Comment

Representation ID: 33

Received: 07/06/2007

Respondent: Ms G Yeadell

4.9.3 Planning Policy Statement 1 says LPAs should "reject designs out of scale with their surroundings. Design should concentrate on scale, density, massing, height, location in relation to other buildings and overall relationship to surroundings". Recently this policy was flouted. Officers/councillors encouraged dwarfing existing homes over 2 to 4 and 1 Southend Road and 11 White Hart Lane, Hockley schemes, making them unviable. K.Steptoe referred to "significant, important hillside site". He recommended "there is no way insignificant buildings should be allowed here". An LPA planner's 1987 letter actually proposed comprehensive redevelopment of the whole block with large buildings. Inspector at 1 Southend Road Enquiry cited Hawkley Meade as a precedent justifying urban status. The traditional scale and character of the area was ignored for market reasons that didn't work in practice, but have had lasting adverse results.

In this regard question of Gated Communities should be revisited. Regardless of the PPS1, Planning Policy committee dropped the 5.1 Gated Communities from the June version of Supplementary Planning papers, which warned "these cannot be integrated into the community and have negative social impacts".

These are based on ECC Design Guide principle of maximum 5 houses/private drive. For mistaken market reasons they pack out of scale mansions in where fewer would fit then find they can't sell on the open market and are sold privately for reduced sums. Prison walls surround, with CCTV, daylight impact and night lighting invading other properties. Owners at a latter such said if needing to move, would it now be possible to sell? Other residents have admired such adjacent homes as des.res., but not as now dwarfed by the gated community.