Eden Quarter Development Brief - KRA Deputation
This Deputation is submitted to the Full Council on 15.12.2015 by Tony Lancaster.
"Thank you Mayor & Councillors for agreeing to this deputation. We are a non-partisan group of local residents representing a number of residents’ associations and social groups in Kingston.
On 5th February 2015, the Council voted to adopt the amended version of the Eden Quarter Development Brief SPD and at that time KRA representative read out a statement to the committee to set out our concerns. Concerns that we still have.
Best part of a year and numerous planning applications later, here we are looking at the consequences of this important document. It is clear from the already proposed large scale developments awaiting DCC decision there are countless breaches of the documents intent.
For us, it is clear that the EQDP is not working.
We consider that instead of conformity numerous excuses are offered by developers for not complying with the brief: They use the London Plan, the GLA, even CrossRail 2. We are also told that the new local plan, ready in a few years’ time, will change this brief. But to address the shortcomings of this plan we need to act now.
Today we would like to reiterate the same 4 concerns we raised almost a year ago in this same room.
1) Building height ( including mass and scale )
2) Heritage and character
3) Design quality
4) Fairfield
1. Building Height
The current ambiguity of ‘9+ storeys’ has to be resolved. The claim that specifying a maximum height means everyone will build up to that height - is clearly not valid. Right now the Old Post Office and the Eden Walk developers want to build up to an unofficial limit of 16 storeys. Let's put that limit into the public domain and have it democratically agreed.
As Kingston residents, we feel that tall buildings are judged in a haphazard fashion and on a case-by-case basis. Moreover, we feel that such major changes to Kingston's skyline should not be allowed without proper public consultation.
On September 10, at the Mayo Centre, Kevin Davis publicly said that "Nothing taller than the existing landscape is worth looking at." We wholeheartedly support this statement. We call on the Council to set a height cap and produce a policy document on tall buildings that has been adequately tested.
2 Heritage and Character
We call on the Council to focus on enhancing our unique 'market town feel' and not to change the centre of Kingston into another generic urban development based on mall shopping, cinemas and restaurants. We believe that adding a set of banal high rises will have a detrimental effect on the character and image of this historic town centre. We believe that a revised EQDB and new Guidance for Tall Buildings and Key Views SPD will protect and improve the mostly suburban character of the borough, especially its areas of significant historical interest.
3 Design Quality
We are collectively disappointed with the low quality of the designs put forward by a number of the proposals coming to planning. We are concerned that Kingston will continue to fill up with buildings of low architectural interest and poor design quality. We need clarity on what are ‘exemplar buildings’ and as defined by whom? This deliberately open definition is an iconic gateway to muddled thinking and poor decision making. KRA has demonstrated that though meaningful and working definitions are elusive, they in fact are needed more than ever if we are to fulfil even the vaguest notion of quality design.We call on the Council to explore additional means for ensuring that only the highest quality architecture, that residents can rightly feel proud of, is allowed in Kingston.
4 Fairfield
Although we welcome the removal of the hard landscaping proposal from the Fairfield, we call on the Council to remove the Fairfield from the development brief altogether.
Its fate does not need to be bound to the Eden Quarter development. A separate task force should be set up to consider changes and issues specific to this unique green space.
In Conclusion and in summary
This deputation has no political intent, but we are the people who voted for you.
We call for a full review and a more meaningful public consultation of the EQDB. Somewhat with the benefit of hindsight the significance of this plan only now becomes apparent. We need to find out which parts work and which elements have gone wrong.
Residents are interested in the ambitious plans to reshape the future of this historic town and this public engagement should be encouraged and used to inform policy.
The result of public consultation should be the basis of the updated EQDB.
Our message tonight simply put: We request that the EQDB be reviewed, fully debated and consulted upon, and residents should be given the opportunity for an informed choice BEFORE being ratified at full Council.
Thank you"
"Thank you Mayor & Councillors for agreeing to this deputation. We are a non-partisan group of local residents representing a number of residents’ associations and social groups in Kingston.
On 5th February 2015, the Council voted to adopt the amended version of the Eden Quarter Development Brief SPD and at that time KRA representative read out a statement to the committee to set out our concerns. Concerns that we still have.
Best part of a year and numerous planning applications later, here we are looking at the consequences of this important document. It is clear from the already proposed large scale developments awaiting DCC decision there are countless breaches of the documents intent.
For us, it is clear that the EQDP is not working.
We consider that instead of conformity numerous excuses are offered by developers for not complying with the brief: They use the London Plan, the GLA, even CrossRail 2. We are also told that the new local plan, ready in a few years’ time, will change this brief. But to address the shortcomings of this plan we need to act now.
Today we would like to reiterate the same 4 concerns we raised almost a year ago in this same room.
1) Building height ( including mass and scale )
2) Heritage and character
3) Design quality
4) Fairfield
1. Building Height
The current ambiguity of ‘9+ storeys’ has to be resolved. The claim that specifying a maximum height means everyone will build up to that height - is clearly not valid. Right now the Old Post Office and the Eden Walk developers want to build up to an unofficial limit of 16 storeys. Let's put that limit into the public domain and have it democratically agreed.
As Kingston residents, we feel that tall buildings are judged in a haphazard fashion and on a case-by-case basis. Moreover, we feel that such major changes to Kingston's skyline should not be allowed without proper public consultation.
On September 10, at the Mayo Centre, Kevin Davis publicly said that "Nothing taller than the existing landscape is worth looking at." We wholeheartedly support this statement. We call on the Council to set a height cap and produce a policy document on tall buildings that has been adequately tested.
2 Heritage and Character
We call on the Council to focus on enhancing our unique 'market town feel' and not to change the centre of Kingston into another generic urban development based on mall shopping, cinemas and restaurants. We believe that adding a set of banal high rises will have a detrimental effect on the character and image of this historic town centre. We believe that a revised EQDB and new Guidance for Tall Buildings and Key Views SPD will protect and improve the mostly suburban character of the borough, especially its areas of significant historical interest.
3 Design Quality
We are collectively disappointed with the low quality of the designs put forward by a number of the proposals coming to planning. We are concerned that Kingston will continue to fill up with buildings of low architectural interest and poor design quality. We need clarity on what are ‘exemplar buildings’ and as defined by whom? This deliberately open definition is an iconic gateway to muddled thinking and poor decision making. KRA has demonstrated that though meaningful and working definitions are elusive, they in fact are needed more than ever if we are to fulfil even the vaguest notion of quality design.We call on the Council to explore additional means for ensuring that only the highest quality architecture, that residents can rightly feel proud of, is allowed in Kingston.
4 Fairfield
Although we welcome the removal of the hard landscaping proposal from the Fairfield, we call on the Council to remove the Fairfield from the development brief altogether.
Its fate does not need to be bound to the Eden Quarter development. A separate task force should be set up to consider changes and issues specific to this unique green space.
In Conclusion and in summary
This deputation has no political intent, but we are the people who voted for you.
We call for a full review and a more meaningful public consultation of the EQDB. Somewhat with the benefit of hindsight the significance of this plan only now becomes apparent. We need to find out which parts work and which elements have gone wrong.
Residents are interested in the ambitious plans to reshape the future of this historic town and this public engagement should be encouraged and used to inform policy.
The result of public consultation should be the basis of the updated EQDB.
Our message tonight simply put: We request that the EQDB be reviewed, fully debated and consulted upon, and residents should be given the opportunity for an informed choice BEFORE being ratified at full Council.
Thank you"