Kingston Residents' Alliance
We are active on social media:
  • Home
  • Planning Portal
    • EDEN CAMPUS >
      • EDENCAMPUS PRESENTATION
      • COMMUNITY WORK >
        • LETTERS
      • EDENCAMPUS SLIDESHOW
      • 2020 CONSULTATIONS >
        • KRA RESPONSE 10 January 2021
        • KRA RESPONSE 4th November
      • 2019 - APPLICATION
    • Seething Wells HELP >
      • SW_representation
    • Cambridge Road Estate >
      • CRE - Regeneration
    • SURREY COUNTY HALL >
      • RESIDENTS COMMENTS
      • KRA CONSULTATION RESPONSE
    • Eden Walk >
      • Eden Walk - submission in pictures
      • Eden Walk presentation 18 May
      • Eden Walk presentation 8 March
      • Eden Walk CONCERNS
      • Historic Englands Eden Walk response
      • Design Panel Review
      • Officers report - Eden Walk
    • New Local Plan >
      • Direction of Travel Consultation
      • Opportunity Area
    • Canbury Business Park
    • Old Post Office >
      • KRA response 5
      • TOPO - submission in pictures
      • Presentation notes 4
      • Old Post Office v4 Concerns
      • Historic England response v4
      • Q.C. OPINION
      • Our response to the Officers report >
        • Officers report
      • Zac Goldsmiths Response
      • Presentation notes 3
      • KRA response 3
      • A fresh look
      • Why it is wrong
      • Residents opposition
      • Notable opposition
      • What could be acceptable
      • Why some say yes
      • Who will decide
      • Other planning cases
    • Riverside Boardway
    • Market House >
      • Open Letter
      • April 2016 - Update
    • Fairfield
    • Archive >
      • Archive - Old Post Office #3
      • Archive - Old Post Office #2 >
        • Our response to Officers report >
          • Officers report
        • Historic England rejection
        • Why it is wrong
        • Weight of opposition >
          • Letters to Councillors >
            • Letter to Councillors 1
            • Letter to Councillors 2
            • Letter to Councillors 3
          • Speaker Notes >
            • Key Objections Introduction
            • Affordable Housing
            • Heritage
            • Urban design
            • Aesthetic Design
            • What might be acceptable
  • Historical Context
    • TOPO story
    • Before the final vote
    • KRA Snap Survey Findings
    • Create Streets Guide for Councillors
    • Planning documents >
      • EQDB Deputation by KRA
    • Kingston's Democracy >
      • Neighbourhood Forums
      • GROVEN >
        • Letter to Viv Evans
        • Grove Ward Neighbourhood Invite
      • North Kingston Neighbourhood Forum
      • Meeting Notes
    • RBK Councillors
    • Kingston Futures
  • Press
    • News Blog
    • In the Press
    • Letters
  • About
    • Our advisers
  • Contact
  • COMMS

Canbury Business...

27/11/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture
“We will focus on... building high quality, high density homes in city centres and around transport hubs” was one of the key comments made by the Chancellor in his latest budget speech.

On the face of it, it would be difficult to get any closer to the perfect brief than the Canbury Business Park site, given its proximity to both Kingston Train Station and Cromwell Bus Station. And with substantial office space, a medical centre and a number of Discounted Market Rate flats, the proposal might appear to address some of the important business and housing needs in the area. With the widely-acknowledged acute housing crisis directly affecting boroughs like Kingston, where hardly anyone who doesn’t already own a house can afford to buy, one could be forgiven for asking why anyone would not welcome a scheme like this.

One simple answer is alluded to in the very same budget speech by Mr Hammond:

“Infrastructure to facilitate higher density development must be ...delivered.”

The proposed plans show no such commitment. Not a bit. No direct answer to the issue of extremely poor existing public transport services, nor any acknowledgement of the already dire traffic congestion problems in the immediate vicinity - both of which would be exacerbated further by this development.

In essence, we are presented with just another Kingston Futures-backed, pro-developer identikit development, with buildings ranging in height from 4, 7 all the way up to 14, offering nothing to average people on average salaries looking to own their first home in the borough. A miserly level of ‘affordable’ housing is offered in the form of 22% Discounted Market Rent units, no solutions are presented for expanding local school capacity (instead putting a very real and very large question mark over the future of the existing Educare Small School on Cowleaze Road), and no sympathetic response is made to important local heritage.This last point, local heritage, is significant: Canbury Business Park is located almost exactly where the Sopwith Aviation Company had a large factory (formerly an ice rink) - indeed the original facade of that company’s office building still stands directly opposite the site. Kingston has a rich aviation heritage with Sopwith, Hawker and BAe being located in the town from 1912-1992, and a significant portion of it located directly at Canbury Park Road. There is an enormous missed opportunity here, with the proposal offering absolutely no acknowledgement whatsoever of this unique and cherished heritage. In fact, owing to the over-indulgent generic mass and bulk of the proposal, the original Sopwith office facade will become even more diminished and consigned to history than it is currently.

It is disheartening that, after all the experiences of recent planning controversies in Kingston, between residents and the Council/developers, we are once again facing yet another round of the same old problems. But of course, all is not necessarily lost: these plans can go back to the drawing board - they can  be improved. Instead of saying ‘this is much loved and needed’ etc and posturing against genuinely concerned residents, the planners and developers in this town, with its best interests at heart, should sit down and listen to what the community is really asking for and address their concerns seriously and promptly.


We have queries and questions regarding several areas, so please read on here
0 Comments

St George applies to amend  TOPO

8/5/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture
May 2017

TOPO developer St George has applied to 
amend their controversial planning application of 2014. The amendments effect the eastern part of the complex and include the 'post office square', but not the main tower and Brook Street elevation.

There are changes to details, an additional 3 residences, change the residential mix and increase the height by a fraction  -  less than 0.5 meters. The most significant impact is the slight increased encroachment onto the Old Post Office square. This is numbered 2.2 in the 3rd picture above. Here is how it is described:
"2.2 Set-back to the Old Post Office Square
  • The tiered set-back has been replaced with a double storey set back to improve internal apartment layouts;
  • The proposed changes have been reviewed by Anstey Horne, who have identified no further impact on daylight/sunlight and overshadowing of the Old Post Office Square. Further details of the Anstey Horne assessment can be found within the Environmental Statement Addendum;
  • This revision maintains the original design principle of the upper floors being set back.
  • Peter Stewart had reviewed the townscape aspects and has confirmed no impact on views. The TVIBHA of January 2016 to remain valid for the S73 scheme. "
Our thoughts

These amendments need to be read the in context of the Planning Application that was fiercely opposed, withdrawn, refused and ultimately permitted without fixing the 3 reasons for refusal ( see our blog post ).  This is the application they are hoping to amend.

The first reason was the impact upon the Listed Buildings. English Heritage in was strongly opposed to the harm the scheme would inflict, in particular upon the setting of the Old Post Office itself. In addition St George had incorrectly pictured sunlight where the sun could never shine. Our own shadow modelling showed the devastating overshadowing of the proposed Post Office Square. ( view on youtube )

With this amendment the setback to the southern edge of this square will be moved forward. This HAS to be more harmful. It HAS to cast more shade than before. We simply don't believe the developers claims of no further impact on the daylight/sunlight to this key selling point of the whole scheme: the Post Office Square.

This is disappointing. We would hope amendments would alleviate the harm, not make it worse. We expect better than this.
Our full response is here: KRA response 5
​
More information:
  • You can view the amendments in the Design and Access Statement Addendum April 2017 
  • You can respond before 02-Jun-2017 
  • You can see the main Planning Application page 
  • Our response

To date the only evidence of construction on site is scaffolding around the Old Post Office and a perimeter fence and gates.
0 Comments

Council approves its 'Kingston Opportunity Area - Direction of Travel'

17/10/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture

Read More
0 Comments

Council to adopt the Kingston Opportunity Area - Direction of Travel

7/10/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
Yes you read that right. They are now calling the 'Direction Of Travel' - that document we commented on -  the 'Kingston Opportunity Area - Direction of Travel'. Welcome to the sneaky world of politics, Kingston style...

Read More
0 Comments

St George applies to use TOPO as sales suite

11/7/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
On 17 June 2016 St George submitted an application to use the Old Post Office as a sales and marketing suite.

Read More
0 Comments

"Direction of Travel" what  is it?

7/6/2016

0 Comments

 

Read More
0 Comments

The Eden Walk decision meeting on 25th May

26/5/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture
Just three out of eleven Councillors voted against the Eden Walk site application...

Read More
0 Comments

Before the Eden Walk DECISION meeting on 25th May

20/5/2016

0 Comments

 
Picture

This is it: the big decision meeting


This  £440 million retail and housing application to redevelop Eden Walk will be the biggest development in the town center for decades. It will be decided by the new Development Control Committee on Wednesday 25th May 2016...

Read More
0 Comments

Walk presentation meeting on 18th May

19/5/2016

0 Comments

 

The Eden Walk pre-decision meeting - the re-run

At council meeting number 1 ( again ) of 2 in the decision making process, British Land presented; KRA & Kingston Society members presented in opposition...

Read More
0 Comments

The insignificant amendments that threw the Eden Walk schedule?

13/4/2016

0 Comments

 
Here is an update and some 'clarification' on the Eden Walk cancelled decision meeting 'shenanigans'.

Read More
0 Comments
<<Previous

    Archives

    November 2017
    May 2017
    October 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015

    Author

    KRA

    RSS Feed

    Categories

    All
    Eden Walk
    Kingston
    Old Post Office

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.