Response from Mr and Mrs Andrew and Anne Thomas (Individual)
1. Mr and Mrs Andrew and Anne Thomas (Individual) : 9 May 2012 13:22:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show you have read the 'Guidance Notes for Making a Representation'
I have read the guidance notes
LA1.10 Existing Green Infrastructure - Site Omission
If you have selected a ‘Site omission’ please enter the site reference or location and relevant policy below
Site Omission M4M
1.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is legally compliant?
2.1 Do you consider that the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD is sound?
2.2 If NO please identify which test of soundness your representation relates to by selecting the relevant option(s) below and completing section 2.3.
The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
2.3 Please give details of the change(s) you consider necessary to make the South Lakeland District Council Land Allocations DPD sound, having regard to the test you have identified at question 2.2 above.
It would be helpful if you could state your proposed change to the DPD and the reasons why you think it is necessary.
In the former South Lakeland Local Plan all the land wrapping around
Helme Drive at Kendal was designated as Open Important Space, which
meant there was a presumption against development. In the Land
Allocation Development Plan Document (DPD) only the southern part of
this field is allocated as Amenity Space, which, I understand, means there
is a similar presumption against development.
I believe the northern section of the field should also be designated in this
way as it has similar open space and amenity value. It lies next to the
former Kendal Canal, which may well be re-opened in the future -open
fields adjoining such a canal would have far more amenity value than
houses or other development. The land is close to the historic canal
bridge on Natland Mill Beck Lane and allows open views from that
bridge. The field's unusual mounds and hollows suggest that it would be
worthy of archaeological excavation. It is also close to Natland Mill
Beck, which should be protected.
I believe the DPD is 'unsound' because it fails to recognise the open
space and amenity value of the land to the north of Helme Drive. This
objection would be resolved if the plan was amended so that this land is
also allocated as Amenity Space.
3.1 If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate in the oral part of the examination?
NO, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination