kendal’s inviolable green gaps and environment for future generations. Where does Kendal’s development stop before it is no longer a market town and ceases to be attractive for both its present inhabitants and visitors alike. We are unconvinced in the soundness of the strategy to almost double the historic growth rate.There is no mention in the strategy of how Kendal’s already fully stretched transport infrastructure will cope with an additional population increase of nearly 8,300. One could assume this would increase the current volume of traffic by a further 29%. Traffic commuting to and from Kendal would also have a percentage increase.The Northern Link Road is a major project put forward by SLDC to Cumbria County Council and is Cumbria County Council’s number one project, yet there is no mention of this project or its likely location within the strategy!!c) There is no mention of how current schools would absorb an estimated 1,000 further children both in Primary or Secondary education. How would existing schools expand or where would future schools be located?d) Currently, Westmorland General Hospital is being run down at the same time as the strategy is intending to expand the population, not just in Kendal but in the surrounding areas some of which are also increasing population growth within this strategy.e) Our present 2 major supermarkets (3 including Booths) already seem stretched to capacity possibly creating the need for a further supermarket. Again there is no mention of a possible location for this in the strategy.f) Are the current Sewerage Works south of Kendal capable of taking the extra demand due to the population increase of 8,300? Is the sewerage infrastructure capable of taking the extra demand?g) Certain areas of Kendal suffer from flooding during prolonged rainfall. Are the current surface water drainage systems adequate to prevent any further problems?

Reduce Kendal’s percentage from 43% to 20%. This would be in line with Kendal’s growth rate over the past 40 years. The remaining 23%, if this has to be, should be located south of Kendal along the transportation corridor to the M6. It seems more logical that any future housing development should be concentrated within range, or south of the potential employment site identified in document S4, item 23 (bottom of page125) to prevent further erosion to Kendal’s green gaps and cut down on traffic congestion within Kendal itself.This reduction will enable Kendal’s quota of 1,784 to be met by existing brownfield sites thus preserving existing inviolable green gaps and the environment

ITEM 16 - NORTH WEST KENDALREASON FOR OPPOSINGEnvironmental Impact Following a partly successful campaign by residents of the surrounding area in 1995, a Government Planning Inspector moved the Kendal boundary to the edge of the new Briery Meadows housing estate thus creating Kendal’s last green gap area in this part of Kendal. Presumably this was done for a reason. Perhaps because so many new houses had been built in the surrounding area already, suggesting the proposal for the new Briery Meadows estate was too big and should be halved. As a result of this he also moved the Kendal Town Boundary to create the current green gap.
The Briery Meadows development was completed towards the end of 2002 which means that this particular green gap has had a 6 year life span to date and is now under pressure yet again. It seems maintaining inviolable green gap areas means absolutely nothing, even though it was recommended by a Government Inspector. What has changed within the environment of this part of Kendal to make a reversal of this decision? The reasons for opposing the direction of growth in this area are all based on challenges to the soundness.
a) This was only designated ‘special protection‘ green gap status following the Briery Meadows Government Inspector’s Enquiry in 1995. Why has this green gap now become flexible? Only SLDC’s core strategy has changed not the environment.b) There is no new vehicular access via the railway bridge from Hallgarth. This bridge has recently been strengthened for its original purpose of pedestrian access to the adjacent public bridleway not as suggested to provide access to a new housing development.c) Mention has been made of a possible new access from Burneside Road north of Carus Green to the proposed development. This would take another slice of the newly proposed green gap between Kendal and Burneside. Is this yet another example of a ‘flexible’ green gap area. Are there any non-flexible green gap areas?
d) Mention has also been made of a possible new access from Briery Meadows through the play area. This would more than double traffic flow in and out of Briery Meadows.e) The traffic on Burneside Road has already increased as a result of traffic management changes within Kendal. It has become another artery in and out of Kendal from the A591. This combined with Cropper’s, Carus Green Golf Club and the Briery Meadows estate traffic can only be intensified by additional growth from the proposed Middle Sparrowmire and Burneside developments. Putting more traffic pressure on this minor road will become an increased safety risk, both from additional access points and also school children crossing adjacent to the railway bridge at Aikrigg End. f) Where does the projected Northern Link Road enter the strategy for this part of Kendal? Is the Northern Link Road likely to go ahead? If so where is it to be situated as this is bound to have some bearing on growth in this particular area. Surely we have a right to know at this stage – it is supposed to be a 20 year core strategy
g) How does this location have good access to key facilities? Schools, doctors, dentists are some considerable distance away. This proposed development site is on the northern fringe of Kendal. h) Can the existing sewerage infrastructure at the north west end of town cope with the additional proposed developments both at Middle Sparrowmire and Burneside considering that it is at the opposite side to the existing treatment works? Has any assessment been undertaken?i) In the past flooding has been a issue in this area. Will the surface water drainage infrastructure and system be able to cope with any extra development?

The proposed Middle Sparrowmire development at the North West end of Kendal be removed from the Local Development Framework Strategy. Much more consideration should be given to areas of growth south of Kendal along the transportation corridor to the M6. Together with Kendal’s Western Bypass this would be a more logical strategy in helping to alleviate an increase of traffic congestion flowing in and out of Kendal