Members will be disappointed to hear that despite a very clear recommendation to grant our application from the SLDC Planning Officers, our elected representatives made the reverse decision and voted 8 to 1 (with 2 abstentions) to refuse planning permission on the Mint Bridge site.

This is a complex case because of the potential for the Canal Head/Gilkes site to be developed and the Planning Officer gave a very lucid and detailed explanation of why the Canal Head site failed the ‘sequential test’…essentially because there was no actual application as yet and for a number of reasons relating to highways, bridge design and environmental impact. It was not thought possible for the development to proceed within the normal 5 year period required for the site to be considered.

Our second application (made in March 2010) had satisfied the traffic issues raised in the appeal hearing and was said to be the only application to consider…it was not a Rugby Club v Canal Head decision and there was a recommendation to grant our application. However, when comments were made by the Councillors, it was obvious that they had chosen to ignore this advice.

It was clear to me as an observer that a number of Councillors had pre-judged the issue and whatever the evidence put before them they had decided that they did not wish a supermarket to be built on our ground. There was no consideration of the Rugby Club’s future or contribution to the community in the discussion about the application.

This leaves the Club in limbo, and it is for the developer to decide whether to appeal this decision. We shall keep you informed as usual about progress and the Board will be looking at alternative strategies once we know the developer’s intentions.

Stephen Green

Chairman Kendal RUFC

24th Npvember, 2011