Deputy Team Leader for North Area for Head of Development Management
Planning Division
11th January 2011
Dear Laurence O’Keeffe
I must apologise for the delay in getting this letter to you, circumstances beyond my control I am afraid however it has given me an opportunity to update the letter in the light of the most recent proposal for this site, which omits the public library.
Thank you for taking the time to meet. One and a half hours was generous although as we realised, when discussing such a large issue the time flies by.
You made reference to the fact that many of the objection letters contained identical wording and that in some cases the points raised were not accurate.
As I am sure you are aware, many of us concerned with this issue have no experience when it comes to planning issues, particularly ones of this size.
We have been told in the past that our objections should wherever possible avoid subjective or emotive arguments and so we have attempted to engage with the more detailed and factual aspects of this proposal.
In addition to this the notice informing us that the final plans had been submitted for planning approval was sent to us around the 20th September and gave us until the 13th October to object. This is very little time to fully understand the proposal and all it’s issues.
I understand from our meeting that you are ‘not even close’ to making your report and that it will certainly not go before the PAC before April. Perhaps it would have been better to let the residents know that they had a little more time to get to grips with this proposal.
Furthermore, in some cases, this proposal is likely to affect those in Hammersmith Grove who are least able to defend them selves against the negative impact of such a development. Particularly on the south east side of Hammersmith Grove, there are many elderly and overseas residents who either do not have computers, nor perhaps the language or confidence to engage with the council on such an issue.
This does not however diminish in any way the strength of their feelings regarding the proposal and indeed should qualify them for particular protection against a process that many of them do not understand or feel intimidated by.
Building size, function and appearance.
Although it was clear that you have not made any decisions regarding this matter, I was disappointed to hear that you do not agree that the proposed building is inappropriate in it’s size, function and appearance.
You mention that the elevations showing the proposed building next to the George Building are misleading, as they do not show the George Building’s highest point. I have looked very carefully at this and I believe you are referring to the ‘tower’ above the entrance. I do not believe this makes for a more favourable comparison with the height of the proposed structure. This ‘tower’ may rise above the height of the top floor of the George building but does not significantly increase the mass/volume of the building and is therefore a poor comparison with the height of the proposed building next door, which is more constant in it’s height/mass/ volume.
We agree that appearance can be a subjective issue but we maintain our position that the size and appearance of the building is unacceptable and that we believe it does not conform to the policies referred to in our previous communications regarding developments close to a conservation area.
With regards to its function, as discussed we are bewildered by the idea that Hammersmith needs any more office space. I recently checked with the many surrounding office buildings and not one of them was full, many of them had a lot of space available and many of them have never been fully occupied. The argument that smarter, bigger office space is needed does not hold water. The management of existing office space want to rent their spaces. I doubt that any of their offices are divided up by more than plasterboard, and if there were demand for smarter, larger offices, they could address this easily rather than sit there empty.
Community Space.
I was very glad to hear that you do not feel the various proposals for community space have been good enough. Neither do we. We are disappointed to have lost the cinema although it seems that was never a realistic option and we have grave concerns regarding the agenda that prevailed at the time when this was offered. Since the last Public Forum it seems we have lost the community space and in it’s place we were being offered a library and again, we have concerns regarding the agenda surrounding this issue and how it was linked with the fate of the library on Shepherds Bush Road. This latest proposal omits the library and I would be grateful if you could clarify what the community is now being offered. I have tried three times now to access the latest plans online and have been unable to do so.
Because of the uncanny coincidences regarding loss of community amenities elsewhere and the various proposals for this site, it is my belief that the local community have assumed some communication between the council and the developers on these matters and have been looking to the council to consider and protect our interests. If as you say, this is not the case, and it is for the planning department to consider what is proposed, not to make a proposal, then I think there is potential here for some good dialogue and perhaps the council should consider organising a more lengthy and detailed conversation with locals about exactly what community facilities are needed.
In any case, we feel very strongly that whatever community provision is made, that it should form part of Phase 1.
Operations
There is no doubt that something will be built here and we residents are relying on the council to carefully consider any proposal and put in place measures that will protect us from the impact of living with any new development, particularly with regards to those issues that are either not in the developers remit or have not been considered by them. In short, to do what they promised and “put residents first”.
I was interested to hear that it is not confirmed that this will be a 24/7 operation. Whatever the operating hours, conditions such as restrictions on parking, direction for vehicles entering/leaving the site, hours of operation for lighting and air-conditioning, restrictions on hours of deliveries and refuse collections etc would all go to help mitigate the impact. If you were to look at the history of the nuisance issue regarding the air-conditioning at the George building you will see that we have not had much success in resolving problems after the event.
As you may recall, when I suggested the council was not listening to us you disagreed and said that on the contrary, significant changes had been made to the plans as a result of the public forum. The two examples you sited where in my view small details that could never be considered significant and we look forward to seeing the promised list of changes that have been made as a result of the public forum. We requested another official public forum but you say that there is no possibility of another one and that this cannot be justified, in part because there have been no significant changes to the plans since then. I would argue that the losing the flexible community space is a significant change, the only one since the public forum.
Finally I am surprised to discover that the proposal is phased because of funding. Happily I am not au fait with the complexities of development funding but I am surprised to hear that you are considering a proposal that will not necessarily be completed. Surely it would make more sense to build a smaller development all in one go, that would be cheaper to build, cheaper to operate, more appropriate to the site and it’s surroundings and would save the residents the misery of living with such a huge development and a double construction time, one following the other.
Thank you again for agreeing to meet. I would be grateful if you could keep us updated on the situation and I look forward to hearing from you on those matters discussed.
Yours sincerely
Nicola Lesbirel
