When councillors met at Kendal Town Hall to approve the development of a 53,000 sq ft supermarket plus over 500 parking spaces, Kendal had yet to experience the worst flooding in living memory.

I am arguing against the development of this supermarket, and for a rejection of the current planning application by Morbaine Limited by South LakelandDistrict Council (SL/2016/0022) in light of the recent flooding that struck this town in December 2015.

A spokesman from Morbaine told us that a flooding event is a '1 in a 100 year event'. Yet, less than two years later the town suffered a deluge, Morbaine claims the drainage they intend to install will be 'equally effective as the existing fields.'

The fields at the rugby club have had tonnes of sand put on them every year for years, yet they still end up waterlogged. How many tonnes? Only Kendal RUFC know.

Embedded in Morbaine's planning application are two significant clauses: firstly, a flooding event is factored in as a '1 in a 100 year' event; secondly, a flooding event will occur over a 24-hour period. These caveats are fundamental to the modelling of the ongoing planning application.

The first clause has been rubbished – are they suggesting that Kendal will not flood for another 98-99 years? The second clause is equally flawed: rapid flooding takes few hours to wreak havoc.

Will these drains and underground tanks be able to displace vast quantities of water if they no longer have anywhere to divert it to?

It is precisely these developments which contribute to the escalation of flooding events, especially when built on land that has never been built on flood plains that have never been built on before. The central argument against the planning application is that it will fail to cope with a flooding event like 2015's and exacerbate flooding of local property.

Compelling evidence has been found on the Environment Agency' Flood Planning Map, which shows the entire area for the site as Flood Zone 3 - its highest category. Yet they consulted with Morbaine over the planning application and, I assume, consented with it. How is it possible for land designated as a flood zone to have a supermarket and car park built upon it?

The Jubilee playing fields, the cricket field, and both pitches of Kendal RUFC became inundated with flood water. At 2.30am on December 6, there was over one foot of of water across the first team pitch all the way up to the stands and club house.

By 8.30am the flood water had receded. Could the proposed development displace this level of flood water without having a destructive affect on other property and forcing people from their homes?

I propose that the whole development is halted and put up for review once again.

James Gosling

Kendal