Viv Evans
Head of Planning & Transport
Development Management
Guildhall 2, High Street
Kingston upon Thames
KT1 1EU
Email: [email protected]
Reference: 14/13247
[ your address ]
6th May 2015
Dear Sir
Here below is my response to the amendments received in relation to planning application 14/13247 at DEVELOPMENT SITE AT FORMER POST OFFICE, ASHDOWN ROAD, KINGSTON UPON THAMES
It is very clear that the proposal seeks to over-develop this sensitive site. It is too dense, too high and there is too little justification for the very significant contraventions of the Council's policies. This planning application in its current form should be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
[ your name ]
Head of Planning & Transport
Development Management
Guildhall 2, High Street
Kingston upon Thames
KT1 1EU
Email: [email protected]
Reference: 14/13247
[ your address ]
6th May 2015
Dear Sir
Here below is my response to the amendments received in relation to planning application 14/13247 at DEVELOPMENT SITE AT FORMER POST OFFICE, ASHDOWN ROAD, KINGSTON UPON THAMES
- The proposal is too tall and too bulky for this sensitive location. It will damage the skyline and harm important views.
- The proposed landmark tower is too high. At 61.6m high the 19 storeys breaches current tall building heights in the vicinity without sufficient justification.
- The proposal is too tall, overbearing and out of scale & proportion to the two listed buildings on site, the street and the residential neighbourhood.
- The Council's Eden Quarter Development brief SPD and I say the proposed Ashdown Road building is far too high. It should be 6 - 8 storeys, not the 13 proposed.
- The Development is too dense - the number of habitable rooms per hectare exceeds the range given by the London Plan and some habitable rooms are too small as defined by the London Plan.
- The Design Panel Review and I say the aesthetic design is unacceptably poor, lacking innovation and imagination.
- The 17% affordable housing is unacceptably lower than the council's 50% policy.
- The sustainability level falls short of the councils target.
- The impact on parking, transport, infrastructure and services is not sufficiently considered. Such as additional school places, GP surgery places, policing, on-street parking, additional peak hour traffic congestion in an already congested area.
- The public consultation was misleading and not effective enough.
- The new Post Office Square will not be as successful and pleasant as we are being promised due to the tall development blocking sun and light on its south side.
- No public access up the tallest building in the area is disappointing.
It is very clear that the proposal seeks to over-develop this sensitive site. It is too dense, too high and there is too little justification for the very significant contraventions of the Council's policies. This planning application in its current form should be rejected.
Yours sincerely,
[ your name ]