The current chair of the Breton House Group is leading the coordination of views on the proposed Bernard Morgan House redevelopment. Below is the latest update. If you have any comments please use the email form at the bottom of this page.
(TW is Taylor Wimpey, the developer and planning applicant)
____
I had a meeting with Lewis Kent from TW and James Garland, at their invitation, this afternoon. This was in response to several recent unanswered emails to Richard Smith.
(TW is Taylor Wimpey, the developer and planning applicant)
____
I had a meeting with Lewis Kent from TW and James Garland, at their invitation, this afternoon. This was in response to several recent unanswered emails to Richard Smith.
The latest on the planning application is that TW consider validation to be imminent, after which, of course, we will receive formal letters from City Planners. There has been no change in the proposals between the last public exhibition and the planning application, by the way.
I pointed out:
1. The height and mass of the proposed building was, as far as I was aware, the main issue for us all and re-iterated that we all expect to be shown how our individual properties would be affected. Apparently there will be graphics showing the effect of the building on the surrounding area, throughout both daylight and the year, but I said we needed views of the building from our own properties, as mentioned in our meeting with City Planners. TW also had to appreciate that losing sunlight, as opposed to daylight, was a very serious issue for those who now enjoy it. For those that don't, losing daylight, will be intolerable.
1. The height and mass of the proposed building was, as far as I was aware, the main issue for us all and re-iterated that we all expect to be shown how our individual properties would be affected. Apparently there will be graphics showing the effect of the building on the surrounding area, throughout both daylight and the year, but I said we needed views of the building from our own properties, as mentioned in our meeting with City Planners. TW also had to appreciate that losing sunlight, as opposed to daylight, was a very serious issue for those who now enjoy it. For those that don't, losing daylight, will be intolerable.
2. Personally, I didn't consider the proposed building to have any architectural merit and, in all honesty, it disrespected the architecture of the neighbourhood. If I was going to have to lose my sunlight, then the least TW could build was something that would be attractive to look at, as well as being more likely to be listed in thirty years rather than to be demolished. The fact that the design is based on the one in Wandsworth - shown on the BMH website - merely confirmed that. Even so Lewis said discussions had been held with various professionals, including City Planners, in formulating the design!
3. TW were corralled by likely objectors. In addition to residents of the adjacent properties, the freeholders of Cripplegate Institute, the Elders of Jewin Welsh Church, of which Huw Edwards is one, the Friends of Fortune Street Park and the Governors of Prior Weston School have all expressed their concerns regarding the proposals, although this might not be the case with Islington Council.
4. The development might be affected by the new Planning and Housing Act and TW were trying to expedite the application before the regulations relating to starter homes are implemented. James and Lewis denied any knowledge of this. They also denied that Brexit has any effect on TW's plans, although construction costs would be affected by the loss of value of the pound and it seems that not only would imported materials cost more, some of the workforce and/or contractors are paid in Euros.
5. The public exhibitions could not be said to be consultations. Despite TW having responded by moving the massing from Fann Street to Blackley Street, playing one side off against the other simply united both sides.
5. The public exhibitions could not be said to be consultations. Despite TW having responded by moving the massing from Fann Street to Blackley Street, playing one side off against the other simply united both sides.
Unfortunately TW has no intention of scaling back the proposed building nor reconsidering its design, unless it is forced to do so by the Planning and Transportation Committee. However, a lengthy consultation process was anticipated, during which meetings with objectors could be arranged and I asked that consideration be given to holding meetings with both objectors and City Planners.
In addition to the above we discussed one or two other matters.
In addition to the above we discussed one or two other matters.
The planning application includes a heads of terms regarding section 106 payments and, in addition, there will also be Community Infrastructure Levy payments, some of which will be used for the benefit of the local community.
TW will try to preserve and reuse the tiles. If it proves impossible to remove them without breakages, there will be a photographic record of them to enable replicas to be made and incorporated into an interior panel, if not. TW does not propose reusing any of the flint.
I also mentioned using "Clarendon", because of its association with Fann Street, in the name of whatever building we end up with.
No comments :
Post a Comment