<<

Lower Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

Lower Allithwaite Parish Council Neighbourhood Development Plan 2016 - 2026

Pre-Submission Draft

MCL Nov 18 v.3 1

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN - CONTENTS

Section Subject Page 1 Introduction 4 1.1 Background 4 1.2 Planning Policy Context 5 1.3 Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Vision and Objectives 5 1.4 Neighbourhood Plan Objectives 6 1.5 Lower Allithwaite Parish 7

2 Neighbourhood Plan - Policies 9 2.1 Built Environment and Heritage Assets – Objective 1 9 3 LANP 1 - Design Principles 11 4 LANP 2 - Conservation area and its setting 12 5 Green Infrastructure / Characteristics – Objectives 2 and 3 13 6 LANP – 3 – Protecting Green Spaces 14 7 Lower Allithwaite Green Spaces / Assets 16 8 LANP 4 – Protecting and enhancing Green infrastructure and 18 Biodiversity 9 LANP 5 - Protecting and enhancing landscape character around 18 Lower Allithwaite 10 LANP 6 – Dark Skies 19 11 LANP 7 – Equestrian related development 19 12 Active Travel – Objectives 4 and 5 20 13 LANP 8 – Improving Pedestrian movements 20 14 Future Developments – Objectives 6,7,8 and 9 21 15 LANP 9 – New Housing in Lower Allithwaite 22 16 LANP 10 – Principle Residence requirement 23 17 LANP 11 – Caravans and Chalet Parks 25 18 A Vibrant Community – Objectives 10,11 and 12 26 19 LANP 12 - Maintaining and Enhancing Community 27 Facilities/Infrastructure

2

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

Appendix 1 Relevant NPPF policies / reference 28 2 Relevant SLDC policies / reference 32 3 Cartmel Conservation area design guidance 37 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities 38 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan 46 6 Questionnaire results 76 7 Design Guide 83 8 Allithwaite and Cartmel Footpath Consultation 112 9 List of Consultees 120 10 List of Evidence Based Documents 122

Maps 1 Lower Allithwaite Boundary 4 2 Allithwaite Development Sites 10 3 Cartmel Development Sites 11 4 Cartmel Conservation Area 13 5 Lower Allithwaite Green Spaces / Assets 16

Figures

1 Resident Population – Lower Allithwaite 8

2 Age Structure – Lower Allithwaite 8

3 Housing Data – Lower Allithwaite 9

4 % Housing – Lower Allithwaite 24

Tables 1 Aims and Objectives 6

3

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Lower Allithwaite Parish Council decided to prepare a Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) for Lower Allithwaite in October 2014 and applied to District Council for designation as a neighbourhood area on 15th October 2014. The application for designation was approved by the District Council on 5th February 2015. The designated Neighbourhood Area is the same as the Parish Council Boundary and is shown on Map 1. This includes the villages of Lower Allithwaite, Cartmel and outlying areas.

Map 1: Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Boundary

1.2 Background The Lower Allithwaite NDP has been prepared taking into consideration extensive community engagement and involvement through the Lower Allithwaite Community Plan (June 2013) and the Cartmel Township Initiative, the Allithwaite Community Orchard consultation and the Allithwaite P4C Bid consultation. 4

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

A steering group comprising Parish Councillors and local residents was established to progress work on the plan, members:

Chair - Cllr Chris Naylor - Cllr Mary Wilson - Cllr Mary Bird - Cllr Caroline Johnson

Consultations took place in the Community Centre Allithwaite on the 13th and 19th July 2016, the results of the questionnaires are contained in Appendix 6.

1.2 Planning Policy Context This plan has been developed with regard to National and Local policies.

1.2.1 National planning policy is set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in July 2018. This sets out in paragraphs 6 and 7 that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development, and that the planning system has to perform an economic role, a social role and an environmental role.

1.2.2 South Lakeland District Council Core strategy, but as part of the Local Plan review, is currently being reviewed and has also been considered. The South Lakeland adopted Core Strategy (2010) sets out an overall vision of how the district and places within it should evolve, strategic objectives for the area, focusing on key issues, a strategy for the delivery of these objectives, and an explanation of how the delivery process will be monitored.

1.2.3 A full list of relevant policies is included at Appendix 1 and 2. Policies will be applied where relevant to the proposal under consideration, recognising that not all policies will need to be applied or complied with.

1.3 Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Vision and Objectives 1.3.1 By 2026 Lower Allithwaite Parish, due to significant change, will include two very different villages and a number of small rural settlements scattered throughout the countryside. The quality of the landscape has been protected from intrusive developments.

5

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

1.3.2 In Allithwaite the village will be enhanced by a number of developments which are well integrated, linked directly to the village with pedestrian circulation having been significantly enhanced. Traffic management has resulted in a quieter, safer village.

1.3.3 In Cartmel, the heritage aspects of the village have been enhanced, protected and reflected in the wider village area. Traffic and parking management schemes have improved access to the many businesses; and residents and visitors benefit from improved circulation.

1.4 Neighbourhood Plan Aims and Objectives 1.4.1 These are taken from the Lower Allithwaite Community Plan completed and adopted in 2013.

1.4.2 For the vision of the Neighbourhood Plan to be realised, planning decisions need to reflect its objectives. Consultation and engagement with local residents demonstrated that there were also other matters of importance to them, which need to be addressed as part of realising the vision. These are set out in the following 12 community objectives.

Table 1: Aims and Objectives Aims Objectives

1 To protect the built environment both in the villages and in the wider countryside and raise awareness of Cartmel’s Conservation Area.

2 To protect locally significant green spaces within the villages and in the surrounding countryside from inappropriate development.

3 To protect and enhance the locally, nationally and internationally recognised natural environments

4 To protect and enhance existing levels of access to the local countryside

5 To promote safer use of the wider road network, to ensure safer pedestrian and cycle access within the Parish, improve and enhance the cycle network, and improve disabled access to the footpath network.

6 To ensure housing stock meets local affordable needs and enables people of all ages to continue to resident within the local area.

7 Ensure new housing developments are small scale, less than 10/15 houses, and meet the aspirations of low density (as outlined in NPPF) and appropriate design.

8 To ensure the proportion of permanent dwellings to holiday homes remains at a level that supports a sustainable local community.

9 Caravan and Chalet parks are well contained in the landscape and remain proportional to the size of the residential villages and hamlets

10 A range of local businesses thrive and are well supported by broad band connections

11 The tourist economy grows in a way which supports and enhances the environment and does not adversely impact on traffic and parking issues.

12 Community facilities support and enhance the wellbeing of residents of all ages.

6

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

1.5 Lower Allithwaite Parish 1.5.1 Lower Allithwaite is a in the South Lakeland District of the county of .

1.5.2 It is bounded to the north by the Lake District National Park and the Morecambe Bay Ramsar area to the South. Morecambe Bay Special Area of Conservation (SAC / Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar sites are wetland sites of international importance designated under the Ramsar convention.

1.5.3 It includes two villages and a number of small hamlets and scattered farmsteads. There are also a number of caravan and chalet parks which, in addition to the growing number of second homes and holiday lets, significantly increase the population of the area for virtually the whole year.

1.5.4 In Allithwaite, archaeological evidence shows that the area has been settled since the Bronze age but the village has only developed since the mid C19 when the then owners of Boarbank Hall built the Church and school and provided a focus for the existing scattered farmsteads.

1.5.5 The village is sited on higher ground with magnificent views in all directions. To the south and west is the coastal plain and which is a SSSI limestone Ridge stretching out towards the important Ramsar site of Morecambe Bay. To the north views are towards the Lake District Fells. The village is sheltered from the east by the limestone ridge of Wartbarrow also a SSSI.

1.5.6 Allithwaite has a wide range of well supported community facilities including a primary school with nursery, children’s playground, community orchard and meadow, allotments, a community centre and playing field, church, post office and shop, charity shop and pub.

1.5.7 Its main problem is that it is divided by the B5277 road and there are many gaps in the footpath network which deter people from walking confidently around the village.

1.5.8 Cartmel nestles in the valley of the river Eea where the village has grown around the medieval grade 1 listed Priory church. The low-lying pasture land which surrounds the Priory church is an important feature; as are the low round drumlin type hills to the south of the village at Headless Cross. A large part of the village lies within flood zones 2 or 3 and this does restrict areas suitable for any future growth. The conservation area includes the older part of the village and a few very ordinary newer developments have created the impression of a village of two halves.

1.5.9 The village has three places of worship with Methodist and Quaker chapels in addition to the Church of Priory church. The latter is, itself, an important visitor destination. There is a Primary school, Montessori Nursery and secondary school as well as doctor’s surgery and village hall and allotments. A large range of shops, pubs, cafes and restaurants, one of which is Michelin 2 star, all support local and visitor needs and add to its attraction as a visitor destination.

1.5.10 The race course – once used 5 times a year for popular horse races is now developing into a venue regularly used throughout the summer for a number of large events. It also provides the home for the football club, cricket club and scouts. 7

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

1.5.11 Managing the increased pressures caused by traffic wishing to visit this destination or attend events has been the focus of a recent village project – “The Cartmel Township Initiative.”

Resident Population

Schoolchild or full-time student 41

Lives in a communal establishment 62

Lives in a household 1,769

Females 962

Males 869

All usual residents 1,831

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Figure 1: Resident Population – Lower Allithwaite - 2011

1.5.12 The Census Statistics for Lower Allithwaite indicates that the Parish has a resident population of 1,783 in 2003 and 1,811 in 2011. There is higher proportion older residents than South Lakeland, and England 31.5% of the Lower Allithwaite population were aged 65+ years and older compared to 24.2% in South Lakeland and 16.3% in England.

1.5.13 However slightly fewer of the 16-74 year olds are economically active 66.9% compared to 70.4% for South Lakeland though a higher number are self employed 26.2% compared to 20.8% in the District and 14% nationally.

Age Structure

Age 90 and over 29 Age 85 to 89 61 Age 75 to 84 190 Age 65 to 74 296 Age 60 to 64 172 Age 45 to 59 421 Age 30 to 44 253 Age 25 to 29 46 Age 20 to 24 58 Age 18 to 19 36 Age 16 to 17 44 Age 15 17 Age 10 to 14 70 Age 8 to 9 29 Age 5 to 7 54 Age 0 to 4 55 All usual residents 1,831 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000

Figure2: Age Structure – Lower Allithwaite - 2011

8

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

1.5.14 Lower Allithwaite has a relatively high proportion of detached houses (45.5% of dwellings compared to South Lakeland, 30.8%) and a low proportion of flats (6.0% of dwellings compared to South Lakeland 15.6%. 83.2% of households in Lower Allithwaite are owner occupied, compared to 73% in South Lakeland, with 5.7 of households being social rented accommodation compared to 10.7% in South Lakeland.

Lower Allithwaite Housing data

Caravan or mobile 18

Flat or Tenant 16

Terraced 187

Semi-detached 271

Detached 446

2nd Homes 159

Residents 822

All dwellings 981

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Figure 3: Housing Data – Lower Allithwaite -0 2011

1.5.15 In terms of transport and accessibility, households are very reliant on private cars with 90.9% of households having 1 car or more compared to 84.7% across South Lakeland.

1.5.16 The villages are served by the Furness railway with stations at Cark and being within 2-3 mile of each village. The bus service is more intermittent and does not facilitate most journeys to work.

2. POLICIES This section sets out the planning policies to guide development in Lower Allithwaite up to 2026.

The policies are defined below each objective. Whilst the policies are divided between the objectives the plan should be read as a whole.

2.1 Built Environment and Heritage Assets

- To protect the built environment both in the villages and in the wider Objective 1 countryside and raise awareness of Cartmel’s Conservation Area.

2.1.1 A questionnaire was conducted in 2012, and the results fed into the production of a Community Plan for the Parish in 2013. The frequently voiced message was one that in the future that the area and the villages would stay the same. On the whole respondents appreciated how their village looked, and the surrounding countryside was as much if not more important.

9

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

2.1.2 The following policies seek to ensure that all development within the Parish is of an appropriate design and nature that allows the parish to grow in a way that retains the existing character.

2.1.3 The following maps indicate areas of development within the Land Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) by SLDC:

Map 2 – Allithwaite Development Sites

Site 1 defines the open nature of the village providing views across it

Site 2 - Orchard and playground provide important open space in the centre of the village plus protect view towards the grade 2 listed church 10

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

Site 3 - Quarry - provides space for recreation and wildlife and also important views out towards Morecambe Bay and Humphrey head

Site 4 - defines the northern boundary of the village with important views towards Lake District fells and Wartbarrow from Templand gate

Site 5 - defines the entrance and setting to the village from Cartmel road with views up towards Wartbarrow

Map 3 – Cartmel Development Sites

Sites 1, 2 and 3 provide important green spaces pastureland around the Priory Church defining its setting within the valley of the river Eea

Site 4 a distinctive drumlin features which define the south western entrance to the village behind Headless Cross.

3. POLICY LANP1 – DESIGN PRINCIPLES 3.1 All new development will be expected to respond positively to the key attributes of the parish and local design features of the villages.

11

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

3.2 Development will not be supported where it has a detrimental impact on the character of the area in which it is located. All new development will be supported when it meets all of the following criteria:

A: Has taken account of the Lower Allithwaite Parish Design Guide (Appendix 7); Makes a contribution to local identity, and sense of place; and is suitable in terms of the overall design and appearance of the proposed development (including materials, size, scale, density, layout, access) when assessed in relationship with the best features of the villages.

B: Demonstrates that consideration has been given to the amenities of existing residences and does not result in the loss of an area which makes a contribution to public amenity by virtue of its open space character, appearance and function;

C: Includes measures that seek to improve pedestrian facilities and linkages in the Parish and between villages to encourage walking and cycling. Does not preclude the implementation of future footpath links throughout the Parish;

D: Contributes to reducing carbon emissions, including maximising solar gain through orientation of properties and the installation of solar panels.

3.3 The Cartmel Conservation area is an asset to the Parish. The conservation area includes not only the two separate built up areas that form the settlement but also the immediate landscape setting around the village to the north, south, and west, as well as a narrow corridor of meadow land which separates the two discrete built up areas.

3.3.1 The Neighbourhood Plan seeks to create a village in which new developments reflect the aspirations of the conservation area management plan (this could provide the link to the emerging Cartmel Conservation Area Management Plan (CAMP), which the Cartmel Village Society are keen to prepare for adoption as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPD) in 2019) creating a unified village.

3.3.2 Residents from Cartmel felt there should be greater enforcement and supervision of conservation area planning principles. The production of a CAMP for Cartmel would provide more locally specific policy with which to control inappropriate development, including the insertion of unsuitable windows and doors, which were mentioned frequently by residents.

4. POLICY LANP2 – DEVELOPMENT WITHIN CARTMEL CONSERVATION AREA 4.1 All new development within or close to the Cartmel Conservation Area that would affect its setting (Map 4) will be expected to maintain and where possible enhance the positive attributes of the Conservation Area and its setting, as defined in SLDC’s adopted Cartmel Conservation Area Character Appraisal (2009)’.

4.2 Development proposals will be supported where they follow the guidance in the Cartmel Conservation Zone guidance see Appendix 7.

12

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

Map 4 – Cartmel Conservation Area

5. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER

Objective 2 - To protect locally significant green spaces within the villages and in the surrounding countryside from inappropriate development.

Objective 3 - To protect and enhance the locally, nationally and internationally recognised natural environments

5.1 The Community Plan questionnaire results indicate that open spaces in the villages were greatly valued – 91% of respondents indicated such spaces were very or fairly important. In addition, the quality of the surrounding countryside was seen as being of equal or more importance.

5.2 70% of people stated that they admired views every single day, these ranging across all areas of the parish. Walking was the most popular activity with 86% of people walking at least weekly and most of them daily. Apart from pure relaxation, which came second to walking, a variety of sports and other leisure activities was listed – cycling, gardening, horse riding, running and many more.

13

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

5.3 Various different open spaces throughout the locality were listed, including footpaths generally, Cartmel park and woods (mentioned by both Allithwaite and Cartmel residents) and Wartbarrow Lane and Fell (Allithwaite). The use of the community centre and playing fields was also referred to.

6. POLICY LANP3 - PROTECTING IMPORTANT GREEN SPACES 6.1 Under the NPPF, neighbourhood plans have the opportunity to designate Local Green Spaces which are of particular importance to the local community. This will afford protection from development other than in very special circumstances. Paragraph 99 of the NPPF says that Local Green Spaces should only be designated:

• where the green space is in reasonably close proximity to the community it serves; • where the green area is demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local significance, for example because of its beauty, historic significance, recreational value (including as a playing field), tranquillity or richness of its wildlife; and; • where the green area concerned is local in character and is not an extensive tract of land.

6.2 The consultation process has highlighted that one of the key features that contribute to the distinctive character of Lower Allithwaite Parish is the substantial number of relatively small open green spaces dotted about the villages with respondents citing publicly accessible green spaces as a contributing factor to their enjoyment of living within Lower Allithwaite Parish.

6.3 Protecting these spaces is therefore important to conserve the character of Lower Allithwaite Parish and the majority are already protected by existing designations

6.4 There are also other reasons why particular green spaces may be of value to the community of Lower Allithwaite Parish: for example, for aesthetic reasons, recreational value, tranquillity, or as a tourist attraction.

6.5 The Neighbourhood Plan seeks to ensure that green infrastructure will be incorporated into new developments and green gaps will be retained to maintain the character and identity of individual settlements

6.6 The Neighbourhood Plan seeks to make provision that enables all residents to have suitable access to parks and gardens, children’s play areas, civic spaces and greenspace

6.7 The following areas of green space (Map 5) have been ranked as being of significant importance to the community of Lower Allithwaite Parish and in need of protection and as meeting the criterion of greenspace designation as set out in the NPPF.

14

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

(View from Playing Fields and Quarry)

(View )

15

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

Map 5 – Allithwaite Green Spaces / Assets

Community Centre / Playing Fields Orchard

King George V Playing Fields

Quarry Allotments

7. LOWER ALLITHWAITE GREEN SPACES / ASSETS 7.1 The Parish Council has stewardship green area in the middle of the village; it was decided to turn the area into an area which was more accessible to grownups and children.

7.2 After public consultation the area was planned to be a Community Orchard and Meadow which is clean to walk and contains a large number of old varieties of apples, a meadow area, a wild life strip and an apiary and a permitted footpath. Part of the concept is to allow children free access to the whole area and access was created from the neighbouring King George V (KGV) Jubilee Play area.

(Community Orchard)

16

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

7.3 This is wholly a dog free area to allow the public a clean and quiet area to sit or play at their leisure and to have access to a limited number of apples during the picking season. A small picnic area has been created with a number of resting seats to take in the views. The area also includes a small group of allotments also neighbouring the KGV.

(King George V Playing Fields) (Community Allotments)

7.4 Lower Allithwaite Parish also has a wealth of national land and marine based designations significant natural heritage.

• Morecambe Bay SAC/SPA/Ramsar site. • Morecambe Bay Pavements (SAC). • Morecambe Bay Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), • Morecambe Bay Special Protection Area (SPA). • Roundsea Wood and Mosses National Nature Reserve (NNR) • Roundsea Wood and Mosses Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) • Roundsea Wood and Mosses Special Area Conservation (SAC) • Humphrey Head Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), • Barker Scar Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), • Wart Barrow Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), • Outley Mosses Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI),

7.5 Ancient Woodland sites as follows:

• Collkeld Wood • Humphrey Head Wood • Kirkhead Wood • Hesketh Wood • Cark Shaws • Nicholas Wood • Rye Croft Wood • Hagg and Scroggs Wood • Deanholme Wood • Waitham Wood • Old Park Wood • 5 additional areas of ancient replanted wood • 2 additional areas of ancient and semi natural woodland 17

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

8. POLICY LANP4 - PROTECTING AND ENHANCING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND BIODIVERSITY 8.1 Lower Allithwaite supports a range of protected and vulnerable species. The Neighbourhood Plan is recognised as an important local tool in ensuring that new development has a positive impact on green infrastructure supporting local wildlife and habitats.

8.2 The Community Plan identified how much residents valued the surrounding countryside. The link between Global Warming and species protection is well documented and in the community plan 54% of people supported small scale renewable energy projects.

8.3 Proposals for new development will be required to:

A: Demonstrate how the design has taken into account its potential impact on local habitats and species and ensure no adverse impact either directly or indirectly, on international, national or locally-designated sites.

B: Incorporate existing green infrastructure, Protect and enhance wild life corridors by retaining existing hedgerows and dry stone walls. Recognises the importance of and protects the existing network of country lanes.

C: Demonstrate that developments protect and enhance biodiversity and important wildlife habitats. These may include for instance use of swift bricks, bat and owl boxes, and ensuring that new and converted buildings provide nesting and roosting spaces for bats and birds. A mixture of native species typical of this locality should be incorporated in landscaping schemes which should aim to use appropriate native species trees to break up roof massing.

D: New developments are expected to contribute to a reduction in carbon emissions Houses should achieve high levels on insulation and be orientated to maximise solar gain.

9. POLICY LANP 5 - PROTECTING AND ENHANCING LANDSCAPE CHARACTER AROUND LOWER ALLITHWAITE 9.1 New development should include landscaping schemes which aim to protect and enhance local landscape character in the Parish.

A: Preserve the landscape features and setting of Cartmel and Allithwaite as identified in the Lower Allithwaite Design Guide (appendix 7). In particular Seek to minimise the encroachment of development into visually exposed landscapes and conserve existing landscape features such as trees, hedges and country lanes as intrinsic parts of new development.

B: Those parts of the locally significant views identified on Map 4 that are visible from locations that are freely accessible to members of the general public should be preserved and not significantly detracted from. Developments should take into consideration any adverse impacts on these views through landscape appraisals and impact studies.

C: Promote high quality residential design that respects local townscape and landscape character and reflects local vernacular building styles, layouts and materials see Lower Allithwaite Design Guidance – Appendix 7. 18

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

10. POLICY LANP 6 - DARK SKIES 10.1 To minimise light pollution and to maintain the views of night time skies, planning proposals that include external and street lighting will have to demonstrate the following:

A: They have undertaken an assessment of the need for lighting and can demonstrate need;

B: The nature of the proposed lighting minimises pollution is appropriate for its use and location. Eg low level bollard types. Security lights should be motion sensitive

C: Development should be designed to conserve and enhance the intrinsic quality of the dark night skies. Lighting which is proposed to be installed should meet or exceed the level of protection appropriate to environmental zone 1 (as defined by the Institute of Lighting Professionals).

10.2 Security and other outside lighting that will adversely affect the amenities of other occupiers or habitats or which cause unnecessary light pollution which reduces the quality of the dark night sky will be refused.

10.3 In considering new development, the first factor to consider is whether external lighting is necessary. If there is a case for its inclusion (for example for security or safety reasons) its design should minimise its impact, both on the amenity of the occupants of neighbouring properties, and in terms of light spillage and glare. Timed PIR lights, down-lighters or ‘wall washers’ are examples of lighting schemes that generally have less impact.

11. POLICY LANP 7 - EQUESTRIAN RELATED DEVELOPMENT

A: Developments which are adjacent to residential properties or within the village boundary must adhere to a strict management plan detailing agreed stocking levels, the removal of manure, and maintenance of the pasture.

B: Developments which are likely to have an adverse impact on identified valued open spaces will not normally be supported unless they can demonstrate that the open pastureland will be maintained and managed in a way which does not detract from the landscape.

11.1 It is recognised that the use of pasture land for the keeping of horses can significantly impact on the quality of this landscape. Poor maintenance of pasture, failure to manage manure and the subdivision of fields and erection of shelters and stabling can all significantly degrade what is valued if not managed properly.

11.2 The British Horse Society provides guidance on stocking levels and pasture management and will be used to inform management.

19

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

12. ACTIVE TRAVEL 12.1 Lower Allithwaite Parish needs to continue to have good public transport links to surrounding villages and towns. Whilst the Parish is served by two railway stations, Kents Bank and Cark and Cartmel, and a reasonable bus service, it is a community aspiration for public transport to be improved as part of delivery of this Neighbourhood Plan, and this plan looks to developer contributions to help provide these improvements.

Objectives 4 and 5 4. To protect and enhance existing levels of access to the local countryside.

5. To promote safer use of the wider road network, to ensure safer pedestrian and cycle access within the Parish, improve and enhance the cycle network, and improve disabled access to the footpath network.

12.2 In the community plan road safety was a concern for both pedestrians and vehicle users. 59% regarded road safety as a problem within the villages.

12.3 Developer contributions through CIL funding will be sought to part or fully fund projects and to lever in match funding from other sources such as Locally Important Project funding. This will be used to contribute to the improvement of local bus infrastructure, with the aim of providing good quality integration between both modes of transport and services. This will include improvements and additions to cycle parking and security at stations and elsewhere and improvements to bus shelters

12.4 It is recognised that active travel will improve the health and wellbeing of residents. It will also make a contribution to reducing greenhouse gasses and global warming.

12.5 Although cars are essential for many people in rural areas, this Plan also seeks to address the challenges of congestion. Therefore, movement must be managed by optimising both access to and the provision of public transport, and encouraging walking and cycling, so as to reduce car journeys

12.6 In order to achieve this aspiration, it is important that the community has access to public transport where ever possible

13. POLICY LANP 8 – IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT 13.1 Proposals for the enhancement and improvement of the existing footpath/cycleway network, and the provision of new links as shown on Map 5, will be supported.

13.2 The Parish council will seek to use the Community Infrastructure levy to improve the experience of all residents in moving around and between villages.

13.3 Opportunities to support and enhance the bus service will be taken

13.4 All new proposals should include the following enhancements to maximise accessibility to residents.

20

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft 2018-2026

A: provide pedestrian and cycle links which reflect the most direct routes to village facilities.

B: provide access to potential new routes identified on map 5 which the Parish

council will aim to develop in the future.

C: Ensure new developments, where possible and appropriate, improve existing links or provide new non-vehicular movement routes to link to key services

13.5 For both pedestrians and cyclists, the environment is noticeably poor and there is a strong sense that the car is the dominant feature. Improving linkages, infrastructure and the quality of the both the walking and the cycling environment are key priorities. Developing new links will make a real difference to how the villages are perceived and used.

13.6 Most transport improvements within the Parish can come about only as a result of decisions and actions by other bodies, as Lower Allithwaite Parish Council does not have direct responsibilities for transport projects. The Parish Council will therefore consider how to work in partnership with others to improve sustainable transport

13.7 The purpose of this aspiration is to achieve:

• a high-quality integrated transport system for the movement of residents, workers and visitors by public transport, walking, cycling and private vehicles, so facilitating access to jobs and services, and for the local movement of goods; • residents with a healthier lifestyle achieved through encouraging walking, cycling and the use of public transport • minimization of the length and number of motorised journeys, so reducing travel demand,

14. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 14.1 The result of the Community plan questionnaire in 2012, indicated that housing was a burning issue amongst the community. In addition, it was felt that any housing development should be small scale: 57% were in favour of just 1 to 3 houses, whereas just 9% would support developments of 10 or more.

14.2 On the other hand, the great majority of respondents showed strong support for affordable housing, 75% regarding this as very or fairly important. 71% of respondents supported the principle of building for local occupancy, particularly for people connected with the parish.

14.3 Census data shows that the villages have a higher than average older population requiring a greater number of homes to be built to life time housing standards.

21

Objectives 6,7,8 and 9 6. To ensure housing stock meets local affordable needs and enables people of all ages to continue to resident within the local area.

7. Ensure new housing developments are small scale and meet the aspirations of low density and appropriate design.

8. To ensure the proportion of permanent dwellings to holiday homes remains at a level that supports a sustainable local community.

9. Caravan and Chalet parks are well contained in the landscape and remain

proportional to the size of the residential villages and hamlets

14.4 The local road network consists of narrow country lanes. The additional vehicular movements and parking during construction periods has the potential to result in unreasonable dangers to residents.

14.5 The challenge for this Neighbourhood Plan is ensuring that developments in Lower Allithwaite Parish are sustainable whilst encouraging creativity in design and also meeting local needs in the type, mix and design of housing. There is the need to address the challenge of how to integrate the relatively high number of new houses into the existing fabric and services of the villages.

15. POLICY LANP 9 – NEW HOUSING IN LOWER ALLITHWAITE 15.1 Over the plan period, within the defined settlement boundaries for Allithwaite and Cartmel, (as defined on the SLDC Proposals map in Appendix 2), proposals for new housing development will be supported where they meet the following criteria:

15.2 Lower Allithwaite has a smaller than average working age population, people are having to move away to access work and suitable housing accommodation. The Neighbourhood Plan seeks to tackle this issue of low cost market housing by ensuring a mix of dwelling sizes are provided and encouraging the provision of dwellings built to help both first time buyers and those seeking to downsize.

15.3 This policy seeks to ensure that new developments offer a range of housing sizes and types, taking account of the housing requirement of different groups of society, including the need to deliver low cost market housing as part of the overall housing mix. It also sets out that all new housing should be easily adaptable for everyone, from young families to older people and individuals with a temporary or permanent physical impairment.

22

Lower Allithwaite Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft – August 2018

A. Developers are required to engage in meaningful consultation with the Parish Council prior to the initial design stage and to hold further consultation with residents as designs are developed and maintain a dialogue with the Parish council both during the design process and construction.

B Developers will be expected to demonstrate at the planning stage that their plans

have maximised opportunities to provide the number of affordable homes as defined in

SLDC core strategy and or provide a binding agreement to deliver these. Sites allocated for development are required to deliver affordable homes. The sub division of the site or phased development must also demonstrate the same level of affordable properties.

C: Demonstrate how the amenity of existing residencies (including visual) has been considered, are small scale reflecting the roles and functions of the villages, relate well to traditional layouts and have maximised solar gain.

D: Provide a range of properties to meet both existing and future needs and meet the standard of life time homes. The Parish Council will support a range of 1,2 and 3 bedroomed properties for each site. Affordable homes must be well integrated and evenly distributed throughout the development.

E. Proposals should seek to enhance the villages reflecting the priorities identified in the design guidance Appendix 2 They should not feature the generic designs associated with suburban developments. They should display the locally distinctive character of the area, typically this should include a variety of style and house types including variations in roof style, building finish and boundary treatment to more accurately reflect the diversity and traditional growth found in villages.

E: During construction developers show consideration for the amenity and safety of residents by agreeing a management plan which includes the provision of parking for construction vehicles away from and off the highways, wheel wash facilities and street cleaning, agreed hours of working and delivery vehicles which consider the beginning and end of the school day.

15.4 Although there is a large amount of housing in the planning pipeline in Allithwaite and Cartmel as at mid- 2016, which is expected to address the majority of needs over the plan period, there will still be other housing developments that come forward within the settlement boundary of the villages, as identified in the SLDC Local Plan. It is considered that this growth should, alongside the growth in the planning pipeline, address the needs of the community of Allithwaite and Cartmel.

16. POLICY LANP 10 – PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT 16.1 Over 10% of properties in the Lower Allithwaite Parish are recorded as second homes. This is the highest level in South Lakeland outside of the Lake District National Park. There are also properties which have been granted planning permission as a holiday lets.

23

Lower Allithwaite Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft – August 2018

16.2 Meeting housing needs, particularly needs for affordable housing, is a strategic objective. Delivery of the new housing development in the quantity and form necessary is fundamental to the policies of the South Lakeland District Council Plan. Key drivers for these policies are the demographic trends at work in the district, the evidence of need for affordable housing set out in the strategic housing market assessment, and the needs of individual villages for additional housing of a range of costs and tenures as part of their development as communities and more sustainable places.

16.3 In order to meet the housing needs of local people, bring greater balance and mixture to the local housing market and create new opportunities for people to live and work here, to strengthen our community and the local economy the Lower Allithwaite NDP also supports the provision of full time principal residence housing in the Cartmel Electoral Division

16.4 This is new housing which has to be used as the principal residence of the household living in it but does not have the price controls that affordable housing does, or any local connection requirement.

16.5 Over the last ten years, the increase in the number of dwellings was 8% (907 in 2001, 981 in 2011), however the increase in resident population in the Parish amounted to 4% (1758 in 2001, 1831 in 2011), and the number of households increased by 5.9% (776 in 2001, 822 in 2011).

% Cartmel and Allithwaite Housing data

% Caravan or mobile 1.8

% Flat or Tenant 1.6

% Terraced 19.1

% Semi-detached 27.6

% Detached 45.5

% 2nd Homes 16.2

% Residents 83.8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Figure 4: Housing Data – Lower Allithwaite - 2011

16.6 The Parish Council consider it important to have some control over further second homes, to ensure the sustainability of existing communities and the viability and vitality of the existing villages.

16.7 Principal Residences are defined as those occupied as the residents’ sole or main residence, where the residents spend the majority of their time when not working away from home.

16.8 There is no definition for what ‘main residence’ means within council tax law. A person does not necessarily have to be physically present at an address all the time for it to be their main residence.

24

Lower Allithwaite Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft – August 2018

A: Due to the impact upon the local housing market of the continued uncontrolled growth of dwellings used for holiday accommodation (as second or holiday homes) new open market housing, excluding replacement dwellings, will only be supported in the Cartmel electoral division where there is a restriction to ensure its occupancy as a Principal Residence.

B: Sufficient guarantee must be provided of such occupancy restriction through the imposition of a planning condition or legal agreement. New unrestricted second homes will not be supported at any time.

C: The condition or obligation on new open market homes will require that they are occupied only as the primary (principal) residence of those persons entitled to occupy them. Occupiers of homes with a Principal Residence condition will be required to keep proof that they are meeting the obligation or condition and be obliged to provide this proof if/when South Lakeland District Council requests this information. Proof of Principal Residence is via verifiable evidence which could include, for example (but not limited to) residents being registered on the local electoral register and being registered for and attending local services (such as healthcare, schools etc.).

17. POLICY LANP 11 – CARAVAN AND CHALET PARKS 17.1 The growth of this type of development although considered to be non-permanent involve an infrastructure – roads, power supplies, sewage and water which significantly impact on the rural nature of the countryside.

17.2 In addition, the disproportionally large increase in population puts pressure on services such as GP surgeries.

17.3 As such new or extensions to existing developments will only be supported where:

17.4 Proposals for new static caravan sites will not be permitted. However the environmental improvement of existing static holiday caravan or chalet sites by remodelling, provision of new facilities and by landscaping will be supported provided the development is acceptable in terms of other Local Development Plan policies and meets the following criteria:

• the proposed development preserves or enhances the character and appearance of the area; and

• it can be demonstrated that any proposed increase in the number of static caravan/chalet units would preserve or enhance the landscape setting of the overall site.

17.5 The change of use of a static caravan or chalet from tourist use to residential use and the conversion of touring caravan sites to statics will not be permitted.

25

Lower Allithwaite Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft – August 2018

A: There would be no harm to the character of the countryside and they are well contained within the landscape such that they are not visually intrusive both from close by and form surrounding distant fells.

B: , Effective screening by the planting of local native species must be well established and maintained around the edges of the site where it is not contained within a landscape form. Internal planting must be provided to break up roof massing when viewed from a distant high land.

C: The layout of such units will be required to avoid a rigid pattern which would not be in keeping with the surroundings and the space between each unit must be maintained and agreed at the planning stage.

D: The design, height and colour of future units shall have regards to the surrounding landform, long distance views and landscaping and be within an agreed range of colours.

17.6 Static and touring caravan sites together with chalets and camp sites are an important source of holiday accommodation, which can be crucial to the success of the tourism industry, although such sites are often seen as being visually intrusive.

17.7 The Plan will seek to ensure that future development is permitted only where the proposal would not result in an over concentration of similar uses in the locality and where there is significant enhancement of the biodiversity of the area. The occupancy of static caravans and chalets will be restricted to holiday use and any residential use will be subject to enforcement action.

18. BUILDING A VIBRANT COMMUNITY 18.1 The community plan identified the need for good internet connections both for existing businesses and for the growing number of people working from home. Concerns were expressed about infrastructure provision within the villages. In Allithwaite there are frequent reports of low water pressure in parts of the village and in Cartmel the sewage system regularly causes problems. The recent Cartmel Township report identified the movement of traffic through the medieval street pattern in Cartmel as being a major problem.

Objectives 10,11 and 12 10. A range of local businesses thrive and are well supported by broad band connections.

11 The tourist economy grows in a way which supports and enhances the environment and does not adversely impact on traffic and parking issues.

12. Community facilities support and enhance the wellbeing of residents of all ages.

26

Lower Allithwaite Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan Pre-Submission Draft – August 2018

18.2 The CIL contribution made to the Parish is important in helping to develop improvements to highways as it is more difficult for villages to feature as a priority in any County Council Highway improvements.

18.3 Children in the villages valued having a convenient public play park however they identified the continuing need to improve the equipment.

18.4 The village play grounds are entirely run and funded by small groups of volunteers and do not receive any support from the District council. They represent a very important facility in villages where access to other facilities is limited. Larger developments in more urban areas will provide community play spaces but in villages the cumulative impact of a number of smaller developments will not deliver the any facilities.

19. POLICY LANP 12 - MAINTAINING AND ENHANCING COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE 19.1 It is clear from the consultation and engagement process that the community wish to see any new developments in the plan area integrated within the existing rural setting in ways that enhance the area rather than diminish what is distinctive about the settlements and their setting or undermine their established character. This applies whatever the specific form or purpose of any building development. This policy will apply to any and all development proposals that come forward.

A: Developers expected to provide best available technology; eg: superfast broadband, fibre optic, link to all new properties in order to support start-up businesses and people working from home.

B: Developers must show that they have considered and acted to ensure that there is no adverse impact on the infrastructure – including Utilities, Highways and Healthcare.

19.2 The sites allocated need to take account of the rural landscape that surrounds the neighbourhood plan area and be able to relate well to the existing settlement pattern. Through careful design and appropriate landscaping, development should be able to be accommodated without any significant adverse landscape or visual effects.

19.3 The design of new housing development schemes, will play a vital part in maintaining the local distinctiveness of Lower Allithwaite. This extends to the qualities of buildings, planting and topography in a locality that defines its character.

27

Appendix 1 National Planning Policy Framework

APPENDIX 1 NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK – JULY 2018

Introduction The National Planning Policy Framework sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied.1 It sets out the Government’s requirements for the planning system only to the extent that it is relevant, proportionate and necessary to do so. It provides a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans, which reflect the needs and priorities of their communities.

Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan,2 unless material considerations indicate otherwise.3 The National Planning Policy Framework must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans and is a material consideration in planning decisions.4 Planning policies and decisions must reflect and where appropriate promote relevant EU obligations and statutory requirements.

This Framework does not contain specific policies for nationally significant infrastructure projects for which particular considerations apply. These are determined in accordance with the decision- making framework set out in the Planning Act 2008 and relevant national policy statements for major infrastructure, as well as any other matters that are considered both important and relevant (which may include the National Planning Policy Framework). National policy statements form part of the overall framework of national planning policy and are a material consideration in decisions on planning applications.

This Framework should be read in conjunction with the Government’s planning policy for traveller sites. Local planning authorities preparing plans for and taking decisions on travellers’ sites should also have regard to the policies in this Framework so far as relevant.

This Framework does not contain specific waste policies, since national waste planning policy will be published as part of the National Waste Management Plan for England.5 However, local authorities preparing waste plans and taking decisions on waste applications should have regard to policies in this Framework so far as relevant.

The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. The policies in paragraphs 18 to 219, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice for the planning system.

There are three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental. These dimensions give rise to the need for the planning system to perform a number of roles:

• an economic role – contributing to building a strong, responsive and economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;

• a social role – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being; and

28

Appendix 1 National Planning Policy Framework

• an environmental role – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.

These roles should not be undertaken in isolation, because they are mutually dependent. Economic growth can secure higher social and environmental standards, and well-designed buildings and places can improve the lives of people and communities. Therefore, to achieve sustainable development, economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system. The planning system should play an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions.

Pursuing sustainable development involves seeking positive improvements in the quality of the built, natural and historic environment, as well as in people’s quality of life, including (but not limited to):

• making it easier for jobs to be created in cities, towns and villages; • moving from a net loss of bio-diversity to achieving net gains for nature;6 • replacing poor design with better design; • improving the conditions in which people live, work, travel and take leisure; and • widening the choice of high quality homes.

Plans and decisions need to take local circumstances into account, so that they respond to the different opportunities for achieving sustainable development in different areas.

In rural areas, planning policies and decisions should be responsive to local circumstances and support housing developments that reflect local needs. Local planning authorities should support opportunities to bring forward rural exception sites that will provide affordable housing to meet identified local needs and consider whether allowing some market housing on these sites would help to facilitate this.

To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.

Access to a network of high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and physical activity is important for the health and well-being of communities. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the need for open space, sport and recreation facilities (including quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses) and opportunities for new provision. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sport and recreational provision is needed, which plans should then seek to accommodate

The designation of land as Local Green Space through local and neighbourhood plans allows communities to identify and protect green areas of particular importance to them. Designating land as Local Green Space should be consistent with the local planning of sustainable development and complement investment in sufficient homes, jobs and other essential services. Local Green Spaces should only be designated when a plan is prepared or updated and be capable of enduring beyond the end of the plan period.

29

Appendix 1 National Planning Policy Framework

Transport issues should be considered from the earliest stages of plan-making and development proposals, so that:

• the potential impacts of development on transport networks can be addressed;

• opportunities from existing or proposed transport infrastructure, and changing transport technology and usage, are realised – for example in relation to the scale, location or density of development that can be accommodated;

• opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport use are identified and pursued;

• the environmental impacts of traffic and transport infrastructure can be identified, assessed and taken into account – including appropriate opportunities for avoiding and mitigating any adverse effects, and for net environmental gains; and

• patterns of movement, streets, parking and other transport considerations are integral to the design of schemes and contribute to making high quality places.

Advanced, high quality and reliable communications infrastructure is essential for economic growth and social well-being. Planning policies and decisions should support the expansion of electronic communications networks, including next generation mobile technology (such as 5G) and full fibre broadband connections. Policies should set out how high quality digital infrastructure, providing access to services from a range of providers, is expected to be delivered and upgraded over time; and should prioritise full fibre connections to existing and new developments (as these connections will, in almost all cases, provide the optimum solution).

To provide maximum clarity about design expectations at an early stage, plans or supplementary planning documents should use visual tools such as design guides and codes. These provide a framework for creating distinctive places, with a consistent and high quality standard of design. However their level of detail and degree of prescription should be tailored to the circumstances in each place and should allow a suitable degree of variety where this would be justified.

The planning system should support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change. It should help to: shape places in ways that contribute to radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimise vulnerability and improve resilience; encourage the reuse of existing resources, including the conversion of existing buildings; and support renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure.

To protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity, plans should:

• Identify, map and safeguard components of local wildlife-rich habitats and wider ecological networks, including the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites of importance for biodiversity; wildlife corridors and stepping stones that connect them; and areas identified by national and local partnerships for habitat management, enhancement, restoration or creation; and

• promote the conservation, restoration and enhancement of priority habitats, ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species; and identify and pursue opportunities for securing measurable net gains for biodiversity.

30

Appendix 1 National Planning Policy Framework

Heritage assets range from sites and buildings of local historic value to those of the highest significance, such as World Heritage Sites which are internationally recognised to be of Outstanding Universal Value61. These assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of existing and future generations.

Plans should set out a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, including heritage assets most at risk through neglect, decay or other threats.

The policies in this Framework are material considerations which should be take into account in dealing with applications from the day of its publication. Plans may also need to be revised to reflect policy changes which this replacement Framework has made. This should be progressed as quickly as possible, either through a partial revision or by preparing a new plan.

However, existing policies should not be considered out-of-date simply because they were adopted or made prior to the publication of this Framework. Due weight should be given to them, according to their degree of consistency with this Framework (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given).

The policies in the previous Framework will apply for the purpose of examining plans, where those plans are submitted on or before 24 January 2019. Where such plans are withdrawn or otherwise do not proceed to become part of the development plan, the policies contained in this Framework will apply to any subsequent plan produced for the area concerned.

The full document, with amendments, can be viewed at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/

31

Appendix 2 SLDC Planning Policies (DPD)

APPENDIX 2 SOUTH LAKELAND LOCAL PLAN – STRATEGIC AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES

The Neighbourhood Plan sets out how we will meet three objectives:

• to provide homes to meet needs; • to create opportunities for economic growth; • to enhance our environment.

The plan sets out our vision and a framework for the future development of our parish outside the National Parks. It looks at needs and opportunities in relation to housing, the economy, community facilities and infrastructure. It is also used for safeguarding the environment, adapting to climate change and securing good design. Further details from the SLDC Development Plan can be viewed by accessing: https://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/planning-and-building.

South Lakeland’s superb natural setting shapes the district’s image and plays a major role in its development, making it a very attractive location for residents and visitors alike. However, while the district can offer a quality of life that is second to none, it does experience problems common to many rural areas. There is a need to deliver more balanced communities and reduce inequality, including reducing dependency on high-level services and jobs in towns outside the district, increasing provision of affordable housing and developing and maintaining high-quality modern sustainable transport networks. The challenge is to secure a sustainable level and pattern of development that creates balanced communities and meets local needs whilst protecting the environment that makes the district special.

The Core Strategy document sets out the development strategy for South Lakeland outside the National Park areas up to 2025. It is a long-term plan. It draws together strategies of the council and other organisations whose activities have implications for the development and use of land. It puts the aspirations of the Sustainable Community Strategy into effect – seeking to create a sustainable district that is the best possible place to live, work and visit.

The Core Strategy is a document which forms part of the South Lakeland Local Development Framework (LDF). The LDF is a series of documents which will eventually replace the South Lakeland Local Plan that was adopted in 1997 and the Alterations to the Local Plan adopted in 2006. The LDF will consider how the District (outside the two National Parks) will develop over the next fifteen years and will form part of the statutory Development Plan for the District.

The Core Strategy does not set out site-specific proposals or allocations; rather it looks at the broad locations for delivering new development such as for housing, employment, transport, retail, public services etc.

The delivery of the Core Strategy will require a partnership approach. It involves other organisations and groups who will work within the framework of their own strategies and plans as well as the spatial plan for the District – the LDF.

Evidence of how well the policies in the Core Strategy are being achieved against clear targets set out within the Monitoring and Implementation Framework is highlighted in the Annual Monitoring Report. The Core Strategy has resulted in some minor changes needing to be made to the 2006 Local Plan Proposals Map.

32

Appendix 2 SLDC Planning Policies (DPD)

These changes relate to the inclusion of an inset map showing the boundary of the Canal Head Area Action Plan as well as the removal of settlement boundaries relating to those settlements not identified as a Principal, Key or Local Service Centre. Further amendments to the Proposals Map will be required when other Development Plan Documents are published, primarily the Allocations of Land DPD.

General Requirements for all development - To maintain, protect and promote the district’s environmental, economic, social and historic qualities, safeguard local amenity and ensure its sustainability.

All development should be of a satisfactory standard in terms of securing high quality sustainable design, providing acceptable levels of amenity for existing and new occupants and users of any development, as well as neighbouring and future occupants. Amenity could be described as the overall pleasantness of any environment taking account of factors such as levels of light, privacy, noise and other nuisances.

Development should seek to enhance its surroundings, create sustainable, safe and healthy environments and provide for the necessary essential infrastructure needs it may generate. By doing so, new developments will help maintain, protect and promote the district’s environmental, economic, historic and social qualities.

Adequate Infrastructure Developments must be supported by adequate infrastructure required to support the needs it may generate. Such infrastructure will most likely include major services such as electricity and water supply, and may include others such as roads, school and health facilities, and this must be provided where existing infrastructure does not have adequate capacity to support needs generated by the development.

Design – New Developments The design of new development has a strong influence on the character and qualities of the district and its various settlements. Proposals should safeguard and where possible enhance local characteristics and distinctiveness. SLDC policies seek to ensure the character and qualities of the district as a whole and its various settlements is maintained and protected by requiring new developments to demonstrate where relevant they are in accordance with the set of design principles. New developments should promote designs and layouts that consider the needs of all who may use and be affected by the development, one that works for all that everyone can use and doesn’t prejudice the needs of one individual over another.

Development proposals will safeguard and, where appropriate, enhance all heritage assets and their settings, in a manner that is appropriate to their particular significance.

Developments – Conservation Areas Development proposals affecting, or within the setting of a Conservation Area will be expected to preserve and enhance its special character and appearance. Any proposals for development and alterations will need to demonstrate that they relate positively to the architectural or historic interest of its buildings, its spatial and broader townscape character, street pattern, any open spaces, important views within, into or out of the Area, and, where appropriate, its setting.

33

Appendix 2 SLDC Planning Policies (DPD)

Green and Open Spaces Green infrastructure incorporates open spaces, parks, playing fields, private gardens, allotments, green corridors, agricultural fields, hedges, trees, woodland, street planting, green roofs and walls, rivers, streams, ponds, wetlands and all other such features, regardless of their ownership, condition or size. Green and blue infrastructure is multifunctional and has a wide range of benefits including supporting: the provision of clean air and water; health and wellbeing; climate change mitigation and adaption and natural water and flood risk management. They also contribute to conserving and enhancing landscape character and visual amenity as well as having positive impacts on the economy.

Footpaths, Rights of Way Public rights of way, and other routes providing for safe, attractive pedestrian and cycle access, facilitate sustainable patterns of movement between and within the open countryside and urban areas of the district. They are key to the promotion of active travel and contribute to the district’s access and green infrastructure network. It is therefore important such routes are maintained and protected and where possible opportunities for their enhancement and additional links to them are realised.

Flooding and Sewage Inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk (from all sources) taking account of climate change and vulnerability of future uses to flood risk, but where development is necessary, making it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere. Where necessary a sequential test/ the exception test will be applied, in accordance with national planning policy.

Applicants at the earliest opportunities should engage with the local sewerage provider to ensure the effective disposal and treatment of foul water. A foul sewerage assessment will need to be submitted where development involves either the provision of new non-mains drainage or the use of existing non-mains drainage.

Broadband New build development too frequently suffers from delays in the installation of internet infrastructure, and poor, unreliable or low speed connectivity. At a time when home working is increasing in popularity and enabling more sustainable travel behaviours, as well as the growing importance of high quality digital infrastructure for economic growth, it is vital that new development in South Lakeland is properly connected to the digital world. Recent survey work undertaken by SLDC has revealed the importance of high speed broadband connections to people buying new homes, with a general expectation that new homes should be provided with superfast broadband.

Parking Parking Standards All developments should have acceptable levels of car, motorcycle and bicycle parking in accordance with the Highways Authority, Cumbria County Council published guidelines and any other published local guidelines/standards. Levels of parking provision for any development will be considered on a case by case basis in consultation with the Highways Authority using these guidelines which will be applied flexibly taking into account the following factors:

• type, mix and use of development; • location; • accessibility of development; • availability of and opportunities for public transport; • local car ownership levels; • dominant effect of the car on the appearance and function of a development including visual impact; • availability and number of parking permits within the locality; 34

Appendix 2 SLDC Planning Policies (DPD)

• availability of public car parking space in the vicinity; • encouraging the use of alternative means of travel; • impact on the road network; • extent of on-street parking in the vicinity; and • encouragement of the use of low emission vehicles.

In areas suffering from significant on-street parking problems, greater levels of provision above those set out in the guidelines will be sought. Where not relevant or considered unachievable alternative measures to address the issue will be required.

Community Facilities Community facilities are vital in delivering sustainable communities. They are defined as village halls, places of worship, community centres, local shops, public houses, education establishments, libraries, indoor/outdoor sports buildings, cultural and health buildings.

The loss of such facilities particularly in rural communities can result in reducing a community’s ability to meet its day-to-day needs.

This can result in people travelling larger distances to such facilities disadvantaging the less mobile in particular and overall community wellbeing. National Planning Policy recognises the need for plans to safeguard against the loss of valued community facilities.

Caravan and Camping Although the pattern of demand for camping and camping holidays has fluctuated over the past two decades, there are an increasing number of caravans in use, both static and touring. The last decade has also seen new forms of development as the tourism market has responded to demand by widening the range/type of development and increasing the quality of the offer; such as chalets, log cabins, camping pods and yurts.

There is particular development pressure for extensions to existing sites and in some instances, to replace static caravans with chalets or log cabins.

Within the District, out-with the AONB, caravan site development is mainly concentrated towards the coast - the . In the Cartmel Peninsula alone, there are more than ten caravan sites.

Equestrian Activities Horse riding and keeping are popular activities attracting a wide range of people as well as being an intrinsic part of rural life; it can positively contribute to health and wellbeing. The scale of horse related development, potentially, can range from small scale; a single field shelter to relatively large scale commercial development; such as racing stables, a large indoor arena, or a riding centre. There is an existing racing stable in Cartmel and there are a few riding centres within the South Lakeland Local Planning Authority Area (LPA).

The LPA has seen an increase (over the last few years) in the number of proposals for equestrian development; mostly comprising private domestic planning applications for either stables, field shelters or outdoor arena. The Council recognises that equine related development contributes towards the provision of recreational opportunities and the diversification of the rural economy.

35

Appendix 2 SLDC Planning Policies (DPD)

One of the core principles of the planning system, as stated in the National Planning Policy Framework is to support the transition to a low carbon future and secure mitigation and adaptation to climate change. South Lakeland and Cumbria more widely has abundant natural resources for renewable energy, and these opportunities should be maximised and carefully balanced with the need to protect the district and county’s special landscape qualities and valued natural environment.

The full document, with amendments, can be viewed at: https://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/south- lakeland.

36

Appendix 3 Cartmel Conservation Design Guide

APPENDIX 3 CARTMEL CONSERVATION AREA DESIGN GUIDANCE

1. Conservation Areas are ‘’areas of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance’’ (Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act, 1990.

2. Local authorities are advised to review their Conservation Areas from time to time and to ensure that they have up to date character appraisals, which set out their special interest and provide the basis for development control and enhancement proposals. In addition, English Heritage advises that:

‘it is essential for local authorities to regularly re-evaluate and confirm the importance of the conservation areas in their districts, to be clear about the special interest which it is sought to preserve or enhance in those areas, and to adopt a firm framework for their management in order to achieve this.’ (Conservation Area Practice, English Heritage, 1995, p 4.1).

3. The Cartmel Conservation Area was designated in 1969 by the County Council, with the agreement of North Lonsdale Rural District Council, but no subsequent reviews of the area have been undertaken since that time. This draft character appraisal has been prepared by Graham Darlington, Conservation Officer in Development Strategy of South Lakeland District Council, who are the local planning authority for the area. This work was undertaken as part of a strategic review of those conservations areas within the district.

4. The fieldwork/spatial analysis for the area appraisal were undertaken between April and June 2008, following a Place Detectives public participation that took place in October 2007, at which 120 people attended and provided information which has been incorporated into this appraisal document. This first consultation draft was completed in July 2008.

5. Cartmel was historically situated in the historic county of Lancashire within the Furness peninsular that was popularly known as ‘Lancashire beyond the Sands’. It is now located within the modern county of Cumbria and the local government district of South Lakeland and is a medium sized village, the civil parish of which had a resident population of 1,783 in 2003. Located 21km south west of Kendal, over 100 km from the county town of , the nearest small town is Grange over Sands, a secondary retail centre some 5km to the south east.

6. The current conservation area includes not only the two separate built up areas that form the settlement but also the immediate landscape setting around the village to the north, south, and west, as well as a narrow corridor of meadow land which separates the two discrete areas.

7. The full document, with amendments, can be viewed at: https://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/conservation/conservation-areas.

37

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities

APPENDIX 4 LOWER ALLITHWAITE PLANNING OPPORTUNITIES

1. Introduction 1.1 Lower Allithwaite Parish Council took an active part in the South Lakeland Local Plan - Land Allocation process. This enabled them to take an early view on what was valued in each village and how developments might contribute.

1.2 In Allithwaite rather than two large allocations, a number of smaller ones were identified. The key objectives were to maintain the open aspects of Allithwaite with its magnificent views in all directions and to help improve pedestrian links within the village particularly along the B5277 which currently divides the village.

1.3 In Cartmel the parish was unable to identify suitable land to fulfill its ambition to create a number of smaller developments. It is hoped that careful planning can mitigate the impact that the large allocated site will have on the village.

1.4 Subsequently the village completed a Community Plan adopted 2013 and an action plan to deliver the priorities – further consultations have taken place including Footpaths in Allithwaite ‘Paths for Communities Bid’ July 2013, The Cartmel Township Initiative adopted 2015 and Allithwaite Community orchard consultation 2014. The Parish also has an Active travel group which is looking to improve footpath links and where possible develop new routes. The protection of country lanes as essential amenity assets for pedestrians and cyclist as well as environmental importance is seen as vital.

2. Settlements in their settings

a. Allithwaite is a south facing village attractively sited on low hills that overlook Morecambe Bay. There are also amazing views to the North to the lake District Fells. The village grew in the 19th Century from a group of isolated farmer / fishing cottages and is now centered around the Church and school both built by the then local owner of Boarbank Hall. There is one main street – Church road which joins the B5277 road via The Square.

There are many popular walks in the countryside around the village which include two SSI’s one at Humphrey Head and the other at Wartbarrow.

b. Buildings of note include: Boarbank hall, The church, The School, Barn Hey farm, Allithwaite Lodge and Wraysholme tower.

c. Views of importance include: From Cartmel road at village entrance towards Wartbarrow. From the top of Holme Lane towards the church. From Boarbank Lane towards the Church. From the bottom of Holme lane towards Morecambe Bay. From Church road down towards Morcambe bay. From Templand gate towards the lake district fells.

d. Valued landscapes and open spaces: Drumlin landscape adjacent to Templand park. Field pattern between Cartmel road and view to Wartbarrow. 38

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities

The parish field. The large field between the B5277 road and Jack Hill. The Quarry.

e. Settlement pattern/ character: Allithwaite was described by a development planning officer as ‘something of an Octopus’ – away from the central Church road fingers of development have traditionally pushed out into the surrounding countryside. This has resulted in the highly valued views into and out of the village. Recent developments have shown little respect for this and produce a discordant note in the overall layout pattern of the village.

f. Cartmel is situated in the flood zone of the river Eea and its tributary becks. It includes an older conservation area of mainly Georgian properties set within a medieval street pattern. The Grade 1 listed Priory and the Race course are both major attractions as are the many pubs, hotels, restaurants, cafes and shops. It is an important employment zone but most houses are second homes or holiday lets. Outside this central area are various newer developments from different decades of the 20th Century which in the past have made little attempt to respond to the neighbouring conservation area.

g. Buildings of note: There are many of note within the conservation area – of particular mention are the Priory, the gatehouse, the old village lock up, and the old grammar school.

h. Views of importance: Towards the Priory church from Headless Cross, the racecourse, Aynesome road, Allithwaite road, Priest lane and Barngarth.

i. Valued landscape and open spaces: The fields around the Priory. The drumlins to the west of Headless close The race course The wet lands upstream of Cartmel on the River Eea

j. Settlement Pattern: Cartmel is a fairly nuclear village with the conservation area based on a Medieval street pattern. Restrictive access to the north of the village has resulted in more recent developments being located to the east and south.

3. Facilities / Services

a. Allithwaite:

Primary school and nursery Church Children’s play ground Community orchard and apiary Parish Allotments Community playing fields including bowling, football, pump cycle track, tennis courts. Community Hall – supporting a wide range of clubs, and classes Charity shop 39

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities

Post office and store Village institute Garage Wood yard Physiotherapist Bed and breakfast facilities Two nursing homes at the Old Vicarage and Boarbank Hall The Village Pub south on the B5277 Caravan parks

b. Cartmel:

Primary School Secondary school Montessori Priory Church Bed and Breakfast facilities (many) Hotels / guest houses 2 Public Houses 4 Specialist wine, and cheese shops Gift shops 6 General food shops 2 Cafes 4 Restaurants 2 Beauticians Hairdressers 2 Brewery Architects Doctors and Medical center Play ground Race course – car parking, cycle hire, Segway hire, Scout hut, archery, football and cricket pitch Village Hall used by a variety of clubs and classes Allotments Caravan park

4. Key Objectives 4.1 The key objectives are fully identified in the community plan – those of relevance and importance to planning include

4.2 Raise awareness of Cartmel’s conservation area and protect the built environment

4.3 Seek to protect green spaces within the villages and surrounding countryside from inappropriate developments

4.4 Protect and enhance existing levels of access to the local countryside.

4.5 Review parking provision for residents, businesses and visitors in order to reduce the congestion caused by inappropriate parking in villages, improve traffic flow and pedestrian safety.

40

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities

4.6 Promote safer use of the road system generally and in particular easier and safer pedestrian and cycling access both within and between villages – make pedestrian and cycle routes safer and more enjoyable – improve the extent and quality of disabled access – reduce the danger of speeding vehicles on country roads and lanes.

4.7 Ensure housing stock meets local affordable needs and enables local people of all ages to continue to reside within the local area.

4.8 Ensure new housing developments are small scale and meet the aspirations of low density and appropriate design.

5. Future Developments 5.1 Key considerations should include:

a. Highest standards of design which in small scale developments should be non standard designs providing the varied street scenes which are typical of traditional village growth.

b. In the Lower Allithwaite parish we feel that the first consideration should be to take every opportunity to respect the outlook of existing properties.

c. Developments must be well connected to the village.

d. Sympathetic road designs should take consideration of existing roads.

e. In Cartmel design and layout should reflect its close proximity to the conservation area.

f. Affordable houses should provide variety and include 1, 2 and 3 bedroomed properties – (provision of all one type is unlikely to meet the needs of our local residents at any one point in time)

g. Dark Skies -Both villages have very restricted street lighting – and therefore benefit from dark skies. Developments should respect this and keep lighting to the very lowest levels.

h. In Cartmel some existing street lighting fail to respect their proximity to a conservation area and should be improved.

i. Speeding traffic and Village entrances – both villages suffer from speeding traffic through the 30 mph zones.

j. Allithwaite is particularly dangerous with very few footpaths which often end at dangerous points – the parish council is currently engaged in trying to develop traffic slowing measures. Regular physical traffic slowing measures are seen as essential as well as making provision for pedestrians.

k. Cartmel – the principle access road passes through the middle of the primary school and past the secondary school – 20 when lights flashing are in place but traffic slowing would also physically restrict the speed of traffic.

l. Councillors are also undertaking speed gun training and the parish is seeking to purchase speed monitoring devices. 41

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities

m. Creating direct pedestrian links from new developments to the village center is seen as essential – where possible developments should contribute to improvements to the village pedestrian /cycle routes. Developments should not be allowed to become barriers to any potential new routes. (even if they are not immediately deliverable)

6. Infrastructure Plans

a. Allithwaite: Quarry nature reserve development Allithwaite to Grange via the Quarry new pedestrian route Traffic calming measures along the B5277 Improved pedestrian routes on the B5277 Improved footpaths along Church road Parking issues on Church road and The Square. New pedestrian / cycle route linking the village Pub and the center of the village. Support for Community center and playing fields Support for children’s play ground Support for Community Orchard and allotments

b. Cartmel: The Cartmel Township Initiative has identified a number of infrastructure improvements aimed at improving vehicle and pedestrian circulations, improving signage, and protecting heritage assets and supporting businesses.

Improving disabled access – the Active travel groups would like to provide disabled access routes from Cartmel car park to Holker Hall and also from Allithwaite to Humphrey Head.

7. Land Allocations

Allithwaite:

a. Top of Holme Lane – north west of B5277 6 properties to complete Holme Lane linear development Must reflect the style and design of Holme lane ie: front onto the B5277 – small front gardens with front gates linking directly to village center.

Roof detail could mirror that of existing properties.

The first house could be double fronted in order to present a strong statement at the village entrance.

b. Jack Hill – South east of B5277 21 properties Preferred access as indicted by the inspection process to be onto Holme Lane – if this proves impossible then access onto Jack Hill should be at or above the entrance to Woodlands.

Jack Hill, with its ancient hedges must be protected from additional traffic as a valuable leisure resource and wild life corridor. (Cumbria coastal way and Morecambe Bay cycle route.)

42

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities

There is a danger that this development be isolated and face away from village facilities – a direct pedestrian / cycle route through the development to cross Holme Lane at a suitable point around the Homestead is seen as essential.

The roof heights of properties should respect the existing homes on Jack Hill (bungalows) and The Ridge way. c. Almond Bank – (sometimes referred to as lane End) 11 properties Safe vehicle and pedestrian access is vital – recommendations were made in the AECOM report – pedestrian routes on the B road need substantial improvement.

A potential route across the fields behind the development for pedestrian and cyclists was identified as a priority to link the pub and surrounding houses to village facilities. Any development must not preclude this route being brought forward at some future date.

Careful siting of the houses so that their raised position does not have an overbearing impact on homes on the lower side of the B5277. The development officer suggested setting them back a little but it is important that they front face the B road unless there was seen to be clear design advantages for anything else. Respecting the outlook of nearby properties is also important particularly Patch Cottage. d. Barn Hey 30 properties Traffic management at the village entrance and complete respect for the scale and nature of Locker Lane are essential.

Speeding traffic approaching the narrows is a well documented problem. Pedestrian routes through the narrows are extremely dangerous. The existing properties on or below the narrows all have problems parking vehicles and accessing the highway.

During the land allocation a pedestrian route from the development up to the corner of Boarbank lane was agreed ( it was also the subject of an unsuccessful P4C bid) – it is noted that the existing land owner also has permission for two properties in the orchard of Barn Hey – if a pedestrian link could be provided here it would mean that pedestrians could avoid walking through the narrows.

The nature of the narrow Locker lane with is well established hedges small or non existing verges should be protected from any increase in traffic – It is increasingly used as a cut through by SATNAV users and there has been damage to verges where they exist and increased danger to pedestrians and cyclists.

Careful alignment of homes with those nearest the road facing onto the road and good use of solar gain from this south facing site are considered important. The rear outlook of the existing properties needs special consideration. e. Land between Green Lane and Vicarage lane 22 properties – given the constraint on this site it is felt this is too many.

A village green type feature is suggested for the triangle of land where Vicarage lane, and Green lane meet Boarbank lane. 43

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities

The view from this point up to the church must also be protected and a church yard extension is required for the area nearest the existing church yard. (this could become allotments or just a green open space depending on local need until required for the churchyard)

A successful development would be one which settles into the village land scape and does not appear to be a ‘new’ housing estate stuck in the middle of the village. To this end careful thought needs to be given to entrances, homes facing the existing lanes and access roads which respond well to the country lane nature of the existing lanes.

Great care should be taken to respect the bungalows on Green lane so that new properties do not dominate. One property adjacent to the site and the church yard will loose its main outlook and careful consideration should be given to mitigating this.

The wall on the Vicarage Lane side is an important feature.

Traffic speeding along Vicarage Lane is a well reported problem and any traffic improvements should look to slow traffic.

There are some parking issues on Green Lane but parked vehicles do act to slow traffic.

Cartmel: a. Old Stable yard 15 properties This site is within the conservation area and in particular the old monastic boundary wall.

During the Cartmel Township Initiative consultations a potential pedestrian route through the site providing a link to Priest Lane was highlighted.

It could aid the development of this site and vehicle movements through the village if it was possible to make this a mixed use pedestrian / vehicle route which could become part of a one way system – in through the village and around the village shop corner and out via this new route and Priest lane. b. Haggs Lane 39 properties. This allocation is considered far too large and out of character for the village – its success will depend on the careful consideration of proximity to the conservation area, the setting of the surrounding woods and the highest quality layout and design.

Creating a suitable and safe access to the site is important – it is suggested by AECOM that a mini round about is used – this would act to slow traffic coming down Haggs Lane.

Great importance should be given to the outlook of existing properties on Haggs Lane and in particular to the Quaker Meeting House where an important part of their worship includes silence.

Footpaths on Haggs Lane are poor and intermittent – a direct pedestrian access at the bottom of the site would be an important connection to the village. If not possible to deliver straight 44

Appendix 4 Lower Allithwaite Planning Opportunities away a suitable potential access point should be considered and protected from development.

An improved pedestrian access from the site to Hesketh wood would also take pedestrians away from a dangerous crossing into Hesketh wood further up Haggs Lane. The 30mph limit should be moved up Haggs Lane and consideration given to speed restrictions or intelligent road markings up Haggs Lane to slow traffic and improve pedestrian movements.

There is a need for an ecological barrier between the development and Hesketh Wood.

Flooding is an important issue – the field currently act as a water store – the secondary school has had problems with drainage on their sports fields and it is vital that extremely robust drainage systems are engineered for this site.

45

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

APPENDIX 5 LOWER ALLITHWAITE COMMUNITY PLAN - 2013

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Community Plan is the result of the most ambitious consultation exercise undertaken by the Parish Council in decades. As its title suggests, the community as a whole owns the Plan, even if the Parish Council launched the idea.

Though it is a snapshot of the public’s attitudes, values and concerns, many of the Plan’s aspirations have been long-standing ones. The intention is that the comprehensive process which produced the Plan has added value to its findings, helping persuade our key partners to support the parish’s prime objectives.

There are high levels of satisfaction with living in the area. The community is clear about what it values here. The local countryside should be preserved from intrusions such as significant wind farm development. The villages should not become even more commercialised. The community needs to remain vibrant with young families continuing to live here.

Issues to be addressed include road traffic, safety and parking, gritting of roads and pavements, public transport provision and the quality of broadband. The need to attract visitors is well understood and local events are popular, but they should not increase beyond their current level.

There is strong support for affordable housing and local occupancy, particularly for people connected with parish, but any housing development should be in keeping with the locality and small scale.

Our Action Plan tries to steer a sensible course between the many competing demands of the locality and its people. It is designed to span roughly a five year period. Clearly everything cannot be achieved overnight. Indeed there may be some intransigent problems which remain with us in 2018, though hopefully not too many. Progress will be systematically monitored through an annual review. Resources at local level will be allocated to help drive things forward. And we hope that individuals who have the local quality of life at heart will volunteer to join us to help make things happen – and to share the sense of achievement when they succeed.

I invite you to spend some time looking through your Community Plan. At its heart is the Action Plan, the working document which is the outcome of all the consultation which has taken place. Do especially read this, so that you can see where we are planning to go and how we aim to get there.

On behalf of the Parish Council, my thanks to all those who have responded during the consultation exercises. I hope you feel that, so far, your involvement has been worthwhile.

David Huggett Chairman, Lower Allithwaite Parish Council June 2013

46

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

INTRODUCTION Lower Allithwaite Parish forms a rough arc midway across the Cartmel peninsula, which lies to the south of the A590 in south Cumbria. It is located between the Lake District National Park and Morecambe Bay. The parish comprises the villages of Allithwaite and Cartmel with surrounding rural areas. It has 907 households and a population of approximately 1,758. The Core Strategy, which underpins South Lakeland District Council’s Local Development Framework, identifies Allithwaite and Cartmel as local service centres. They are situated in close proximity to the resort of Grange-over-Sands, a key service centre.

The area’s transport links include a railway station at Grange, bus services to the local towns and the M6 approximately 15 miles away. Grange offers a range of shops, while the larger towns of Kendal and Barrow-in-Furness can be reached within 30 to 45 minutes drive.

A large proportion of Cartmel village is situated within high probability flood risk land relating to the River Eea and minor tributaries.

The traditional economy of the area has been mainly agricultural with some small businesses. Tourism now plays a major role and there are consequently numerous related accommodation, catering and retail businesses in the parish.

Cartmel is renowned for its historic priory and race meetings and the valley as a whole enjoys unspoilt views extending as far as the Lake District fells to north and west. The village’s rich built heritage is reflected in its conservation area status. The District Council’s Core Strategy aims to ‘secure the preservation and enhancement of the very distinctive character and appearance of Cartmel village and ensure that its characteristic landscape setting is protected from harmful development’.

Holker Hall, located in the neighbouring parish, owns a significant proportion of the land locally including various farms, woodland and Cartmel Park (the racecourse, situated on the edge of Cartmel village). Over recent years Holker Estates has extended the number and range of events held at the racecourse.

Allithwaite is a south-facing village attractively sited on low hills that overlook Morecambe Bay. The village is less dependent on tourism as a community, though it has features of interest such as Boarbank Hall and walking in the area is a popular leisure activity. Nearby large scale events do have an impact on the locality. The village has continually grown in size over the last fifty years and has more households than Cartmel. While it has fewer historic properties, the nature of its physical development nevertheless presents its own challenges to its residents.

Changes in the pattern of the parish’s population over the last 30 years have seen an increasing number of people moving from outside the area to live here, some of them commuting to employment and many of them retired or second home owners. In Cartmel particularly more and more homes are being bought for use as holiday lets or overnight accommodation linked with local eating establishments.

The number of permanent static vans and chalets in year round holiday parks has also increased. 47

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

The area’s popularity with visitors has had a significant impact on the market value of local 4 housing and therefore on the availability of affordable homes for local residents .

The Core Strategy has set a target that 35% of new dwellings in the area are affordable.

Despite increasing numbers of non-main residences, both villages still enjoy a thriving community life. While some leisure activities tend to be focused on Cartmel, with its range of eating establishments, the Priory, park and village hall, Allithwaite has its own sports field, community centre and institute (built in the mid-nineteenth century as a place of education), all of which provide venues for a wide range of clubs and social events. Both villages have shops and post office facilities. They both have successful primary schools and Cartmel has an 11-16 comprehensive school, to which pupils travel from a wide catchment area. Cartmel also has a doctors’ surgery.

BACKGROUND Over the years a number of snapshots have been taken of life in the parish to identify issues of greatest concern to local residents. In 1993, based on an extensive consultation exercise, Lower Allithwaite Parish Council published Village Appraisals for both Allithwaite and Cartmel. In 2009 a Parish Statement was produced, setting out the public’s most important priorities for action.

Government policy has been to encourage Parish Councils around the country to develop fully fledged Parish Plans. Often known as community led plans these were to be ‘owned’ by the community and intended to help Parish Councils focus on agreed local priorities. The 2009 Statement was a simplified version of such a plan. While it provided a useful framework for Parish Council priorities, it was seen as a holding operation pending the drawing up of a fully comprehensive plan.

In October 2010 the Parish Council set up a Community Plan group to move this idea forward. The group consisted of Parish Councillors and members of the public who for the most part represented particular community groups or interests. Informal consultation exercises were undertaken with the local community throughout the following year5, resulting in an exhaustive compilation of issues. These in due course formed the basis of a detailed questionnaire for every household in the parish.

The questionnaire was distributed door to door and made available online late spring 2012. This was the process by which public opinion across the full range of local issues could be both identified and quantified. Much detailed analysis has followed, together with further public consultation at the action planning stage. This present Community Plan is the outcome.

THE NEXT STEPS Having adopted this Community Plan, Lower Allithwaite Parish Council is committed to promoting and developing the aims, objectives and actions outlined in the Action Plan. It will take measures to manage its budget and resources in the delivery of the Plan and will keep residents informed about the progress made. The Action Plan provides a transparent framework which will enable regular monitoring to take place.

48

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

While the Parish Council will have the overall management and control of the delivery of the Plan, it will seek the support of various groups in the community to deliver different aspects of it. The Council will also need to commission some new groups. It is suggested that these should be:

• Allithwaite Community Group • an Active Travel group • a Countryside group • the Cartmel Townscape Initiative.

A number of members of the public have already volunteered their services to support the Action Plan in some capacity. The Parish Council intends to follow up such offers as well as further canvassing local people to ensure the viability of each group.

The Parish Council will provide a clear brief which outlines the delegated powers of these groups, the timescale within which it will work and the success criteria which will be applied. Where groups exist already the Parish Council will similarly define its expectation in negotiation with them.

All groups will be expected to report back to the Parish Council on a regular basis as well as producing a summary statement of progress for the Annual Parish Meeting.

SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS 284 questionnaires were completed. 64% of respondents were aged 51 or over. 69% had lived in the area for at least 11 years. Given the length of the questionnaire some people did not answer all questions.

Clearly there were high levels of satisfaction with living in this area. Time and again respondents commented on the quality of the countryside, its scenery and its peace and quiet. Equally they valued the nature of the community itself and the quality of village life including its relatively crime free nature.

The most frequently voiced hope for the future was that the area and the respondent’s village would stay very much the same. Where change was necessary, it should be for such things as improvements in parking and some small scale provision of affordable homes for local families. The local countryside should be preserved from intrusions such as significant wind farm development and the villages should not become more commercialised than they are. The community needed to remain vibrant with young families continuing to live here.

On the whole respondents appreciated how their village looked and how its buildings were cared for. However, one criticism was pavement clutter, including A boards. Open spaces within the villages were greatly valued - 91% respondents said such spaces were very or fairly important.

The surrounding countryside was if anything even more important to people. Nobody ticked the not at all important option, either for open spaces within the villages or more widely.

49

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

As regards green issues, although major infrastructure projects were strongly opposed, interest was nevertheless expressed in smaller scale local renewable energy development: 54% of respondents felt this was very or fairly important. There was quite a strong demand for improved recycling arrangements.

Respondents viewed road traffic (57%), parking (53%) and safety (39%) as serious concerns, which were very much intertwined. These issues particularly affected the centre of the villages but also, to an extent, the wider area. The volume and speed of traffic were a concern and a reduced speed limit, particularly within the villages, was the most supported of the presented options.

Car parking was a significant problem, especially in the centre of the villages, where pedestrians felt particularly vulnerable. It is a daily issue and it applies all year round. Indiscriminate parking was one of the main bugbears. A range of solutions was supported, the most popular being additional parking provision on the edge of the villages.

Housing was a burning issue. It was felt that any housing development should be small scale: 57% were in favour of just 1 to 3 houses, whereas just 9% would support developments of 10 or more. On the other hand, the great majority of respondents showed strong support for affordable housing, 75% regarding this as very or fairly important. 71% of respondents supported the principle of building for local occupancy, particularly for people connected with the parish.

The value of having local businesses was recognised and the importance of attracting visitors was understood. Local events were popular and well supported (67%), ranging from small community based events to the larger scale shows, festivals and race meetings. The vast majority of people felt the number of events should not increase beyond the current level, concerns being expressed by some about noise and, more significantly, road congestion.

Local amenities and services were generally well thought of. However, the gritting of roads and particularly pavements was regarded as unsatisfactory by a majority of respondents: 39% were satisfied against 45% dissatisfied with road gritting; and just 13% were satisfied against 54% dissatisfied with pavement gritting. A narrow majority thought road maintenance satisfactory. Many people were unhappy about dog fouling (32% satisfied with the situation compared with 40% dissatisfied).

Public transport – especially the bus service - was poorly rated to the extent that 18% of respondents said there was nothing which could induce them to use it more often. 70% regarded it as easier to use a car and 25% even thought it easier to walk or cycle than use public transport. Services running at times needed (for example, for getting to work) and with better connections would help.

Provision of faster broadband was supported by 75% of people, 46% seeing this as very important.

50

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

There is a general feeling that the needs of particular groups in our community are at least reasonably well cared for, though quite large numbers chose not to offer a judgement. 52% of people were satisfied with how older people are cared for compared with 6% dissatisfied. For families the breakdown was 39% as against 5%, for people with disabilities 26% as against 10% and for younger people 26% as against 17%. A variety of suggestions was offered for improving the picture, including the views of young people from the local primary schools and of a small number from Cartmel Priory School.

DETAILED SURVEY REPORT 284 questionnaires were completed, though not everyone answered every question. Added to the Don’t Knows for a particular question the Not Answered figure sometimes accounts for quite a number out of the total respondents. Nevertheless, it is the percentages of the 284 total which are quoted throughout this report except where otherwise stated. It is of course the breakdown of those who expressed a definite opinion which counts.

145 respondents (52%) said they lived in Allithwaite, 111 (39%) in Cartmel and 22 (7%) in the surrounding area. These figures changed somewhat when respondents were asked which village they viewed as their main centre, 137 for Allithwaite compared with 136 for Cartmel. Where specific village responses are described, it is these latter figures which are being referred to.

The profile of respondents overall showed little variance across the parish. The majority were in the older age ranges, 87 (31%) being between 66 and 80 years old and 94 (33%) between 51 and 65. 32 were over 80. 48 were in the 36-50 group and only 9 respondents were younger than this. There were no Under 16s. 137 (48%) admitted to being male, 122 (43%) female.

There were no children aged 17 or under in the households of 224 of the respondents (79%). 32 households (11%) had one child living there and 13 had two. Just four homes had three children and none had more than this.

Almost all the respondents (268 or 94%) have lived in the area for two years or more, with 196 (69%) having been here at least 11 years. 71 (25%) have lived here 30 years or more. There were 12 second home respondents (4%), while 14 people did not answer this question or preferred not to say.

1. SUBJECT AREAS

1.1 The Villages On the whole respondents appreciated how their village looked. 45% did not think there were any unsightly areas or features needing improvement compared with 35% who did. However, there was criticism of pavement clutter, including A boards. Litter was a problem in certain places. Allithwaite people were unhappy about unkempt pavements and grass verges and parking was seen as an issue in Cartmel.

Most people felt that alterations or repairs to buildings were in keeping with the village tradition (51% compared with 16% who did not) and that older or more historic buildings were well looked after (57% against 7%). However, neither satisfaction nor dissatisfaction were strong.

51

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

A number of Allithwaite respondents felt there should be greater Parish Council involvement; and a number objected to developments like Greendales. People from Cartmel felt there should be greater enforcement and supervision of conservation area planning principles. Plastic or otherwise inappropriate windows and doors were mentioned frequently.

On the whole the various ideas put forward to enhance the villages received quite a favourable or at least open-minded response. Separating the answers by village, Allithwaite residents were interested in the idea of a square, ornamental park or other focal point for their village (31% of Allithwaite responses agreeing, the same number answering Possibly).

For their part Cartmel people strongly approved the idea of a footbridge crossing the River Eea linking to the corner of the square beside the Kings Arms (46% Yes and 24% Possibly). However, they were rather more divided over a garden by the entrance to the racecourse car park (38% Yes, 22% Possibly). Both villages supported improving the provision of road or street name signs (33% Yes, 28% Possibly with 24% against the idea).

However, except for the footbridge idea, the significant statistic was the number of Possibly respondents, yet to be firmly convinced.

Individually proposed ideas for improving the villages were very varied in nature, ranging from a general tidy up (verges, litter) to the encouragement of off-street parking. Signs needed to be better maintained and new signs introduced where necessary. Toilets and more footpaths were mentioned in Allithwaite.

1.2 Open spaces Open spaces within the villages are greatly valued. 74% respondents said such spaces were very important and a further 17% fairly important. The surrounding countryside is at least as important to parish residents as the villages in which most of them live: 77% regarded it as very important and a further 14% as fairly important.

Nobody selected the Not at all important option, either for open spaces in the villages or more widely.

70% of people stated that they admired views every single day, these ranging across all areas of the parish. Walking was the most popular activity with 86% of people walking at least weekly and most of them daily. Apart from pure relaxation, which came second to walking, a variety of sports and other leisure activities was listed – cycling, gardening, horse riding, running and many more. Various different open spaces throughout the locality were listed, including footpaths generally, Cartmel park and woods (mentioned by both Allithwaite and Cartmel residents) and Wartbarrow Lane and Fell (Allithwaite). The use of the community centre and playing fields was also referred to.

There was strong opposition to infrastructure developments such as wind farms: 46.1% rated protection from these as very important and 17% as fairly important, only 14% viewing the issue as not very or not at all important. The opposition to electricity pylons was even stronger, the equivalent figures being 54% very important, 21% fairly important and 7% not very or not at all important. 52

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

1.3 Green issues Though major infrastructure projects are strongly opposed, there is some interest in smaller scale local renewable energy development, 23% of respondents seeing this as very important and 31% as fairly important.

More general responses showed residents open to a variety of green ideas: 116 people (41%) responded to the general question which asked for ideas for local initiatives. Of these, 48 felt there could be improvements of various sorts in waste recycling arrangements; 17 supported solar roof panel initiatives, including their installation on public buildings; seven suggested a greater emphasis on buildings insulation; six suggested small scale onshore wind energy, including community organised projects and three supported offshore wind. (Three others opposed wind development). Other suggestions included tidal energy, increasing the number of allotments and how to deal with litter. A number of people considered it important to reduce the use of private vehicles by such means as the better provision of walking and cycle ways, improvements in public transport, improvements in the provision of amenities locally and better broadband.

1.4 Traffic – congestion, parking and road safety

Parking Parking was seen as a significant problem. 53% of people confirmed this, the proportion being higher for Cartmel (62%). The problem was a daily one rather than particularly during holiday periods and related to parking in the villages (51% seeing this as a major or minor problem) rather than outside one’s home (a major or minor problem for 27%).

In both villages the combination of narrow roads and indiscriminate parking created real difficulties. Allithwaite respondents commented how parking both sides of the road could make it difficult for large vehicles to get through. The school run was considered part of the problem. The location most complained about in Allithwaite was Church Road, a particular difficulty for people wanting to park near their home. Despite these views, a number of respondents felt parking was not really an issue in the village but that the situation would be helped if homeowners who had a drive used it.

In Cartmel the problem was almost everywhere, but especially in the centre, where again indiscriminate parking made things difficult. The extent of parking by business owners and employees, unrestricted by any short stay regulation, was commented on; parked delivery vehicles were also a regular problem.

There was a positive response to a number of the suggested option relating to parking. Additional parking provision on the edge of the villages was the most favoured, supported by 40% of people, followed by on-street residents’ parking permits (32%), the use of yellow lines (28%), improved parking signage (27%), limiting parking to short stays (27%), promoting the annual parking permit on the racecourse for Cartmel residents (24%) and parking enforcement by the Parish Council (22%). Least popular were restricting parking during peak times (16%), sympathetic marked parking bays such as the use of cobbles (15%) and marked parking bays using white lines (14%).

53

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Cartmel support for all the above measures was more positive than these overall scores, in many cases by 10 to 15%, though parking bays marked with white lines remained least popular. A number of additional comments from Cartmel respondents mainly reiterated the above points. Restricting street parking in some way was seen as a key solution, but such restrictions needed to be enforced. Some people, however, stated their opposition to yellow lines.

Traffic flow, congestion and road safety Traffic was seen as a problem by 57% of people and particularly so by Cartmel people (68%). It was a major or minor problem in the villages themselves for 61% (for Cartmel 78%). Almost twice as many respondents, across both villages, saw it as a major rather than a minor problem. In the wider area outside the villages it was felt to be a problem by 41% of people.

Fears over road safety were inevitably linked to the more general problem of traffic. It was a concern for both pedestrians and vehicle users. Though a number of people chose not to answer, 167 respondents (or 59%) regarded road safety as a major or at least a minor problem in the villages and 125 (44%) felt this to be so in the wider area.

Traffic generally and road safety were both seen as problems besetting the area on a daily basis. The traffic situation was felt to worsen at weekends though holiday periods were not identified as an extra factor.

In the villages part of the problem was seen as parked or speeding cars and the lack of pavements. In Allithwaite poor visibility was an issue, partly because of overgrown hedges. Large vehicles were thought dangerous in Cartmel village, as well as vans obstructing one’s view, but to an extent the problem was seen as sheer volume of traffic. A number of roads were named as being particularly prone to traffic problems in both villages, on the outskirts as well as in the centres.

In the wider area the general problem was fast traffic and too many large vehicles on narrow roads and lanes. All the roads out of Cartmel were mentioned. Wartbarrow Lane and the road down to Cartmel were particular problems for Allithwaite respondents, whose other concerns included blind corners and poor provision of passing places.

Of the suggestions proposed to improve the situation, a 20 mph limit in villages was by far the most popular (58% of respondents). Least favoured by far was improved street lighting (6%). Non- roadside pedestrian routes was a highly rated option across the parish (37%) and pavement improvements also gained reasonable support (28%) from both villages.

In other respects, however, there were some important variations between Allithwaite and Cartmel. Parking management scored highly for Cartmel (51% of Cartmel respondents), as did modified traffic routes (40% of Cartmel respondents). Traffic calming came higher in Allithwaite’s rating (32% of Allithwaite respondents), as did non-roadside cycle ways (30% of Allithwaite respondents).

Various of the other measures floated proved at least interesting possibilities for people, a number of whom added their own suggestions. Some of these reiterated listed options, reduced speed limits, traffic calming and limiting access among them. Awareness-raising of wheelchair and 54

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

motorised buggy use was suggested in Allithwaite and painted walkways in Cartmel.

2. People

2.1 Housing The great majority of respondents showed strong support for affordable housing, 75% regarding this as very or fairly important (more so the former), compared with only 7% who felt it was not important. In parallel with this there was a strong belief in the principle of local occupancy for people connected with the parish (71% compared with 8% against). Fewer thought it important that provision should be for those connected to South Lakeland District generally (56%, with a higher number of Fairly rather than Very important).

26 people (9%) reported that a family member had had to move away from the area owing to a lack of suitable or affordable housing.

It was felt that any housing development should be small scale: 57% were in favour of just 1 to 3 houses, whereas just 9% were happy with developments of 10 or more. Scoring one of the highest response levels to any question, 232 people (82%) felt it very or fairly important that new housing was in keeping with local architecture; and 222 (78%) supported the idea of sheltered accommodation within the parish.

Where developments of four or more houses were being planned, getting the infrastructure right was viewed as critical by an overwhelming number of respondents. 92% emphasised the importance of adequate parking provision and 89% thought traffic flow and 88% traffic speed would need addressing. 69% supported the provision of pedestrian or cycle routes. 89% agreed with protecting the open spaces within the village boundaries and an even higher proportion, 91%, the wider countryside. Also important were the provision of utilities (88%) and local employment opportunities (72%). Street lighting was not regarded as so important a need (40%).

Green energy features were important for some, including the scope for small individual wind turbines, though there was also opposition to full scale wind farms and inappropriately placed solar panels. Sufficient land with each new property for parking and/or growing produce was suggested. Other ideas included routing all cables underground, ensuring good access to public transport, ensuring that building designs were in keeping with their rural setting and showing awareness of the problems of light and noise pollution.

There was a generally positive response about second home owners becoming more involved in the local community, 40% agreeing compared with 29% disagreeing. The more detailed comments were mixed: several respondents suggested that second home owners should pay more council tax while others felt more should be done to make second home owners feel more welcome and to involve them. Though there were some negative comments, it was also argued that second home owners helped the local economy.

2.2 Business and employment A strong majority (88%) held a positive view of the contribution made by locally run businesses and believed them to have a positive impact on the community (80%). 76% felt it important that there should be new employment prospects locally. 55

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Respondents commented that as well as providing local employment, businesses ensured a vibrant community. They were conveniently located for local people (thus helping reduce our carbon footprint) and, in Cartmel particularly, brought in visitors.

50 questionnaire responses (18%) were from people who ran their own businesses. These ranged from farming and various building trades to consultancies, gift shops, bed and breakfasts and holiday lets.

Apart from visitor numbers (which had a positive impact for 25 out of the 50 businesses responding), none of the impact examples presented seemed to be significant either way. However, 19 business respondents said the issue of broadband speeds was having a negative impact and 15 said the same of parking. Of the few additional comments, one expressed concern about the future of direct train access to Manchester airport.

2.3 Events and visitors 67% of people supported the idea of local events, from local church and other community events to larger scale ones such as the Cartmel Show, the races and Holker Festival. Only 14% regarded them as not very or not at all important.

Events may exist primarily for the local population or the wider public. Both Allithwaite and Cartmel respondents felt both types of event were important to them. The former referred to the village carnival, school and church events and playground and community centre activities. The latter mentioned Priory concerts, football and cricket matches, bonfire night and school and village hall events. More major events enjoyed by both sets of respondents were Cartmel Show and the races. Allithwaite people also made mention of the Holker Garden Festival, the Steam Gathering and Grange-based activities. The food market was popular with Cartmel respondents.

A variety of reasons was given for the importance of events, such as community spirit (including bringing old and young together) and economic benefits, as well as just personal enjoyment. A few mentioned the value of keeping traditions going while others pointed out about sustainability and how locally based events helped reduce the carbon footprint.

Having said this, only 11% of people wanted such events more often than at present. The vast majority felt the number should stay about the same, while 8% wanted fewer, most of these coming from Cartmel.

Generally people enjoyed events (72%), attended them when they could (69%) and certainly appreciated the contribution they made to the local economy (80%). However, 62% – a large proportion of these in Cartmel - felt that road congestion relating to events could be a problem and 23% – again the majority in Cartmel - thought they could be too noisy.

There was overwhelming agreement (over 80% of respondents) about the importance of visitors to the local economy and of the importance of the local environment and local facilities in attracting visitors. A similar proportion of people confirmed the view that the local environment was indeed of a high quality. 56

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

A significant majority of people (69%) - from both villages – felt it was important to retain the existing public toilets in the centre of Cartmel. 45% thought that direction and information signs could be improved, this receiving significantly higher support among Cartmel respondents.

Suggestions were made about how to improve signage. More Cartmel respondents than Allithwaite wanted more signs (some of the latter felt there were already too many). In Cartmel it was felt important to have better direction signs for the car park, for other facilities and as pointers for village walks. In Allithwaite the concern was over visitor-related facilities themselves – the need for public toilets, maps containing local information, better public transport and better disabled access.

Most people supported the view that the positive impact of visitors outweighed the drawbacks (68% against 10%). Ideas for making the area more attractive to visitors were not very different from those for reducing their negative impact.

In terms of the former, both villages wanted parking facilities improved. Allithwaite respondents again felt public toilets were needed but otherwise, on the whole, they wished the village to stay as it was. Cartmel respondents thought there should be better tourist information and that verges needed to look tidier.

As for reducing visitors’ negative impact, managing car parking was again the main issue, along with traffic control. Allithwaite, for example, wanted to see lower speed limits, Cartmel different access routes through to the racecourse. Allithwaite also wanted to see more litter bins about the place.

2.4 Amenities and Services People had mixed views about how their locality was being cared for.

The gritting of roads and particularly pavements was regarded as unsatisfactory by most respondents, in the case of the former 39% satisfied against 45% dissatisfied and just 13% against 54% for the latter. The inadequate gritting of roads in Cartmel was seen as far more of an issue than in Allithwaite.

Road maintenance fared rather better, with 43% of respondents saying it was satisfactory compared with 40% unsatisfactory. Again Cartmel residents were less happy.

Respondents were generally more positive about how the litter situation was managed - 47% satisfied against 30% dissatisfied - and the tidiness of verges and hedges (50% against 34%), but were unhappy about dog fouling (32% satisfied with the situation compared with 40% dissatisfied), especially in Allithwaite.

Levels of use of public transport are low: 43% of respondents said they never used buses; 15% never used the train. Just six people used Rural Wheels at least once or twice a month and three used the Voluntary Car Scheme.

57

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

The clearest reason for not making more use of public transport was that it was easier to use the car, according to 70% of respondents. (53% of the over-80s also gave this as their reason.) Moreover, 25% regarded it as easier to walk or cycle than use public transport. Other reasons picked out from those presented included buses and trains not running at the times needed, connections not being synchronised, no buses or trains running to the destinations needed and a car being cheaper to use.

Added comments criticised the infrequency and irregularity of the bus service and the ‘roundabout route’ taken. Public transport could be expensive for families and did not lend itself to people with much shopping or heavy luggage – or to wheelchair users.

To encourage people to use public transport more often 39% of people thought better connected services might be an answer. Better cleanliness, however, was not seen as a factor (supported by only 6%). It was commented that for working people a more frequent service was necessary. Buses stopping on request would be helpful given the distance between actual bus stop points. More services into the Lake District would also be valued. However, 18% of respondents said there was nothing which could induce them to use public transport more often.

Respondents were positive about various of the amenities which were listed. 60% agreed there was a useful range of businesses locally. 57% felt there was a good balance between shops and eating establishments and 72% thought there was a good choice of places to eat. However, feelings were more mixed about whether shops were adequate for their needs: only 25% felt local shops stocked everything they needed, though 62% did say they were open when they needed them to be. Post Office arrangements were satisfactory for 62% of people. The mobile library was regarded as important to only 8% of people. While the majority of Allithwaite people agreed about most of these amenities, they rated them lower in almost every case and especially places to eat and opening times of shops; on the other hand, Cartmel felt considerably more poorly served by Post Office arrangements.

Questioned about a range of possible new services or amenities, respondents’ strongly supported the idea of a local cash machine, only 8% saying they would never use one and most (164 or 58%) saying they would use it about once a week or more often. Only five people said they would never use local recycling facilities, 244 (86%) reckoning they would use it at least once or twice a month. 124 people (44%) reckoned they would use a public swimming pool in the area at least once a week. And 31 Allithwaite people (23%) – along with eight others – would use a new café in Allithwaite around once a week or more often.

Elsewhere in the questionnaire a question on infrastructure development revealed a significant majority supporting improved broadband provision, 75%, with 46% seeing it as very important and only 7% relatively unconcerned. In terms of daily use, fast broadband was supported by 61%, with a further 11% saying they would use it around once a week or more often.

Least support among the amenities listed was for a mobile bank and a local police presence.

58

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Among the few additional suggestions made, Allithwaite’s need for public toilet facilities were again mentioned, as was the lack of a local petrol station and the need for a drop-in centre and youth club. Cartmel wanted increased opening hours for their outreach Post Office and also a cinema locally.

2.5 Specific needs: the elderly, the young, the disabled and families There is a general feeling that the needs of these particular groups in our community are at least reasonably well cared for. However, moderately high numbers of respondents chose not to answer or responded with Don’t know – 38% on younger people, 42% on people with disabilities and 36% on families. A high number (variously between 15 and 25%) answered with Neither/No.

However, the Not answered/Don’t know aggregated figure in relation to older people was lower at 25%.

149 people (52%) were satisfied with how older people are cared for compared with 17 (6%) dissatisfied. For families the figures were 110 (39%) as against 15 (5%), for people with disabilities 73 (26%) as against 28 (10%) and for younger people 75 (26%) as against 48 (17%).

A variety of suggestions was made to improve provision. Sheltered housing and better organised care schemes were needed for older people. People with disabilities needed more suitable housing and better access along roads and pavements. More social housing was needed at affordable rents for families, who would also benefit from better local leisure facilities, especially a swimming pool.

Comments made on behalf of young people proposed dedicated meeting places, better facilities, youth groups, better public transport and affordable housing. By comparison direct feedback through other forms of consultation with secondary age young people themselves was very small scale. However, it was interesting how far it reflected the preoccupations of the adult community. The local scenery and the villages themselves were appreciated, as were open spaces especially the racecourse area and play parks. The closeness of the community was also seen as a positive feature. For Allithwaite youngsters the Post Office was a much appreciated amenity.

Concerns were voiced over new housing developments on green field sites, the need for more car parking areas (in both villages) and the lack of leisure facilities of various sorts: there needed to be more sports facilities, more equipment in Allithwaite play park and more places where dogs could be exercised off the lead. Taking a rather broader perspective, one negative was the need to travel further afield than Grange to enjoy a good selection of shops which met their needs.

In consulting with primary school children in both Allithwaite and Cartmel schools a set of ‘quality of life’ questions was put to them. The children were rather critical of the state of tidiness of buildings and streets in their respective village, more so in Allithwaite. However, they felt generally positive about having a convenient public place to play and felt safe there.

Most also felt safe from traffic if they went for a walk, though this was less true in the Cartmel area. On the whole they felt comfortable with other people in their particular community, though 59

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Cartmel children felt both grown-ups and teenagers they knew were somewhat friendlier.

Some of the younger Cartmel children, however, appeared more cautious in these answers.) Asked how they felt if they had to leave the area and their school, the great majority of children were evidently unhappy at the prospect.

Both Allithwaite and Cartmel understandably share the same kinds of activities and there was overlap between them in the use of local amenities. Organised sports such as football, cricket and baseball were popular as well as other outdoor activities such as cycling, riding, walking (maybe with the dog) and visiting the play park. The village shops, including the Allithwaite Post Office, were regular destinations. Children in Cartmel were likely to make use of the racecourse and the woods. They might go into a local restaurant or pub with the family or visit the Priory. Allithwaite children might sledge on Hampsfell or go to the allotments or take part in archery.

These children had a clear idea of what needed putting right: potholes in the roads, dog fouling, the need to continue improving the equipment in the play parks, bringing a swimming pool to the area, having tennis courts in Cartmel and cleaning up the ones in Allithwaite; having an ice cream van which goes round all the villages. Allithwaite children wanted new goal posts and basketball hoops at the play park, a warmer church, more footpaths, more safe places to play including safer roads; they would like more large stores in the area and even more ambitious projects than this. Cartmel children wanted to see their school playground further developed, speed restrictions outside the school and more or wider pavements or painted walkways.

2.6 Parish Council and Emergency Planning There was broad support for extending the roles of the Parish Council, 68% of respondents agreeing with giving it greater responsibility for planning issues, the same number agreeing with its development of an Emergency Plan and 70% supporting its undertaking services such as street cleaning. There was some concern over the likely impartiality of the Parish Council regarding planning decisions.

30 respondents (11%) came up with further ideas of their own. Various aspects of maintenance of highways, verges and footpaths were put forward, as well as monitoring noise and pollution and more involvement with recycling. Dealing with vehicle speed and parking problems was proposed.

In the event of an emergency 61% of people were prepared to help out in some way or other. This generally took the form of accommodation, but medical and technical skills and assistance with transport and communication were also offered.

At the same time 44% said they would appreciate receiving help of some sort. Provisions, especially the collection of medication, and transport were the areas where assistance would be most appreciated.

62% of people felt the Parish Council communicated well, compared with just 16% who did not. A number of suggestions were made to improve communication further. Some people were not aware of either the Parish Council newsletter or website.

60

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Others did not receive the newsletter and some of those who did felt its format and the level of information it contained needed some work. It was commented that the website needed updating more frequently; related email alerts were also suggested. Existing methods of communication could be extended with, for example, noticeboards in local surgeries being used.

3. General The open questions generated a wide range of responses, some – but not all – of which reflected the more detailed earlier answers.

Clearly there were high levels of satisfaction with living in this area. Time and again respondents commented on the quality of the countryside, its scenery and its peace and quiet. Equally they valued the nature of the community itself and the quality of village life including its relatively crime free nature. In addition the convenience of our location was appreciated, its handiness for the National Park, town shopping, commuting and motorway.

Looking ahead 15 years the most frequently voiced hope was that the area and the respondent’s village would stay very much the same as at present.

Where change was necessary, it should be for such things as improvements in parking and some small scale provision of affordable homes for local families. The local countryside should be preserved from intrusions such as significant wind farm development and the villages should not become greatly more commercialised than at present. The community needed to remain vibrant with young families continuing to be a presence here.

Fears for the future focused primarily on the challenge of an increasing - and ageing - population, the merging of the individual villages with their neighbours, even more second homes and too few affordable homes for young families.

The over-dominance of tourism was a concern voiced by some, along with the amount of traffic and the problems of parking. Wind farm developments which altered the local landscape were also the fear of a number of respondents.

Concerns relating to the wider peninsula echoed much of the above – over-development, wind turbines, too much tourism, too few affordable homes, traffic.

Other points raised included too few jobs for younger people, the lack of a local petrol station, the dangers of the A590, poor local supermarket provision, the noise of flying from Cark airfield and the threat of pylons.

4. Any other comments It might be argued that this opportunity for a final fling would throw up the issues that really did provoke most feeling. If so, then people’s preoccupations were traffic and parking, followed by excessive housing development.

61

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

However, a number of respondents used this question as a chance to thank the organising group for their work in seeking the views of local people so comprehensively, though one or two complained about the questionnaire’s length. Two comments are perhaps worth quoting:

‘Thank you for giving us all the opportunity to express our views, concerns and ideas on the future of our parish. I must apologise for the sheer amount of words in my response - I didn't realise I would have so much to say on so many subjects! It has been a very interesting and thought-provoking exercise.’ and more simply:

‘Thank you for the opportunity to express my strongly held views.’

62

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

LOWER ALLITHWAITE COMMUNITY ACTION PLAN

Issue Aim Objectives Actions Organisations Steering Group Re- view 1a / 1b. Village To protect the build and i. Create clean and tidy vil- PC to commission and fund Allithwaite Commu- Cartmel – Community in and Open Spaces natural environment for the lages and surrounding areas. programme of work to in- nity Group/Cartmel in bloom engaging with continuing enjoyment of clude litter, dog fouling, Bloom, SLDC and SLDC to support their present and future genera- grass verges and road CCC work. Allithwaite tions sweeping. PC to explore lengthsman now ap- participatory budgeting with pointed. SLDC and CCC.

ii. Reduce pavement clutter. PC to develop voluntary code of conduct with traders Cartmel Traders, Most A boards found to and monitor with SLDC en- SLDC be on cobbles which are forcement officer PC, CCC not highways therefore little can be done but en- gagement and review needed iii. Improve road surfaces PC to organise survey, iden- and footpaths. tify improvements needed Work to be done in Al- and work with CCC to pri- Allithwaite Commu- lithwaite as part of high- oritise a programme of nity Group/Cartmel ways. CTI proposals work. Townscape Initiative, about to be published SLDC and CCC iv. Improve signage in and PC to commission and fund around the villages. programme of work which CTI proposals due for will identify improvements SLDC, PC, CCC Cartmel. Allithwaite needed to street signs and work needs doing as part local directional signs. of highways project. Re- view already undertaken, awaiting CCC response. v. Raise public awareness of Develop a conservation the Cartmel conservation ar- management plan for Cart- New conservation docu- eas built heritage. Protect mel Cartmel Village Soci- ment overdue needs the village from inappropri- ety, SLDC, PC. chasing. CVS working ate changes to properties. with SLDC, report awaited from conserva- tion officer.

63

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan vi. Seek to protect green spaces within villages and PC to commission interest the surrounding countryside group to: Countryside Group to Work has begun, this from inappropriate develop- • identify landscape, work with other statu- would be better placed in ments. environmental, and tory and voluntary the neighbourhood plan. wildlife features of bodies Allithwaite created Or- significance chard for wildlife area • draft strategy for PC with an Apiary. Quarry approval under review with H&S work undertaken. vii. Protect and enhance ex- Review existing CCC foot- isting levels of access to the path document with view to Active Travel Group, Active travel group has local countryside. improve provision. CCC made excellent progress Review permissive foot- – action plan and budget paths/public access areas submitted to PC for work and seek to persuade land- 2016/17. Quarry work- owners to introduce/expand ing party established network where possible with budget to improve access to Quarry. Stile repaired Humphrey Head and number of footpath signs. viii. Seek to enhance and PC to seek ideas and fund Allithwaite Commu- Village orchard now develop the village centre in appropriate projects where nity Group open for public use. Allithwaite. affordable Small picnic area with table/seats in Orchard, repaired and added 3 new seats across village.

64

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Issue Aim Objectives Actions Organisations Steering Group Re- view 1c. Green Issues To encourage the take-up of i. Improve waste recycling PC to lobby SLDC for ear- PC, SLDC, G&C SLDC to roll out recy- environmental initiatives arrangements. liest possible rollout of LAP, CCC. cling, 2017 due date. appropriate to local com- plastic and cardboard recy- munity level. cling.

PC to work with G&C LAP and CCC to maintain household waste recycling site

ii. Encourage small scale PC to draw up acceptable PC, planning officers No projects identified to renewable energy schemes parameters. and groups as schemes date. which do not have a Where appropriate, encour- arise detrimental impact on the age and support interest surrounding countryside. groups, local businesses and community groups, of- fering an initial point of reference. iii. Meet demand for ground PC statutory responsi- Allotments increased to grow own produce by in- Explore the possibility of bility with future possibility of creasing the number of allot- creating new allotments in further increase on devel- ments and suitable garden ar- new housing develop- opment in Green Lane. eas as needed ments.

iv. Encourage greater use of PC supported Grange public transport to reduce circular Saturday service community’s carbon foot- with grant. Increase and print promote use of ‘Rural Wheels’.

65

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Issue Aim Objectives Actions Organisations Steering Group Re- view 1d. Traffic con- To balance the needs of in- i. Review parking provision Commission survey work PC, Cartmel Town- Cartmel – CTI delivery gestion, parking creasing numbers of vehi- for residents, businesses and in both villages, draw up scape Initiative, Al- group awaiting outcome and road safety. cle users with the protec- visitors to reduce the conges- action plan and initiate ac- lithwaite Community of TRO. Allithwaite tion of the local environ- tion caused by inappropriate tions; in Cartmel this to be Group with CCC and community group to de- ment and quality of every- parking in villages, improve part of a wider holistic re- SLDC velop project plan. day life. traffic flow and pedestrian view. safety. PC to influence provision in new developments. PC to make P4C (Paths for Communities) bid for Al- lithwaite. ii. Promote safer use of road Need to highlight poten- system generally and easier Review pedestrian access Active Travel Group, tial new footpath routes and safer pedestrian and routes within villages and G&C LAP, CCC, which could come for- cycling access both within work with other PCs to SLDC, Cartmel Town- ward as land developed and between villages (‘active commission a wider review scape Initiative essential as part of travel’): and action improved routes neighbourhood plan. between villages. Lack of support from • Make pedestrian and CCC highways for addi- cycle routes safer and New developments to in- tional footpath crossing more enjoyable corporate appropriate pro- on Holme lane contrib- • Improve the extent and vision. uted to inspector’s deci- quality of disabled sion in favour of the de- access veloper. • Reduce the danger of speeding vehicles on Footpath, Vicarage Lane country roads and lanes through Parish field and possibility of new paths through new develop- ment in Green Lane.

More work still to do within both villages.

66

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Issue Aim Objectives Actions Organisations Steering Group Re- view 2a. Housing To ensure that housing pro- i. Achieve more control of Explore the potential bene- PC, SLDC, G&C LAP Neighbourhood plan vision meets genuine local future building developments fits of developing a Neigh- consultants appointed need with minimum detri- by local community bourhood Plan and initiate and initial documents mental impact on local en- action if feasible. produced for PC review vironment. which are on website.

ii. Ensure housing stock Monitor delivery and ex- PC, SLDC, G&C PC support for social meets local affordable needs plore opportunities to de- LAP, Cumbria Rural housing project in Cart- and enables local people of liver affordable housing Housing Trust mel now being built. all ages to continue to reside with the G&C LAP and within the local area. Cumbria Rural Housing Trust. iii. Ensure new housing PC, SLDC To be part of neighbour- developments meet the PC work actively with hood plan aspirations of low density planners and developers to and appropriate design; seek achieve aspirations to bring empty properties back into use.

iv. Monitor and mitigate the PC, SLDC Newsletters delivered impact of second home/holi- Encourage involvement in through Grange now – day let ownership on com- village life, e.g. through more work to be done to munity life newsletters. Monitor num- inform rural fringes. bers, using data to influ- ence the proportion of af- Need to develop email fordable houses in future contact lists for as many housing developments people as possible. Web- site updated, new do- main name.

67

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Issue Aim Objectives Actions Organisations Steering Group Re- view 2b / 2c. Business To help enable local busi- i. Encourage and support PC engage with and sup- PC and community CTI engaged with to ease and employment, nesses to thrive – for the events for the local port and encourage local groups parking and congestion, events and visi- benefit of all - without a community. event organisers. part of TRO. tors. detrimental impact on the local community and the at- ii. Aim to manage and reduce PC monitor impact and PC, Cartmel Town- Recent improvements in tractiveness of the area to disruption to the local work proactively with pro- scape Initiative traffic management for visitors; particularly to sup- community caused by major viders and others to ensure races and events with port events which enhance events. minimum disruption Holker and promoters. the experience of commu- nity. iii. Enhance the visitor PC commission groups to PC, Allithwaite Com- CTI proposals for sign- experience by improving review visitor access and munity Group, Cart- age about to go out for signage, information and the information and undertake mel Townscape Initia- consultation, TRO. general attractiveness of the improvements as appropri- tive, Cartmel Village LAP funding for one in- local area (see also 1a and b) ate. Society, Cartmel Trad- formation board in Al- ers, Countryside lithwaite being devel- Seek sponsor partners to Group, Active Travel oped. assist funding. Group

iv. Ensure adequate toilet PC to assess need, monitor PC and community Holker new toilet block, provision in both villages. existing provision and seek groups. none in Allithwaite. to enhance provision in Al- lithwaite.

v. Support local employment PC monitor new business PC, SLDC Limited. opportunities. premises applications through the planning pro- cess and support where ap- propriate.

vi. Help ensure the survival PC to explore needs with PC Limited of local shops. local traders and, where possible, encourage and support services provided.

68

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan vii. Support local businesses PC to explore needs with PC Limited with the provision of an af- local traders and, where fordable fast broadband. possible, encourage and support services provided.

69

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Issue Aim Objectives Actions Organisations Steering Group Re- view 2d. Amenities and To enhance local quality of i. Encourage the increased PC to take active steps to PC, Active Travel PC part funding the Sat- Services. life by helping make day to use of public transport influence timetable connec- Group, G&C LAP urday Grange Circular day living easier and more tions, including evening bus route enjoyable in a family provision and access for el- friendly locality. derly and disabled passen- gers. Support and promote Com- munity Transport schemes in newsletters.

ii. Seek to improve PC continue to work proac- PC, CCC, broadband Government scheme to broadband provision across tively with CCC and pro- providers help finance broadband the locality viders. available for villages.

Commission an initial re- PC, statutory and vol- Emergency plan written iii. Develop an emergency sponse plan to ensure peo- untary bodies and on website. plan to ensure people in the ple are looked after in the locality are cared for in event of severe weather or extreme conditions other emergencies

PC support and promote in- PC, statutory and vol- Limited. NPlan can push iv. Improve the provision of itiatives from voluntary untary bodies for bungalows. care for the elderly and bodies, e.g. Age UK (‘vil- disabled in their own home lage agents’)

PC to support as appropri- PC, statutory and vol- v. Increase the pool of ate the work of voluntary untary bodies Allithwaite community volunteers within the organisations and G&C centre Coffee / tea drop community willing to offer a LAP initiatives in session service to the young, disabled and elderly PC to support and promote vi. Help ensure that local the work of the schools. PC, local schools Limited. schools survive and flourish as a key service to local families present and future

70

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

vii. Help ensure adequate PC to support and promote PC and youth groups PC support King Edward provision of out-of-school the work of youth organisa- V playground needs as- activities for youngsters of tions. sistance in fundraising both primary and secondary and volunteers. age Identify any major gaps in provision and work with AP&CC have con- partners to bring about im- structed a Pump Track provements. and activities for chil- dren

The Plan uses the following abbreviations to describe lead organisations and partners:

PC - Parish Council CCC - Cumbria County Council SLDC - South Lakeland District Council G&C LAP - Grange and Cartmel Local Area Partnership (a group of local parish councils working together to influence the actions of the statutory bodies)

71

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

ANNEX 1: CONSULTATION PROCESSES

In February 2011 drop-in consultation events were held in both Allithwaite and Cartmel. These were designed to raise awareness of the Parish Council’s intentions to develop a full Community Plan. Using the chief issues from the 2009 Parish Statement as a starting point they sought responses from the public on a range of local issues, including proposals for land allocation for building development. Open-ended questions prompted the public to put forward a wide range of issues.

This initial Plan launch was followed up around Easter 2011 by a letter issued through the local media, an information leaflet delivered to every household and suggestion boxes located at various points in Cartmel and Allithwaite. The email and phone details of members of the Community Plan group were publicised.

Over the coming weeks various members of the group reached out to a large number of individuals via local clubs and community activities to consult and raise awareness. These included:

Allithwaite and Cartmel sports clubs Allithwaite businesses Allithwaite carnival Allithwaite Community Hall Allithwaite Institute Allithwaite over-60s Cartmel Allotment holders Cartmel food market Cartmel over-60s Cartmel scouts Cartmel Show Cartmel Traders Cartmel Village Society Women’s Institute Young Farmers Schools: Cartmel Priory secondary school and Cartmel and Allithwaite primary schools.

Including the earlier drop-in sessions, the total number of responses received was approximately 100, with in addition 70 pupils involved across the three schools. The total of all the comments received, collated as a basis for framing the questionnaire, numbered 209.

In the case of the schools members of the Community Plan group, supported by the experience of Young Cumbria, worked with groups of pupils to identify what they appreciated about where they lived and what they would like improved.

Since the household questionnaire was unlikely to prove particularly accessible to youngsters, the key outcomes from these exercises were carried forward into the final Plan in their own right.

72

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

Subsequent to the questionnaire process a bulletin email system was set up to maintain contact with subscribers. In addition public updates have been maintained through Grange Now, the Westmorland Gazette, parish magazines, Parish Council noticeboards and village websites.

73

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

ANNEX 2: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Lower Allithwaite Parish Council is grateful to the Community Plan group for producing this Plan and steering the process from which it emerged. It also appreciates the generous professional guidance of Julia Wilson, Project Team Manager at Action with Communities in Cumbria, and Emma Nichols, Community Engagement Officer at South Lakeland District Council.

Liz Cornford from Young Cumbria contributed invaluably to the work undertaken with the local schools. The head teachers are to be thanked for their work in helping us engage youngsters in the consultation process: Sarah Firth at Cartmel CofE Primary School, Brian Jones at Allithwaite CofE Primary School and Paul Williams at Cartmel Priory CofE School.

Thanks are also due to Rod Wilson and Mary Wilson in their respective capacities as Cumbria County Councillor and South Lakeland District Councillor. Parish Council members provided important assistance in distributing information at various stages.

Members of the Community Group have been:

Hazel Allen Barbara Copeland Heather Drinkall John Evans David Huggett- Chairman Dai Hunt Tiffany Hunt Philip Pascall Mary Wilson.

74

Appendix 5 Lower Allithwaite Community Plan

ANNEX 3: CONTACTS

For further information about the Community Plan and its progress contact David Huggett, Chairman of Lower Allithwaite Parish Council ([email protected]; telephone 015395 36378), or Phil Turner, Clerk to the Parish Council ([email protected]; telephone 015395 32639).

The Community Plan may be accessed online at www.allithwaite.com/parish-notices and www.cartmelvillage.com/parishnews, where future updates relating to the Plan will also be found. Related information is also hosted on the Have Your Say Consultation Hub at www.opinionsuite.com/cumbria/other-public-sector (listed under Closed Consultations).

Printed copies of the full Community Plan are held by the Parish Council and deposited with Grange-over-Sands public library for reference.

75

Appendix 6 Neighbourhood Plan – Questionnaire Results

APPENDIX 6 NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CONSULTATION QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS

The results of the questionnaires completed on the consultations which took place on the 13th and 19th July 2016 are outlined in the following tables. The questionnaire was split into various headings with residents encouraged to comment.

GETTING ABOUT THE AREA – PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICLE ACCESS

Allithwaite Good idea to re-establish footpath from Allithwaite via Quarry to B5277 New footpath through Quarry to Grange is a great idea B5277 – 20mph signs through village and pedestrian signs Vicarage Lane is a rat run where people race Make it a bridleway from the start Traffic on B2577 should be 20mph. Speed limit between Yakkers pub and Pheasant pub – signs to warn drivers of people and children walking in road Mandatory 20mph in both villages Templand Lane is now a rat run for the white van brigade. Dangerous! Could also do with a dog bin on here since lodge visitors Templand Lane Lodge development application, if this is approved it’ll cause access problems with extra traffic in very narrow lane Footpath needed from Templand Lane (Pastures) to Cartmel – many people use this dangerous road to walk Mandatory 20mph in both villages Templand Lane is now a rat run for the white van brigade. Dangerous! Could also do with a dog bin on here since lodge visitors Templand Lane Lodge development application, if this is approved it’ll cause access problems with extra traffic in very narrow lane Cartmel Create a relief road across fields for heavy race traffic Access to car park via track though woods on race days, not through village LANP7 – whilst cars are encouraged to use the racecourse car park, this means they enter and then leave via the centre of the village. Plans should be put in hand (quickly) to make it one way in and then out via Cark Shaw’s. This in turn could lead to a one-way system being adopted LANP7 – heavy goods traffic including fairground trailers, horse boxes and caravans should be banned from entering the village conservation area and Holker should make alternative provision. 20mph speed limit, traffic calming – road narrowing and sleeping policemen – more warning signs Greater control of traffic and visitors for the races, businesses may prosper but residents don’t. 76

Appendix 6 Neighbourhood Plan – Questionnaire Results

Ban all HGV through Cartmel Further iffy places if you are walking to Cartmel along Cartmel road – buses, including school buses and cars need to slow down Mandatory 20mph in both villages Many walkers and dog walkers would hate traffic going through the park and Cark Shaw’s. Village traffic can be difficult and thankfully slow but rarely dangerous Road narrowing system outside primary school could use revision

GENERAL COMMENTS ON PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICLE ACCESS

General Infrastructure including surface water run off Caravan park – parking? Density issues, footpath off site for pedestrians and cyclist access to main road and quiet lanes Restriction in lease periods ie some advertise 100-year lease, should be say 10? Restrict severely new sites for lodges and caravans. They detract from the rural ambience Agree with LANP16, adding that screening should not impair views from footpaths, roads etc Lodge/permanent van site on Templand Lane would be inappropriate. I hope SLDC planning turn it down as it will alter the Templand area very substantially to its detriment. Anyway, do we need yet more caravans/lodges? What will all the residents of new houses do? travel to / Barrow / Kendal like most people already do creating dormitory villages. The application for 12? Caravans / lodges ½ way along Templand Lane MUST be turned down. Reasons too many to write here (objection letter posted to planning department). Too many lodges already

EMPLOYMENT

Allithwaite There is nothing for Allithwaite businesses in this plan There are no sites suitable for people to build businesses in Allithwaite Cartmel Try to encourage long term / permanent employment No more lodges Rural gardens should not be classified as brownfield sites.

ENVIRONMENT

General No building on fields B and C thanks. Yes to dark skies Yes to dark skies Keep dark skies (as currently at Templand end of Allithwaite. Yes to hedgerows and open spaces. Yes to enhancing/complementing local townscape, but can be contemporary design

77

Appendix 6 Neighbourhood Plan – Questionnaire Results

New streetlights should be of the down light variety, reduces upward light pollution without sacrificing downward visibility Dark skies are a valuable asset. Streetlamps used to go off at midnight when I was growing up – saves energy Strongly support dark skies. Agree strongly that views A, B and C be protected I support dark skies Support dark sky policy and need to keep suburbanising and intrusive street lighting to a minimum All development seems aimed at Cartmel and leaves Allithwaite with no shops, businesses or ways to develop We need to conserve areas of B and C in Allithwaite and A in Cartmel The open views suggested here are very important and should be protected at all costs Blanket policy, Cumbria landscapes policy. Dry stone walls support habitats and preserve landscapes – designate specific walls. I value all of the green / open spaces and views surrounding fells/countryside Protection of green swathe running north / south through the village – doesn’t say which village

DEVELOPMENT

Allithwaite Beck under field at Green Lane site Development should be in fill only, the village boundary should not be extended Dark skies, existing street lights in Allithwaite should be put on timers so that dark skies are available after midnight say, would save energy. View of Morecambe Bay from the churchyard and Church road, in spite of Heysham power plant. Allithwaite Parish field and Orchard must be a protected green space. Development along Green Lane must include significant green space. Please make sure that field B is protected A, C, D, F and G essential outlooks to be retained Beck under field at Green Lane site Development should be in fill only, the village boundary should not be extended Dark skies, existing street lights in Allithwaite should be put on timers so that dark skies are available after midnight say, would save energy. View of Morecambe Bay from the churchyard and Church road, in spite of Heysham. Allithwaite Parish field and Orchard must be a protected green space. Development along Green Lane must include significant green space. Cartmel Corner of Priest Lane – view across paddock to Fairfield Lodge Cloggerbeck stream viewed from playground Vital to ensure Farmery Field is kept an open green space and view Farmery Field (development) should not be allowed, it will obstruct view in village Farmery Fields - protect the views from the road up the valley which will be lost by the size and especially the height of these field shelters. Farmery Field should not only be protected against any building / development but should be managed as a community resource. 78

Appendix 6 Neighbourhood Plan – Questionnaire Results

Farmery Field to be protected at all costs Farmery Field to be designated as an area to be protected against future hosing development due to its’ proximity to the Priory Templand Gate view, yes as extremely popular walking route Dark sky, yes important Dark skies, if lighting needed then must be in keeping with the environment, especially in conservation area Dark skies policy spot on – agree x 2 Support dark skies Keep Cartmel without street lights Support dark skies Dark sky policy – new developments should not need lighting, no different to old parts Is there a clear plan on how point d, materials and layouts link with the desire to be more carbon neutral? All existing open spaces in the village need to be protected.

DESIGN

Allithwaite The views from Allithwaite are worthy of protection Although nit currently attractive, solar panels should be mandatory on all new housing. No more, and no more expansion of caravan / lodge sites. Fields and open views must be preserved. Any development should conform to existing ‘type’ excluding the Persimmon estate. Cartmel I support the view about item D. There needs to be a balance between window size linked to historic integrity and point L, larger windows for solar gain. Larger windows are very desirable in modern housing now we have the technology to achieve this economically, it is perfectly possible and desirable. To have design referencing local characteristics and materials yet also having the lighter more open buildings we now prefer Policy LANP2, item d) Quality design can complement traditional detailing. Restricting design to only have traditional solid to void relationship would be highly detrimental to the design of quality buildings and extensions. Robust details can be produced in other materials to stone and render. Applied features can also add to quality if carried out with care, design and detail. Neighbourhood Plan objectives and 5 and 4 – also to include reducing speed on all roads towards and in Cartmel to ensure safety of pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, mobility scooters Robust detail does not mean using only traditional materials Need to have Graham Darlington proceed with the Conservation Management Plan. Design in Conservation area, key words are conserve and enhance Outlook towards and from village needs protection

79

Appendix 6 Neighbourhood Plan – Questionnaire Results

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS ALMOND BANK, BARN HEY AND LAND BETWEEN GREEN LANE AND VICARAGE LANE

Allithwaite The B5277 needs improving before any development of either Almond Bank or Barn Hey starts Affordable housing is what is needed in both villages. Local Occupancy conditions are essential on any permission Prioritise slowing speed of traffic and creating affordable housing Green Lane/Vicarage Lane, I support paragraphs 2,3 and 4. Think 22 houses would be 10 too many. – avoid overcrowding. Green Lane/Vicarage Lane can’t cope with houses on this site Green Lane and Vicarage Lane – 22 is a lot and this is valuable green space. 22 leads = 44 more vehicles on single track lanes 63 new homes for Allithwaite???? Is this affordable housing??? Where are the jobs?? This means a lot more traffic on Vicarage Lane and on the Square. It isn’t just a matter of slowing down the traffic Green Lane/Vicarage Lane was turned down as unsuitable for development about 20 years ago. All the reasons for rejection then still apply. How did it get on the plan?

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS OLD STABLE YARD AND HAGGS LANE

Cartmel Old Stable yard – too many houses Not happy with vehicle access from Priest Lane to Old Stable Yard Priest Lane cannot cope with more access – traffic, the corner by L’Enclume often gridlocked, as is Barn Garth/Priest Lane junction How can you protect hedges and move them? – was answered on sheet How about making Cartmel a one-way system? Pedestrian route through to Priest Lane an excellent idea Hesketh Wood bend – the road is a danger to pedestrians crossing in this area NOW. The exit proposed for traffic from s side proposal and new housing exit from n side will be hazardous to say the least. A mini roundabout NOT solution – this is irresponsible. Old Stable yard – too many houses Not happy with vehicle access from Priest Lane to Old Stable Yard Yet many more vehicles passing into and through the village. What a nightmare! Existing developments on Haggs Lane = x? = 15 + 39 – far too many in too short a time frame versus gradual evolution to grow village to today’s level. Very opposed to idea of mini roundabout which would be an unsightly approach to the village. No, not a mini roundabout surely? A mini roundabout in this ancient village. BONKERS. Mini roundabout definitely NOT in keeping Not against new housing sensitively done, but must be as much affordable to keep families in village and schools used. Haggs Lane, too many houses. Poor design.

80

Appendix 6 Neighbourhood Plan – Questionnaire Results

Holker appear to ride roughshod over anybody’s opinion and do their own thing. They need curtailing. Cartmel, especially Haggs Lane does NOT need any more homes. Why spoil our village. A very dangerous access. Far too many houses. Potential flood plain – remember the OLD TARN

QUARRY

Quarry A nature/butterfly site at the Quarry will be beneficial to school children as well as the flora/fauna. Plants can’t grow anywhere The quarry is not being managed properly as a conservation area for wildlife ie birds, deer, rabbits, foxes etc, just butterflies Cows coming through would keep paths open. Nettles and glass covering paths. No need for gate. Butterfly people not maintaining it for wild life. Stile at top of lane. Nettles have just been let to grow, it should not just be for butterflies as this quarry belongs to the people of Allithwaite and should be able to be used by them. But development should include conservation and habitat for birds and animals and access for people to observe and see more wildlife. Need more control of brambles, nettles and undergrowth. Quarry may be good for butterflies Good idea to develop quarry and establish as public amenity A nature/butterfly site at the Quarry will be beneficial to school children as well as the flora/fauna. Plants can’t grow anywhere Very good idea Quarry does not need developing. Cut path once a year, maintain lime kiln. Butterfly people stopping people going to the quarry Lime kiln full of asbestos. Also council sign at quarry? Quarry sign saying no work being done during breeding season (gone now) Needs tidying up again

GENERAL COMMENTS

Comments 012 hectares or less could be too small and result in overcrowding support the agricultural buildings policy support the principal residence requirement need to protect children walking and cycling along the roads in the village safer route to school – priority the narrows, very difficult corner by square ? Allithwaite is not a pedestrian friendly village =-need for link footpaths – condition for? (couldn’t decipher) Avoid crowding houses in new developments Level of development being allowed depressing. Area will lose its villages to become a linear urban sprawl. Only houses needed are housing association properties for young families to rent – plenty of expensive houses for sale in the area. No further development except in precise areas already agreed for development Too much traffic. Already the village (Allithwaite) is too big

81

Appendix 6 Neighbourhood Plan – Questionnaire Results allow for green space in between to keep village feel villages by definition include green spaces, don’t in fill at all Need to allow for progress as well as trying to keep the local character too much use of Quarry Lane now to community centre, another extended road should have been through Greendale’s we do not need more housing before jobs I would like to see some barns staying as barns, but when converted, require provision for owls, bats and birds to roost and nest What about a design panel to comment on proposals – perhaps with local architects? Support being open to sympathetic modern design All these comments and not a mention of the bus service – 14.30 Monday – Friday for last bus disgraceful – couldn’t use it for getting to work if you wanted to Re draft policy LANP13 the site B is regarded as’ infill plot’. By whom? What is the definition of an infill plot? Create a Parish Action in the Neighbourhood Plan to prompt developers to think about vehicle access and restrictions during development phase particularly in out of the way sites with narrow lanes/tight bends (eg artic lorry going to Haggs Lane couldn’t turn at the Pig and Whistle)

82

Lower Allithwaite Parish Council

Design Guide

Neighbourhood Plan – Appendix 7

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

This Design Guide supports the information and adopted guidance as laid out in the adopted SLDC Allithwaite and Cartmel Conservation Area Character Appraisal (CACA) (2006). The CACA is a detailed 54-page document that seeks to define what is special about the designated area’s character and appearance. Developers wishing to put forward planning proposals are expected to use this guide in conjunction with the CACA for greater detail and guidance regarding technical evidence in support of the Local Plan.

84

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

CONTENTS

Part One – Residential Areas 87

1 Quality Design in Lower Allithwaite Parish 88

1.1 Design Quality 88

1.2 Relief and Context 89

1.3 Character and Landmarks 89

1.4 Character Areas 92

1.5 Design Issues 93

Part Two - Design Guide Principles 95

2 Justification of design principles 96

3 Explanation of Design Principles 96

3.1 Principle 1 96

3.2 Principle 2 98

3.3 Principle 3 98

3.4 Principle 4 99

3.5 Principle 5 100

3.6 Principle 6 101

3.7 Principle 7 101

3.8 Principle 8 101

3.9 Principle 9 102

3.10 Principle 10 102

3.11 Principle 11 103

3.12 Principle 12 103

85

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

3.13 Principle 13 105

3.14 Principle 14 105

4 Character Areas 105

4.1 Allithwaite 105

4.2 Cartmel 106

5 Acceptable Design Examples 107

5.1 Bungalows 107

5.2 Terraced Houses 108

5.3 Semi-detached Houses 108

5.4 Town House 109

5.5 Detached Houses 110

6 Conclusion 110

Map 1 – Allithwaite 90

Map 2 - Cartmel 91

86

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

Part One

Residential Areas

87

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

1. Quality Design in Lower Allithwaite Parish The purpose of this document is to provide design guidance to owners, developers and anyone who is involved in the planning, design and development of sites which fall within the Neighbourhood Plan Area and NPPF paragraph 125 which advises that Neighbourhood Plans can play an important role in identifying the special qualities of an area and how this can be reflected in development.

They also clarify some of the policies and guidance contained in the South Lakeland District Council (SLDC) Local Plan Core Strategy and other related strategic documents which apply to design and development in Lower Allithwaite Parish. Together with the SLDC policies, this guide is intended to provide a framework for development which complements and enhances the character and qualities of Allithwaite and Cartmel and encourages good design. It is not intended to stifle innovation or to be restrictive, but to help guide the design process. Guidance is given in NPPF (July 2018) to provide maximum clarity about design expectations at an early stage, plans or supplementary planning documents should use visual tools such as design guides and codes.

88

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

1.1 Design Quality Lower Allithwaite is an area of great landscape and beauty. Farming provides the landscape and the landscape provides a thriving tourism industry. The local heritage is what gives a place its character. The existing built environment and local heritage are often forgotten elements when it comes to development. The built and historic environment should be conserved and where possible enhanced for future generations to enjoy the beauty.

1.1.1 Lower Allithwaite’s distinctive villages with an attractive environment and many positive and memorable features. This section identifies the physical aspects of the villages and establishes some directions for maintaining and enhancing the best of Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Area, while ameliorating some of its less attractive features.

1.2 Relief and Context Lower Allithwaite is a civil parish in the South Lakeland district of the English county of Cumbria. It includes the villages of Allithwaite and Cartmel, the historic Cartmel Priory, Humphrey Head and Cartmel Racecourse.

1.2.1 Allithwaite is a small village in the Parish, located roughly 1.2 miles (1.9 km) west of Grange- over-Sands.

1.2.2 Cartmel village is located 2.2 miles (3.5 km) north-west of Grange-over-Sands and close to the River Eea. The village was once known as Kirkby in Cartmel, as it was the location of the church for the large parish of Cartmel. It is the location of the 12th century Cartmel Priory.

1.2.3 Lower Allithwaite Parish lies on a complex geological composition of limestone rock which has a significant effect on the area through its appearance as outcrops and pavements, its use in buildings and stone walls, and its contribution to flooding problems. There are longstanding flooding “hotspots” in business and residential areas throughout the Parish.

1.3 Character and Landmarks: One of Lower Allithwaite’s most reassuring qualities is its sense of community and the quality of the architecture that provides its character and form.

1.3.1 There are a number of architectural landmarks in Lower Allithwaite contributing to its historic form and heritage which have considerable significance in the streetscape. Some examples of these architectural landmarks are shown on Map 1 for Allithwaite and Map 2 for Cartmel.

89

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

1.3.2 Cartmel Conservation Area Appraisal Townscape Features Map and its associated map key at https://www.southlakeland.gov.uk/media/3911/cartmel-townscape-features-map.pdf, which identifies major and locally important landmarks and other significant elements of

5

3

4 1

townscape character, including key views and other spatial elements.

Map 1 - Allithwaite 1. Quarry 2. Community Playing Fields 3. Community Orchard 2 4. King George V Playing Fields 5. St Mary’s Church

90

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

1.3.3 The Anglican parish church in the village is St. Mary's Church, built in 1864–65 and designed by the Lancaster architect E. G. Paley. There is a small primary school, Allithwaite Primary C of E School located next to the church. Both church and school were built by a legacy left to the village.

1.3.4 A mile to the south, Wraysholme Tower is a 15th-century Pele tower, used as a barn and cow- house, adjoining a 19th-century farmhouse.

1 3 2

5

4

Map 2 – Cartmel

1. Cartmel Priory 2. Cartmel Racecourse 3. Cartmel Priory Gatehouse 4. Cartmel Primary School 5. Pig and Whistle Inn

91

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

1.3.5 Within the conservation area are many fine listed buildings clustered around the Grade 1 Priory Church of St Mary and St Michael. The river and water meadows running through the heart of the village soften the hard edges of the built environment and are key features which must be protected.

1.3.6 Cartmel Priory Gatehouse is a medieval building and is listed grade II and is part of a scheduled monument. It belongs to the National Trust. Along with the church, the gatehouse is all that remains of the Augustinian Cartmel Priory.

1.3.7. Cartmel Racecourse is a small racecourse in the village of Cartmel. Nine race days are held each year, starting on the Whit Holiday weekend at the end of May and ending on the August Bank Holiday weekend in August Bank Holidays.

1.4 Character Areas 1.4.1 The Designated Neighbourhood Area of Lower Allithwaite extends over 2,859 hectares and had

a population of 1831 residents in 20111.

1.4.2 Tourism is a fundamental part of the local economy. However, regional North West and local niche markets are becoming increasingly competitive. As a consequence, tourist facilities need to become more specialised, offering higher quality goods and services, with a focus on added value and higher wage employment opportunities.

1.4.3 Cartmel is situated in the flood zone of the river Eea and its tributary becks. It includes a conservation area with many Georgian and Victorian properties, although within the ‘Church Town’ area, a high proportion of these seem to preserve earlier medieval fabric set within an early medieval street pattern.

1.4.4 The Cartmel conservation area includes not only the two separate built up areas, ‘New Town’ and Church Town’ that form the settlement but also the immediate landscape setting around the village to the north, south, and west, as well as a narrow corridor of meadow land which separates the two discrete areas.

1.4.5 The Grade 1 listed Priory and the Race course are both major attractions as are the many pubs, hotels, restaurants, cafes and shops. It is an important employment zone but most houses are second homes or holiday lets. Outside this central area are various newer developments from different decades of the 20th Century some of which have made little attempt to respond to the specific context of Cartmel’s historic environment.

92

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

1.4.6 A relatively high proportion of residents living within the Lower Allithwaite area had high levels

of satisfaction within living in the area2. Time and again respondents comment on the quality of the countryside, its scenery and its tranquillity.

1.4.7 Lower Allithwaite has a relatively high proportion of detached houses (45.5% of dwellings compared to South Lakeland, 30.8%) and a low proportion of flats (6.0% of dwellings compared to South Lakeland 15.6%. 83.2% of households in Lower Allithwaite are owner occupied, compared to 73% in South Lakeland, with 5.7 of households being social rented accommodation compared to 10.7% in South Lakeland.

1.5 Design Issues 1.5.1 Through a number of consultation events during the process of developing the Neighbourhood Plan a number of issues were highlighted in relation to residential design:

• There was great concern expressed about unsympathetic patterns and location of recent development, i.e. new housing estates that add little or nothing to the character of the villages and the surrounding area.

• There were strong feelings that new developments should be integrated within the villages and community, that it should be a coherent addition supporting the environment rather than further piecemeal type development with no links to the key service areas.

• There were strong feelings that new development should be complementary to the villages in character, form and quality, that it should aspire to the same design and construction quality as found in the historic core area.

• There was great concern about the impact new development might have on much- valued views of Morecambe Bay and the surrounding hills.

• There was great concern that any new development should respect the landscape and setting of the villages.

• There was some concern that the density of some recent housing development was too high, though this may be attributable to the layout and scale of buildings rather than the density itself

93

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

• There was great concern that new developments might exacerbate local flooding problems, as many allocated sites are near or uphill of known problems areas. There was a strong wish to see drainage designs for new developments being based on a very thorough and informed assessment of local hydrological conditions, and also forming a key part of the site design from the earliest stages of the planning process.

1.5.2 Therefore, it is vital that new development, particularly of new housing, safeguards and enhances the distinctive character, appearance and qualities of Lower Allithwaite and that development is of a nature and scale appropriate to an historic village (Cartmel) and its setting.

1.5.3 These Design Guide Principles are therefore intended to apply to all new development within Lower Allithwaite.

94

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

Part Two Design Principles

95

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

2 Justification of Design Principles

2.1 The purpose of this document is to provide design guidance to owners, developers and anyone who is involved in the planning, design and development of sites which fall within the Neighbourhood Plan Area. They also clarify some of the policies and guidance contained in the South Lakeland District Council (SLDC) Core Strategy and other related strategic documents which apply to design and development in Lower Allithwaite. Together with the SLDC policies, this guide is intended to provide a framework for development which complements and enhances the character and qualities of Lower Allithwaite and encourages good design. It is not intended to stifle innovation or to be restrictive, but to help guide the design process.

2.1 Lower Allithwaite has distinct character, form and quality. The design of new development should be within the context of the Lower Allithwaite unique features and characteristics, responding appropriately to its historic setting and supporting the evident sense of community. The design of any new development should therefore be complementary to Lower Allithwaite, drawing upon, and inspired by, the Allithwaite and Cartmel villages individual assets:

• Its topography and surrounding hills • Allithwaite and Cartmel with its distinctive biodiversity and ecology • Patterns of development that have been influenced by the topography to provide an exceptional outline • The historic buildings within Lower Allithwaite core area and public spaces • Views of the Bay and Lower Allithwaite.

3 Explanation of Design Principles

3.1 Principle 1

Development should make a positive contribution towards the distinctive character and form of Lower Allithwaite as a whole and relate well to its site and its surroundings. Proposals should seek to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area.

Lower Allithwaite has a distinctive character and identity, based on its unique assets and areas of special interest. These assets are important to local people.

Lower Allithwaite’s most reassuring qualities is its sense of community and it is the quality of architecture and villages that provides its character and form. There are a number of architectural landmarks in Lower Allithwaite all contributing to its historic form and heritage which have considerable significance in the landscape.

96

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

Development should contribute to the character and form of Lower Allithwaite as a whole, incorporating design principles that reflect the historic core of the villages, the most successful and cherished part of the villages. This principle does not seek to impose a particular architectural style, instead it aims to ensure that new development relates to the specific local context, character and form of Lower Allithwaite.

Lower Allithwaite Parish historic character is rich and varied, particularly reflecting the incremental development of the area. The quality of design should, therefore, ensure that new buildings contribute positively to the historic character and form of Lower Allithwaite. When a traditional design is followed, it should aim to be appropriately proportioned and detailed. The design approach should use historically- compatible materials so that it does not result in a debased version of an historic style, which would undermine the overall historic character and form of the Parish.

Different areas within the villages have different characteristics. Some of these characteristics enhance the area and some might be said to detract from it, therefore, development proposals should respond to the unique character of the site and its surroundings, maintaining or enhancing its strengths, and seeking to address its weaknesses.

97

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

3.2 Principle 2

Architectural appearance should be appropriate to the context and take account of the eclectic mix of form and style.

Lower Allithwaite’s historic character is rich and varied, particularly reflecting the incremental development of the area. The quality of design should, therefore, ensure that new buildings contribute positively to the historic character and form of the villages. When a traditional design is followed, it should aim to be appropriately proportioned and detailed. The design approach should use historically- compatible materials so that it does not result in a debased version of an historic style, which would undermine the overall historic character and form of Lower Allithwaite.

The proportions of buildings are also important. The older buildings in the Parish and surrounding villages, which are important in the conservation area all 'fit' into their setting. They do not dominate. Although some of the larger Victorian and Edwardian houses have three stories, these buildings were originally set in grounds in proportion to the dwelling and so do not dominate the street scene. Details are of great importance too. The shape and design of windows and doorways need to reflect the styles used in these historic buildings. They often are quite deep set into walls - designed to give protection from the weather.

There are 96 listed buildings within the parish of Lower Allithwaite. Any development proposal that may affect a listed building or its setting should preserve the special architectural or historic interest of the building and its setting embodied within Lower Allithwaite.

3.3 Principle 3

Materials within new development should complement the architectural character and quality of its immediate context.

There is a preference for the design of new buildings to use natural and indigenous materials (for roofs, external walls and joinery) which have a natural coherence with the buildings in Lower Allithwaite. Materials should be selected with care to ensure they are of the type that will blend into their surroundings more with age and weathering. Lower Allithwaite’s much appreciated architectural tradition achieves a rich cohesion through a limited palette of materials. New development should incorporate the same approach.

The following are predominant materials and should be incorporated in the design of new buildings:

98

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

• Local building stone, where possible sourced from local quarries. The use of quarried limestone of similar geological composition and colour to the locally predominant material and in shaped rectangular blocks and laid to even beds and perpend joints.

• Local slate, to reflect the existing character of much of the local roofscape?

• Render, either painted white or left its natural colour. There is evidence of both roughly dashed and smoother stucco type finishes within the historic core of the villages and the application of each should be considered as specific to the nature and character of each structure.

• Porches in general need to be slate roofed (gabled or lean to roof forms/open sided or enclosed walls)

• Brick – there are brick buildings interspersed within the core of the villages, therefore, limited use of red brick will be acceptable within new development(s).

3.4 Principle 4

Design of new buildings should incorporate roofing materials and patterns that complement their

immediate context.

Where older houses in the Lower Allithwaite are clustered together it can be seen that they are rarely identical, but vary in size, proportions and detail which reflects the way the villages have grown over years and the changing fashions for style and materials. They have come together in a fortuitous rather than formally planned manner as the area has developed and needs have changed. An approach to roofing form and materials should be included and illustrated within any Design and Access Statement.

Natural slate is typical of roofs in the villages and contribute greatly to its character. Thus, there is a preference for natural slate to be incorporated within new developments.

Alternatives which might be considered include:

• Artificial stone, only if this has a similar colour, texture, variety of unit sizes and diminishing coursing per local stone tile roofs.

• Natural clay tiles only if this has a similar colour, texture and variety of unit sizes to those used in the specific local context;.

• Lead and zinc (only allowed in exceptional situations for shallow pitched roofs which may be incorporated within an overall design methodology).

99

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

3.5 Principle 5

The form and structure of new development should ensure that a sense of place is created, which respects its context, setting, local village and landscape character

A recurring theme throughout the consultation process is that recent developments in Lower Allithwaite have not been good enough in the layouts or streetscapes they present. Consensus opinion is that they detract from the character, form and quality of the villages rather than enhance or complement them. Improving the design character, form and raising the quality of any new development and ensuring it reflects the rich tradition and variety of the villages was seen as very important.

Therefore, with any new development in Lower Allithwaite conservation area, consideration should be given to the composition of frontages, building types and sizes and landscaping to ensure the street frontage is harmonious, as opposed to a random collection of urban components that do not relate to each other.

The form of new development should consider the opportunity to accommodate economic as well as residential activity, providing the opportunity for mixed development.

100

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

3.6 Principle 6

Design of new buildings should interpret and enhance the character, appearance and identity of Lower Allithwaite through high quality tailored developments which are specific to the site.

One of Lower Allithwaite’s defining characteristics and most loved features is the diversity of architecture across a range of sizes of buildings within the villages. However, within this eclectic mix there are common themes ensuring a natural coherence. Therefore, there is scope for variation in architectural style as there is precedent for this within the villages, and individual architectural expression is expected and encouraged, subject to the proviso that the design of buildings and spaces is harmonious and contributes to a cohesive local identity.

The rhythm of the buildings and houses in the villages in terms of continuity of frontages and, at a more detailed level, the ratio of solid (wall) to void (windows and door), materials, predominance of pitched roofs and vertical emphasis to windows should be used to inform the way in which elevations are handled within new development. The above is not intended to invoke stylistic preferences, merely to ensure that the design of new buildings is consistent with the quality of form and character in the best of Lower Allithwaite.

3.7 Principle 7

The scale and massing and layout of all new buildings should be informed by and sensitive to local topography and landscape character and the wider setting of the development within Lower Allithwaite parish.

The outline of Lower Allithwaite parish and views into and out from it rely upon sensitively-scaled buildings. Proposed building heights should be guided by building scale, form and grain existing already within the parish. The scale and massing of buildings should also be informed by the nature of the street or development site position they occupy. As a general rule, new buildings should not exceed 3 storeys.

3.8 Principle 8

Development proposals should maintain visual connections with the surrounding countryside and where possible the Bay

Where possible, open views towards the countryside, or across open spaces, should be maintained from key existing routes within Lower Allithwaite and new development sites.

101

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

For example, a view along an existing street / road can be maintained by continuing along the same alignment. Views along streets and/or open spaces to the surrounding countryside should be created within new developments where there are opportunities to do so.

Both panoramas and even glimpses of the Bay through gaps between buildings are defining features of Lower Allithwaite parish should be incorporated in any design approach to new development.

It is particularly necessary to have regard to the Neighbourhood Plan Policy Conserving Gateway Views which highlights certain views of particular importance.

3.9 Principle 9

Visual impact should be enhanced or adequately mitigated through the design of the site layout, buildings and landscape. The approach to enhancing visual impact should be fully explained in an accompanying Design and Access Statement.

As elsewhere in Lower Allithwaite, where village and countryside are intrinsically linked, developers proposing to build in proximity to the surrounding countryside should recognise the unique character and setting the location provides and address this positively through the inclusion of appropriate landscaping treatments and respect for the local topography and its tree cover.

An assessment of views to and from the proposed development should be included in the Design and Access Statement. Visual impact should be enhanced or adequately mitigated through the design of the site layout, buildings and landscape. The approach to enhancing visual impact should be fully explained in the Design and Access Statement.

It is particularly necessary to have regard to the Neighbourhood Plan Policy Conserving Gateway Views which highlights certain views of particular importance.

3.10 Principle 10

Within new development proposals, where possible, opportunities for creating public space(s) should be identified

As evidenced throughout Lower Allithwaite, public spaces play a vital role in the social life of the villages. The design of spaces between buildings should be given the same care as that given to the buildings. The provision of public space should therefore be integral to the overall design concept, exploring the opportunity to create a well-defined space. In Lower Allithwaite public spaces provide a focal point and it is advised that a similar approach should be taken to integrate such a feature in the design of any new public space(s) especially within new developments.

102

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

3.11 Principle 11

Design in the ‘forgotten’ elements from the start of the design process

The following items should be considered early in the design process and integrated into the overall scheme:

• Bin stores and recycling facilities • Cycle stores • Lighting • Flues and ventilation ducts • Satellite dishes and telephone lines. • Bin stores and recycling facilities should be designed to screen bins from public view, whilst being easily accessible for residents.

• Meter boxes: consider a tailored approach that fits in with the materials used for the remainder of the building. Position them to be unobtrusive or incorporate ‘smart meters’.

• Position flues and ventilation ducts to be as unobtrusive as possible. Use good quality grilles that fit in with the approach to materials for the building as a whole.

• Guttering and rainwater down pipes should be shown on application drawings (elevations) to ensure they fit into the overall design approach to the building and minimise their visual impact.

These items are all too easily forgotten until the end of the design process. By considering them early, it will be possible to design them in at the beginning of the process in a way that doesn’t appear an afterthought.

3.12 Principle 12

Design car parking so that it fits in with the character of the proposed development

Lower Allithwaite was designed before the car became the preferred mode of private transport and there were many comments about the lack of availability for car parking during the consultation process. In order to adapt to current preferences for travel yet provide safe and attractive streets, there is a preference for the use of small parking courts contained within perimeter blocks. These spaces can be provided in a variety of ways

A range of car parking options for new development was considered by the Neighbourhood Planning Steering Group in light of the community consultations:

103

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

• Courtyard/mews • On-street in discreet bays • In-curtilage • Garages

Courtyards/mews There has been a general preference for the majority of car parking within new development to be accommodated within well designed small courtyards/mews. These spaces can be appealing and have been shown to work well where:

• They are not just car parks, but places which have multi uses with parking in them; eg: play area. • They are overlooked by adjoining houses, or by buildings entered from the parking area such as flats/workspace over garages.

• They normally include, at most, 10 parking spaces – if there are more spaces, the courtyard layout should be broken up so it doesn’t resemble a car park.

• There are at least 2 vehicular access points and additional pedestrian access.

On-street / road It is acknowledged that the provision of on-street / road parking keeps the space active, helps with reducing traffic speeds and is consistent with local aspirations for the inclusion of shared surfaces within new residential development, however it should not detract from the sense of place of new developments. Visitor parking for cars, small vans and motorcycles should generally use shared public on-street parking.

In-curtilage On plot car parking, will be considered acceptable however it should not detract from the sense of place of a new development. For in curtilage parking, the following principles should be incorporated and where possible a mix of approaches should be used to provide variety, avoid dominance and reflect the differing types and styles of the houses within each development:

• Garages should be designed to be consistent in architectural style and character of the house they serve.

• Garages should be set back from the street frontage. • Parking should be tucked discreetly between houses (rather than in front) so that it does not dominate the street scene.

• Where parking is located in front of houses, design of the street and the landscaping to minimise their visual impact, e.g. incorporate planting between front gardens.

104

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

3.13 Principle 13

Outdoor garden amenity space or a shared amenity area where possible and practicable, should be provided for all new dwellings, including Extra Care housing

The amount of land used for garden or amenity space should be commensurate with the size and type of dwelling and the character of the area and should be of appropriate quality having regard to topography, shadowing (from buildings and landscape features) and privacy.

3.14 Principle 14

To ensure that new homes are accessible and can be easily adapted as people’s needs change throughout their lifetime.

Accessible and adaptable homes that are designed and built to a standard that meets the needs of occupants with differing needs, including some older or disabled people. They must also allow adaptation to meet the changing needs of occupants over time. These homes are broadly equivalent to, and replace the former Lifetime Homes standards, which SLDC have encouraged through its Core Strategy Policy CS6.2. Homes built to this standard are more flexible and readily adaptable as people’s needs change, for example if they have children and require easy access for pushchairs, if they have a temporary or permanent disability or health issue, or as they gradually age and their mobility decreases.

People’s housing needs change as they get older, and homes designed in a way that makes them more easily accessible and adaptable allows people to stay in their own homes for longer, as adaptations are easier and cheaper to undertake. With public health and social care strategies placing more emphasis on supporting people in their own homes rather than moving to residential care it is important that we ensure that more adaptable and accessible homes are provided in the district.

This is particularly important given that Lower Allithwaite parish has a higher proportion of older housing stock than regional and national averages, and national studies have shown that older properties are generally less accessible, and harder to adapt.

4 Character Areas 4.1 Allithwaite Lower Allithwaite is an area of great landscape and beauty. Farming provides the landscape and the landscape provides a thriving tourism industry. The local heritage is what gives a place its character. The existing built environment and local heritage are often forgotten elements when it comes to development. The built and historic environment should be conserved and where possible enhanced for future generations to enjoy the beauty.

105

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

A questionnaire was conducted in 2012, and the results fed into the production of a Community Plan for the Parish in 2013. The frequently voiced message was one that the future was that the area and the villages would stay the same. On the whole respondents appreciated how their village looked, and the surrounding countryside was as much if not more important.

Most people felt that alterations or repairs to buildings were in keeping with the village tradition (51% compared with 16% who did not) and that older or more historic buildings were well looked after (57% against 7%). However, neither satisfaction nor dissatisfaction were strong. Residents from Cartmel felt there should be greater enforcement and supervision of conservation area planning principles. Plastic or otherwise inappropriate windows and doors were mentioned frequently.

4.2 Cartmel Cartmel Conservation area is an asset to the Parish. Cartmel was historically situated in the historic county of Lancashire within the Furness peninsular that was popularly known as ‘Lancashire beyond the sands’. It is now located within the modern county of Cumbria and the local government district of South Lakeland and is a medium sized village, the civil parish of which had a resident population of 1,783 in 2003 and 1,811 in 2011.

106

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

The conservation area includes not only the two separate built up areas that form the settlement but also the immediate landscape setting around the village to the north, south, and west, as well as a narrow corridor of meadow land which separates the two discrete areas.

The design guide seeks to ensure that all development within the Parish is of an appropriate design and nature that allows the parish to grow in a way that retains the existing character.

The Parish Council consider that that existing legislation, National Planning Policy, and South Lakeland Core Strategy and associated documents provide appropriate protection for Heritage assets in the form of Statutory Listed Buildings. However, protection of Cartmel Conservation Area and non-designated assets are a priority for the Parish Council.

5 Examples of Acceptable Design (not all examples are from Lower Allithwaite) 5.1 Bungalows

During the consultation process the bungalow in the photo above was chosen by the community as incorporating an interesting modern design with character, using materials that are appropriate to the area.

107

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

5.2 Terraced Houses

The top-rated terrace house design during the consultation process includes a variety of local materials; the proportions are good and fit well with other nearby buildings. Additionally, the frontages are stepped rather than being in a long line.

5.3 Semi-detached Houses

108

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

The consultation process identified the semi-detached houses in the above photograph as an acceptable design model. The deep window embrasures and doorways reflect the styles of old Lakeland cottages. The locally sourced materials are those frequently used in local vernacular architecture. The proportions fit in well with nearby buildings.

5.4 Town Houses

Community preference identified this as an appropriate design for a town house as there is a good use of local materials giving texture to the final building. There is an interesting variety of faces to the elevation. The dormer windows reflect similar ones found on old cottages in the area.

109

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

5.5 Detached Houses

The consultation process led to the choice of this design as it is not too dominant and relates well to its setting, it has also used local materials and has good proportions.

6 Conclusion All new development will be expected to respond positively to the key attributes of the parish and local design features of the villages. Development will not be supported where it has a detrimental impact on the character of the area in which it is located.

All new development within or adjacent to Cartmel Conservation Area (Map 2) will be expected to maintain and where possible enhance the positive attributes.

The Community Plan questionnaire results indicate that open spaces in the villages were greatly valued – 91% of respondents indicated such spaces were very or fairly important. In addition, the quality of the surrounding countryside was seen as being of equal or more importance.

Green infrastructure is important to underpin the overall sustainability of a development by performing a range of functions including flood risk management, the provision of accessible green space, climate change adaptation and supporting biodiversity.

110

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan Design Guide - 2018

Lower Allithwaite supports a range of protected and vulnerable species. The Neighbourhood Plan is recognised as an important local tool in ensuring that new development has a positive impact on green infrastructure supporting local wildlife and habitats.

111

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

APPENDIX 8 ALLITHWAITE FOOTPATH CONSULTATION

Public Drop-In Consultation – Feedback

Would you use any of the footpaths?

Would use Would use Would not Path regularly occasionally use 1a 11 1 3 1b 16 5 1 2 12 3 3 3 11 4 1 4 1 3 3 Total 51 16 11

Which is your preferred route?

1a 1b 18 48

Additional comments:

1b - closer to village facilities 1b - closer to school and village 1b - less far to walk to school when the footpath stops 1a - too long a detour?

Path 1a • Would use 1a at least twice daily. This is a great location to access North and South Allithwaite and should have been done years ago! I hope to see it happens.

Path 1a and 1b • 1a and 1b would make good circular walks • 1a or 1b would only be useful if there is access at points behind the houses • 1a and 1b are still hard to get to on a busy road with no footpath. Would only benefit a few houses.

Path 1b • 1b exits nearer to the church, school and village facilities • Many young families live at the bottom of the village so a footpath through to the school (B) would be safer for them • Living in Heather Bank we have no objection to 1b. In fact a path between us and the cows would prevent them knocking the wall down • If 1b was the footpath then special safety attention should be paid to Vicarage Lane as there are regularly large lorries and cars going up and down especially to Boarbank.

112

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

• We would use 1b and 2. We live by the Pheasant and frequently have to run the gauntlet up into the village - whilst pushing a double pushchair • Route 2 and 1b useful for getting from bottom of village to top

Path 2 • 2 would be a good access route to 1b • Route 2 and 1b useful for getting from bottom of village to top • I would use 2 twice a day at least as I live near The Pheasant. The road past Hillside Farm is very dangerous with no footpaths. I have a small child and we wear hi-vis jackets but still feel unsafe on this road. We need provision for young children and we need footpaths all round the village. • I live at Mount Carmel and would not wish people crossing the back of my garden - selfish - yes! Why has no-one spoken to me before this meeting? • Four separate mentions were made of using 1b and 2 linked

Path 3 • I would use 3 regularly because I live at Greendales and my childminder lives on Holme Lane and would be much safer with the children • 3 is a massive detour out of the way • 3 - there is no point if it comes out before the triangle (Square) this is a dangerous corner! • Footpath 3 maybe go up to Quarry Lane for ease of getting to playing fields or centre [a number of people made this point] • I support routes 1b and particularly route 3. This would serve the Kents Bank area which is in the catchment for Allithwaite school • If you’re going to spend £30k do 3 and 4 first which benefits those at the bottom of the village and Kents Bank • Footpath 3 would be great if extended to Quarry Lane • Route 3 would be more useful if it went from the B road right through to Quarry Lane • Route 3 would be very useful • Route 3 would use frequently – southern section would be better if further west. • Footpath 3 is too out of way to be used. Better to move wall on main road slightly from the barn lad • Routes 3 and 4 would help me as a motorist as it is awful to see them almost clinging to the wall in order to get to and from Holme Lane.

Path 4 • Route 4 doesn’t achieve much – 2 crossings of the road is little gain • If the old footpath was reopened outside the lovely Bill Jackson's old house (Hillside Farm) it would be amazing!! And of no public cost, I used the footpath to take 4 children to school and playgroup and got a friendly wave from Bill when he lived there! • We would use 1b and 2. We live by the Pheasant and frequently have to run the gauntlet up into the village - whilst pushing a double pushchair. We would also appreciate the public opening on Jackson cut through to if we still had to use the road!!! • Reopen road at Hillside Farm

113

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

• Please reopen the footpath outside Hillside Farm – save £30k and put it back into the community. • Footpath from bottom of Back Orchard through Jackson’s field to Guide entrance. • The older road by Jackson’s farm would be so much safer – could it be reinstated? • I used to use the road by Hillside Farm often, but now it’s been cut off and I find the walk down the road dangerous. Can we not use it again?

Other footpath suggestions:

• I think that we should make all the way from Flookburgh to school safer, so the footpath will help • I fink we shod haf mor pats around grand [sic] • Footpath into Cartmel • A footpath between Allithwaite and Cartmel would be a great improvement • Would also greatly welcome footpath from Allithwaite to Cartmel in the longer term maybe? • Footpath down Church Road and then down to Pheasant would be great! That would link the village

Speed restrictions:

• Speed restriction to 20mph or bypass village • Speed controls from the top of the village, past the school down to the B road • Speed restrictions through the village • Speed ramps from school area down towards Yakkers • Instead of footpaths why not do traffic calming through the village • Traffic calming around the “Guide”/Yakkers corner and up to wood yard. Also on approach to school – poss width/height restriction to vehicles • Footpaths most welcome, combined with 20mph zone throughout village • Traffic calming measures from corner of Kents Bank/Jack through to crossroads after the Narrows. • There should be a 20mph speed limit between the Yakkers and the junction of Church Road and Vicarage Lane • 20mph from the top of the village down to the main road • 20mph outside school. Lived in Allithwaite all my life – ask the born and bred locals! • Traffic calming/speed reduction needed before the the Yakkers Pub and down and beyond The Pheasant. Also from the Yakkers junction up to and beyond the woodyard • 20 mph through the village or anything which slows traffic down

Other Highways suggestions:

• What about a pavement up Church road? • (2 and 1b) I live at Yew Tree Farm Cottage. I don't drive and so I have to walk 2 children up and down to the school at least twice a day. I regularly fear for my and my children's life as people go way too fast, flying down the lanes.

114

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

• It is terrifying and means I shout at my kids and we all get stressed. Driving is not an option for me and yet it is genuinely risky to walk to school. I use the cutting through Jackson's farm, which makes things easier and safer on that awful corner. If we don't get safe footpaths, we need pavements. • I would not use the footpaths without improvement to traffic management of the B5277 - make Locker Lane a QUIET LANE. See SUSTRANS document LTN/1/104 which would benefit may residents, cyclists, horse riders. • The main danger is at the triangle – motorists coming down too fast. Footpath not really necessary. • Make Back Orchard access only, 2 bollards at top restriction • Improve B5277 at same time as any proposed development at Barn Hey • Road by Yakkers pub needs to be safer for walkers • Village bypass • The main problem is traffic, particularly at the Narrows where the signs are ignored • Can you make the centre of Allithwaite car free in some areas • Making the Square and the road where the institute is one way would mean you could put a footpath on. • [a number of people seemed to like to idea of a one way system around Church Road/the Squares] • Put a crossing at Kirkhead Road across the road that comes from Grange

General:

• I think we should build a footpath it will be safer • All routes unsafe unless lit in Winter • Would question the costings – can’t see this done for £30k! • All routes have danger areas big decisions to be made • Brought up on Boarbank Lane, how lovely it would be for future generations to learn to ride a bike along Boarbank Lane, down field and down to Humphrey Head – Wow • Whether 1a, 1b, 2, 3, or 4, we need to focus on the most number of children/pedestrians being safest. Are there more on Holme Lane or down the Narrows? • Combine with bridleway? • £30k would/could be used for improving existing traffic problems • Politics are at work! • The larger map was the best size – the smaller maps made it difficult to find out where we were

Maps showing dangerous locations Dots pretty much covered the main roads through Allithwaite, with particular danger points highlighted on Church Road by the wood yard, at the corner of Holme Lane by the Yakkers and on the B5277 past Hillside Farm and at the corner by the Pheasant and Low Square. See attached maps

115

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

ALLITHWAITE FOOTPATH – MAP 1

116

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

ALLITHWAITE FOOTPATH – MAP 2

117

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

ALLITHWAITE FOOTPATH – MAP 3

118

Appendix 8 Lower Allithwaite Footpath Consultation

ALLITHWAITE FOOTPATH – MAP 4

119

Appendix 9 Lower Allithwaite List of Consultees

Lower Allithwaite Neighbourhood Plan 2016 to 2026. APPENDIX 9

Pre-submission Consultation

Neighbouring Parishes Parish Contact email address Replied? Notes Rev KM Price [email protected] Ms J Taylor [email protected] Grange-over-Sands Ms V Tunnadine [email protected] Levens Mrs S Roberts [email protected] Stavely-in-Cartmel Mrs S Shires [email protected] Upper Allithwaite Mrs D Cowperthwaite [email protected] Miss L Rogers [email protected]

Statutory Consultees

British Gas [email protected] Cumbria Clinical Commissioning Group [email protected] Mr T Belshaw [email protected] Cumbria County Council Mr G Hale [email protected] Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership Ms G Bishop [email protected] Electricity North West Mr I Povey [email protected] Environment Agency Mr J Pickup [email protected] Highways England [email protected] Historic England Ms E Hrycan [email protected] Homes and Communities Agency Ms A Seipp [email protected] Local Enterprise P/Ship Cumbria Mr R Johnston [email protected] National Gas Distribution [email protected] Open Reach (BT) [email protected] United Utilities Group plc Mr D Sherrat [email protected]

Other Consultees

Organisation Contact Address or email Action with Communities in Cumbria Ms L Smyth [email protected] Age UK South Lakeland Mrs S Mangan [email protected] Arnside and Silverdale AONB Ms L Barron [email protected] Canal and River Trust Mrs A Truman [email protected] Cumbria Association of Local Councils Mr A Smith [email protected] Cumbria Bridleways Society Ms C Barr Crook Barn Stables, Torver, LA21 8BP Cumbria Equalities Group Awaz Aftab [email protected] Cumbria Geo Conservation Ms S Woodhead [email protected] Cumbria Interfaith Forum Mr C Butland [email protected] Cumbria Rural Housing Association Mr A Lloyd [email protected] Cumbria Tourism Mr R Greenwood [email protected] Dallam School Mrs J Hamer By Hand 120

Appendix 9 Lower Allithwaite List of Consultees

Dallam Tower Estates Mr J Oston [email protected] Disability Action Mr J Gallgher [email protected] Heversham St Peter's Primary School Head Teacher [email protected] Inland Waterways Association Miss M Dean [email protected] Invest in Cumbria Mr J Grainger [email protected] Lancaster Canal Trust Mr D Currington [email protected] Levens Estate Mr Hal Bagot [email protected] Morecambe Bay Partnership Ms S Bleakley [email protected] National Farmers Union Mr C J Davies [email protected] Renewables UK Ms G Grimes Greencoat House, Francis Street, SW1P 1DH Sam Smith's Brewery (The Blue Bell) Company Secretary Old Brewery, High Street, Tadcaster, LS24 South Lakeland CVS Ms B Sykes [email protected] South Lakes Chamber of Commerce Mr D Armstrong [email protected] South Lakes Housing Mr R Clarke [email protected] Stagecoach Cumbria and North Lancashire Mr Sanderson [email protected] Sustrans Ms N Wingfield [email protected] The Woodland Trust Mr N Sandford [email protected] Tim Farron MP Mr T Farron [email protected]

121

Appendix 10 Lower Allithwaite Evidence Based Documents

APPENDIX 10 LIST OF EVIDENCE BASE DOCUMENTS

1. South Lakeland District Council Core Strategy (adopted October 2010); 2. South Lakeland Local Plan Land Allocations (adopted in December 2013) 3. South Lakeland saved Local Plan policies (adopted 1997, saved in 2006 and updated in 2007 to incorporate modifications) 4. National Planning Policy Framework (July 2018) 5. South Lakeland Infrastructure Delivery Plan update 2014 6. The Local Plan Land Allocations (adopted in December 2013) 7. SLDC (Supplementary Planning Document) Adopted Development Brief for Land South of Allithwaite Road, Kents Bank 8. SLDC CIL Charging Schedule 2015 9. SLDC Council Plan 2014-2019 Updated February 2016 10. SLDC Housing Strategy (SLHS) 2016-2025 11. SLDC Housing Position Report, March 2016 12. SLDC Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 2014 Update 13. Parking Guidelines in Cumbria 2002 14. ONS Census data 2011 15. Extra Care Housing and Supported Living Strategy 2016-2025 (Cumbria County Council) 16. Cumbria Landscape Character Assessment and Toolkit

122