| Topic: | Re:Mea culpa | |
| Posted by: | David Buckingham | |
| Date/Time: | 08/08/13 13:43:00 |
| Thanks Vlod. If it's true it's a shame the ActonW3 article didn't mention that the proposal ignores the planners' own Development Framework as above, which corresponds pretty much to local aspirations. Another recent quote (Feb 2013) from the council's own recently discovered (and scintillatingly named) 'Development Sites DPD Incorporating Minor Changes Submission Document EDS3' is even more detailed and uncompromising (quote): "Successful integration will depend on an innovative and creative layout that responds to size and structure of existing blocks within the town centre to avoid a monolithic and incongruous development. To support successful integration, proposals must provide an improved connection providing public access through the site that facilitates movement between the High Street and Churchfield Road. This should provide a legible, safe and attractive link that integrates with and improves the existing movement patterns of the town centre. Proposals should provide for active frontages to define the route, and explore the potential of the new connection to enhance the Burial Ground and intensify its use as a soft landscaped public space in the town centre. Care should be taken with the height and massing of buildings on all boundaries to ensure that the amenity of existing residential properties, the Burial Ground, and the character and appearance of the adjacent Conservation Area are preserved. The scale of development to street frontages should be commensurate with the prevailing massing of the surrounding built form." (unquote) Thanks to http://lockedoutandboxedin.wordpress.com/ - a new website set up on The Oaks - for this gem. Unless I'm missing something the developers appear to be hoist by the planners' own petard. Presumably they have been discussing acceptability with the planners, so it seems surprising the proposal has got this far, considering this fresh thinking that has been done by the planners as recently as Feb 2013. There is also the major heritage issue regarding the graveyard implicitly acknowledged above - that the new development should ENHANCE the graveyard, as well as other heritage sites locally. |