| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:L'Oriental resturant - 94 Churchfield Road | |
| Posted by: | Paul Webster | |
| Date/Time: | 24/05/20 14:59:00 |
| I completely agree and said as much in my response. However, other comments there might be ignored. For example "The planned conversion of the basement into a flat will provide accomodation with very little direct light" "Providing living quarters in the basement would go against guidelines of healthy living" "a largely underground dwelling" "a dark basement flat" "dark basement apartment" "appear to propose a dark underground flat" "a small dark basement flat" and more I suspect that the developer will try to counter all of these by saying that the objection is invalid because the area downstairs is not a self-contained flat but is a bedroom. In my objection I wote: "The only windows face to the rear of the property - which is north facing meaning very little light will enter and there will be very little airflow. The proposal includes photos from an adjacent flat that attempts to show how things could be. In doing so it confirms these issues. While it could be argued that the downstairs bedroom would not need much light (as a bedroom) it also means that there would be almost no airflow into the space and no view at all from the window. No internal dimensions are given on the plans - only a total area for each room - which makes detailed assessment difficult. An unstated consequence of this proposal is the removal of an appreciated local restaurant that has been serving the local community for over 30 years.Churchfield Road is not lacking in unoccupied retail space. Adding another retail unit, that has no indicated provisions for toilets or washing facilities for staff should it ever be let, is not needed. Removal of a restaurant that serves something different to all others in the area would be a significant blow to the community." |