Planning Dept
London Borough of Havering
7th Floor
Mercury House
Mercury Gardens
RM1 3SL
10thMay,
2008
FAO: Chief Planning Officer
Re:Planning application P0702.08
Dear
Sir / Madam
I
write in connection with the Proposed
Major Housing Development of 874 dwellings on the Harold Wood Hospital site by
Countryside Properties.I wish to object strongly to the proposed
development.
Havering’s
Local Development Framework section 6.2 states “The aim of Havering’s Local
Development Framework, and especially the Core Strategy, is to protect and strengthen what is best
about Havering, to create places of real quality which are enjoyable and
fulfilling to live in.”This application threatens the character and
community of Harold Wood and should be refused.
Some
of the areas which would be adversely affected by this development are detailed
below.
c
Transport – traffic /
trains
DC32
– The road networkstates “New
development which has an adverse impact on the functioning of the road
hierarchy will not be allowed”.
On
this basis the development should be refused. The congestion around Gubbins
Lane and Whitelands Way is bad enough already without the anticipated 1400
extra cars from the estate exacerbating the situation. The application does not
include a realistic solution to the traffic problems which already exist and is
totally unrealistic about the impact these extra vehicles will have on Harold
Wood roads.
CP10 states“A
choice of sustainable transport modes will be promoted by ensuring that new
development does not overload the capacity of the public transport network.”
The
development will introduce approximately 2,000 new people into Harold Wood.
Currently 27% of Harold Woods workforce travel to work by train and
consequently the trains are extremely busy in rush hour. The development will
bring additional passengers trying to travel on already crowded trains without
any increase in capacity. There also seems to be no consideration of the impact
of these extra passengers on stations further into London where trains are
currently full long before Liverpool Street. Countryside’s proposed maximum
contribution of £15,000 for Harold Wood station will do nothing to resolve
this.
Community Facilities
Havering
LDF Core Policies CP8 states “The Council will ensure that a suitable
range of community facilities are provided to meet existing and forecast demand
by ensuring major developments provide facilities to meet new demand”.
c
Education
It
is estimated that several hundred children will reside in the new development.
Harold Wood schools have very little or no capacity to educate these children. There
is no workable proposal for nursery provision or primary education. The
proposed solution for secondary pupils is for them to be educated at King’s
Wood school in Harold Hill (bottom of the 2007 secondary school league table
for Havering). The currently stable community of Harold Wood will disappear as
families move away for better schools catchment areas.
c
Health
Vision
for the core strategy: 6.4.9 states that “Improved availability of services and
facilities in Havering’s health care system will be achieved through the provision of additional accessible
facilities.” Every resident of Harold Wood who is registered with a local
GP knows the reality of a 2 or 3 week wait for a doctors appointment. NHS
standard for GP list is 1,800 patients. The Havering average in 2004 was 2,346
and Harold Wood currently averages 2,760.
Despite
these issues and contrary to the councils policy there is no provision for a
GP, Dentist or childcare facility within the development. This will force
Harold Wood residents out of the area for essential services.
Under
DC21 the Council requires open space provision at the rate of 1.84 hectares per
thousand population. By this calculation the hospital site should have 3.5
hectares open space – it only has 2.45, indicative that this development is
more about cramming in the maximum amount of dwellings, than the quality of
life of the new residents of those dwellings.
c
Community
Vision
for the core strategy: Design 6.4.19 states “Developments are required to be
high quality and design-led, contributing
positively to the character of the borough, respecting the local heritage and
creating an environment in which people want to live, stay and prosper.”
Harold
Wood is currently a community to be envied. Whilst residents of other areas
bemoan the lack of neighbour contact, we are a friendly, stable community with
a village feel. Many people have lived here all their lives, and new residents
are attracted by an environment desirable for families to settle, grow and
mature.
These
proposals appear to prioritise commercial gain without safeguarding the
community and environment which currently make Harold Wood so attractive. The
proposed development would mean a massive 20% increasein the population of
Harold Wood without providing the means to integrate them into the community.The
prevalence of 1 and 2 bedroom apartmentswill increase the likelihood of
transient occupiers, an unstable community which tends to move on to houses
with gardens and is therefore unlikely to‘live, stay and prosper’ in Harold
Wood.
c
Character
Vision
for the core strategy: Places to Live 6.4.2 “Outside the town centres the borough’s suburban character will be
maintained and enhanced by sympathetic residential development which respects
and makes a positive contribution to the existing context”
DC61
Urban Design states “Planning permission
will only be granted for development which maintains, enhances or improves the
character and appearance of the local area. Development must therefore:
..respond to distinctive local building forms and patterns of development and
respect the scale, massing and height of the surrounding context… complement
the amenity and character of the area through its appearance, materials used,
layout and integration with surrounding land and buildings… provide structure
by utilising and protecting existing views, vistas, panoramas and landmarks”.
On
this basis the application must be refused as it is entirely inappropriate. It
appears as if there has been no attempt at all to design homes in keeping with
or sympathetic to Harold Woods housing stock (of primarily 1 and 2 storey semi
detached dwellings).
The
proposed density is far higher than the rest of Harold Wood and the visual
impact of the5 storey block on Gubbins Lane would be especially incongruous.
The proposed materials and design – glass fronted with semi flat roofs – will
only jar in the surrounding area.
The
proposed 9 storey tower must be rejected under DC66 Tall Buildings and
structures policy, both in terms of height and under the condition ‘do not mar
the skyline’, which this undoubtedly will.
This
development is against the Local Development Framework and will be detrimental
to existing residents.
Countryside
Properties have said “it is vital for the success of the proposed development
at Harold Wood that local views and opinions contribute to the final
scheme.”Local views and opinions seem to have been ignored so far, I ask that
you consider them now and refuse planning permission.
I am also concerned about the following: ……………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Signed: ___________________________________
Dated: ________________________
Name:_______________________________________
Address:_____________________________________
:_____________________________________
Post code:
______________________________________