|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 09/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 77
|
Re: Planning application by East Homes for Grove Farm, R/O, 951-1009, Including 1009 High Road, Chadwell Heath, Essex, RM6 4FH
Proposal: Redevelopment of site comprising 1 to 6 storey buildings to include 116 dwellings, offices, retail space, energy centre and associated works.
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
The above mentioned project that created quite a stir in the community fo Chadwell was stopped. At a planning Regulatory Committe meeting on Tuesdat 14th April I spoke against the applicatiuon due to the scale of teh project and its impact on the Chadwell community, which is already lacking in infrastructure with respect to schooling and health services. Somehow our planning department belives that their are no single mothers with a child living in 1 bed flats - this is not true and their calculation that suggetsed in a 116 unit (365 Bedroom - with variant 1 bed, 2 bed, 3 bed, and 4 bed flats) development the estimated number of children would be 25 was fallacious and rather misjudged. Furthermore the estate would be opposite a school and their intention to install a right hand filter lane for entry into the grounds of the development would result in increased conjestion on an already often-gridlocked segement of the High Road. King George hospital staff are already increasing local parking burden and the filter lane would move cars closer to a street where lots of School children would be walking. to compound matters the construction would be up to 6 storeys (reduced from 7 storeys after much campaigning by myself), which is still higher than the proposed 3 storeys I championed and Area 5 Councillors agreed to at an Area 5 Committee Meeting. I am not against development per se, however, when planning large scale projects such as this one it is essential to consult with local residents, community groups and councillors so that an accurate assessment of impact can be made.
the application has been deferred till East Thames homes devise a more sensible scheme. It was good to see councillor from all parties recognising that this project was disproportionate and to see them finally work together sensibly (with often vociferous and vitriolic debate as is to be expected), with a positive result for the people of Redbridge.
It is a rare victory for the minor people -but a satisfying one!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 30/01/2009(UTC)
Posts: 6
|
:lol: :lol: Well done, and thank you to all involved. I am delighted that the planning application was rejected/deferred as Mr Chowdhry states it is disproportinate in every sense. A child yield of 25 children from such a large developement is ridculous - the planners really do not live in the real world. The United Kingdom has the one of the worst rates for teenage pregnancy, we have a high migration rates and social mobility, London has been experiencing and continues to have a soaring birth rate and together with the economic downturn meaning it is difficult for many young families to get onto the housing ladder would surely indicate more than 25 children on this development. Now why can we not have something useful on that site eg a swimming pool ???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 06/11/2008(UTC)
Posts: 232
|
Definitly well done - it's always nice when the powers that be act in accordance with the needs of the people, but sometimes it needs the people to say what they need as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 09/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 77
|
I am not sure that this location would be a good loction for a swimming pool either due to restrictive parking - however in a ward deficient of Parks, what a good location to introduce one! Perhaps we should ask our Cabinet to re-purchase the land for this very purpose?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 16/04/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1
|
Though the plan has been rejected for now...when will it next be presented for review...additionally what is the real likelyhood of this development never reaching approval? Is going to be used for social housing? I would like to campaign against this developement too...does anyone know how I can register my dissaproval?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 09/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 77
|
I will keep all readers informed of the next date for a planning regulatory meeting for the new design and will advise residenst of how to view the design in this area 5 Forum. Keep watching......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 14/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 975
|
To Wilson Chowdry: you see, there is an advantage at not being a cllr (yet) when the purdah is being displayed!
annesevant:d
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 16/09/2007(UTC)
Posts: 874
|
Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that Flats were in less demand these days!?!?!:?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 30/01/2009(UTC)
Posts: 6
|
The grove development has been proposed by a housing association (affordable, social housing, key workers etc agenda). Developments backed by private developers may not be so lucrative considering the current climate, although one look at the Ilford town centre skyline defies this. You are right there is a need for more family housing, 3 bedroom HOUSES as opposed to flats. The only way the government is going to meet its housing targets is by allowing the building of poor quality, shabby looking high rise blocks. Again a quick glance of the Ilford Town Centre skyline is evidence of this eg the Centreway block that was built in the last two years is already looking like a slum, there is also scaffolding around the back.
This development will bring more people into this area and without the facilities and services to cope with these additional numbers it will become extremely congested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
