5 responses from Mr Hal Bagot, Levens Hall Estate
1. Mr Hal Bagot, Levens Hall Estate : 21 May 2008 20:00:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
3.97 - 3.102 Options Considered: Alternative Sustainable Economy Options; Options 1 - 5
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.
3.102, Page 82, Preferred Options. Option 5A.
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Support
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 land is owned by Levens Estate Trustees.
It has been clear for some time that Kendal is in desperate need of more employment land. If Kendal is to maintain its status as a "Principal Service Centre", then this need must be addressed, and urgently. The Trustees therefore support the Preferred Option set out in 3.103, and would further support the sequential approach outlined. However, it is clear that the Shenstone site, Option 5A, provides the best solution for Kendal's immediate employment needs. Part of the site already has Planning Consent for B1 use, there is a large greenfield area available, it has good access to the M6 south, and traffic need not go through Kendal. There are, it is appreciated, drainage problems for this site, but with support from bodies such as NWDA, these can be overcome. I therefore support the use of this site to ease Kendal's chronic employment land shortage.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
I consider that the other Options given do not satisfy the requirement, they are not close enough to the "Principal Service Centre"
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 Hal Bagot, Levens Hall Estate : 21 May 2008 22:59:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
Key Diagram - Kendal Functional Area - Figure 21
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.
Also Table 3, Page 133, item 2c - Land to the south of Lumley Road
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Support
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 site is in one ownership. It is owned by Trustees. Access could easily be obtained from Milnthorpe Road, and it additionally has provision for two further accesses, at the top(west) end of Lumley Road, and between 6 and 8 Lumley Road. The owners are aware of at least two developers who have expressed interest in the site for residential development. Any development would need to be be highly sensitively carried out, as it would affect both Lumley Road occupiers and the initial impression of Kendal entering from the south.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
The Kendal Functional area Key diagram identifies the site, 2c, as being suitable for mixed employment and housing use, but the table on Page 133 does not indicate this. It is felt that any employment use is incorrect and undesirable, the site should be used for housing use alone.
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
3. Mr Hal Bagot, Levens Hall Estate : 21 May 2008 19:57:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
Key Diagrams - Remaining Local Service Centres (South & East)
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.
No.29, East Levens, Page 182, key diagram on Page 182, and 1-East Levens on Page 189.
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Support
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.
The site appears to include land owned by Levens Estate Trustees, and if this is the case they are obliged to consider any proposed changes to their holding. It is highly likely that residential development in this area will be opposed by those close to it, and that is entirely understandable. Nevertheless, if housing is to be provided in the required quantity in South Lakeland in the years to 2025, then this area has to be considered. The centre of the village has been subject to development which is intensive, leaving no other areas for development, and if the area is to prosper, then a relatively level greenfield site has to be put forward.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
None
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
4. Mr Hal Bagot, Levens Hall Estate : 21 May 2008 23:25:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
The Preferred Option - PO11 - Kendal Functional Area
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, Page 125, No.23
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.
The report does not include this site as a Preferred Option. It is unfortunate that the two Reports mentioned in Para 23, South Kendal, refer to this land as being EITHER, in South Lakeland's case a "rural setting for Kendal", OR, in North West Development Agency's case, it is identified as "having potential for knowledge-based development, is well positioned and separated from dwellings by Scroggs Wood." In the owners' view, the latter is the case, it is also a much better site than Shenstone, being on the right side of the A6 to connect to the town's foul water system, and is extensive in nature, rather than cramped, and with much easier access than is the case with the Shenstone site. It is also set lower down in the landscape. NWDA is correct!
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
This site, No.23, should become one of the Preferred sites for employment use, and should be added to Table 3 on Page 133.
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
5. Mr Hal Bagot, Levens Hall Estate : 22 May 2008 19:42:00
To which part of the Report does your representation relate?
Paragraph or Section
Alternative Options/ The Preferred Options - PO14 - Milnthorpe Functional Area 2025
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.
Alternative Option 10, page 164, also Figure 30 page 166 and Table 6, page 168.
Do you support, oppose or have an observation about this part of the Report?
Support
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.
Site 3a is owned by the Levens Estate. It is noted under Option 3 of Table 6 that "development between the existing settlement boundaries of Leasgill and Heversham is considered as in-filling, with minimal effect on the landscape".
It is submitted that with the pressure on land for development in South Lakeland generally, this site must be included for residential development.
What change(s) would you suggest for this part of the Report?
It is noted that further work is proposed to assess the implications of such a development. There is no objection to this.
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