Goldhawk Industrial Estate Public Inquiry (Hammersmith and Fulham Liberal Democrats)

Hammersmith and Fulham Liberal Democrats <info@hflibdems.org.uk>

Goldhawk Industrial Estate Public Inquiry

June 15, 2010 10:01 PM

The public inquiry over the Council's decision on the Goldhawk Industrial Estate has drawn to a close. The barrister engaged by the Brackenbury Residents Association has made all the arguments with far greater clarity that we can, so here is the summary of what he said, with link the entire submission. http://hflibdems.org.uk/pages/goldhawk-call-in-closing-argument.html

" a. The proposal would result in the loss of a thriving industrial estate to speculative residential-led mixed use development. The proposal is therefore contrary to the development plan and PPS4;

"b. The applicant's dogmatic approach to increasing density would result in a development which is poorly designed and which plainly constitutes a physical overdevelopment of the site. The development would create cramped spaces hampering the amenities of future occupiers. The design lacks sensitivity to its surroundings in terms of the amenity of the adjoining occupiers and the impact on the wider area, including the adjoining conservation area. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy EN8 of UDP and 4B.1 of the London Plan;

"c. Among the consequences of overdeveloping the site is an acute shortage of amenity space, including an inexcusable failure to adequately cater for children's play. The proposal is contrary to policies EN23B of the UDP and 3D.13 of the London Plan;

"d. Similarly, the overdevelopment would cause adverse parking and traffic issues. It is contrary to policies TN8 and TN15 of the UDP;

"e. Despite the proposal to overdevelop an industrial site in a prime residential area, there is a failure to make appropriate provision for affordable housing or school places.

"3. In short, the proposal amounts to an unsatisfactory series of compromises: purported compliance with employment policies through a mix of uses, but the displacement of a number of established businesses and the extinction of a successful employment site; increases in density, but an inappropriate scale of development to accommodate that increased density; and high density housing, but little thought to the consequences for neighbours, future occupiers of the scheme or the wider community. For those reasons permission should be refused"

The Inspector will provide his report to the Secretary of State later in the year, and the minister will then decide whether the council's decision should be allowed to stand.

The Brackenbury Residents Association has taken the lead in challenging the very inadequate procedures of our council when dealing with planning applications from big business and commercial developers. Their fund-raising has just about covered the cost of this battle, but they are stretched and would appreciate further contributions.

Meanwhile several other applications remain in the pipeline or under discussion including, we understand, proposals not yet made public, to replace the Stowe Road bus depot with another housing development. Other residents groups will take heart from what has been achieved so far.

http://hflibdems.org.uk/pages/goldhawk-call-in-closing-argument.html