|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 17, 2015 21:34:42 GMT
Okay. This is just a suggestion and thought it would help. As they read the comments and if we have evidence that is was meant to be max 3 storey it could have more holding than just a comment. I personally think it will help.
|
|
|
Post by bakerville on Jun 18, 2015 8:12:22 GMT
I will also be strongly objecting to the plans to build a 4 storey ‘monster’ block of flats right in the middle of the estate.
Here are the key points…
- Refer to “Waverley design code March 2013” (rotherham.planportal.co.uk/view.aspx?id=RB2012/1428&filename=5664171-31-1_01_A.PDF)
The new barrats planning applications is located in phase 1d (reference page 17) It is clearly stated on page 31 the following "Development within this phase will therefore be a predominant MIX OF 2 AND 2.5 STOREY DWELLINGS WITH SOME ELEMENTS OF 3 STOREY DWELLINGS in key locations and along key routes.” - Refer to “Waverley design code August 2014” (roam.rotherham.gov.uk/PlanNet/documentstore%5C5666899-66-1_01_1.PDF)
The barrats planning application is now in “Waverley central” (reference page 6) It is again stated on page 30 “Typically 2.5 and 3 storey, limited amount of 2 storey units possible”. There is even a drawing on page 31 and 32. - Refer back to “Waverley design code March 2013”
Parking. On page 54 it clearly states that for flats “1 Parking Space per flat plus 50% allocated for visitors” There are 42 apartments planned, therefore 63 parking spaces required. I can not see any where this number of spaces on the proposed plans. Also lets use some common sense here. New apartments are going to be bought mainly by young professional couples. They are highly likely to have 2 cars, plus social with friends regularly. So we need at least 2 spaces per flat, therefore 84 in total. - Again let’s use some common sense. Building a 2 x 4 storey monster block of flats in the MIDDLE of the estate is going to look TERRIBLE.
Putting aside these terrible 4 storey flats for a moment. What concerns me even more than this, is the fact that these Waverley design codes can be broken so easily. We all need to object to these plans otherwise what's next?! In summary - These flats must be reduced to 3 storey, plus the width reduced as well rather than 1 massive block. The rest of the proposed plan actually looks good, its just these flats! I would urge everyone to object. Plus some sort of petition as was mentioned by other people.
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 18, 2015 10:44:36 GMT
Thanks for the support ! Nice to see community spirit. Definitely think all the above points would help. Especially it will show we've done our research and are not letting it drop. I feel everyone like you said above should contest even if it doesn't directly affect them, like I did for the harron houses, as like you say it will affect the whole estate.
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 18, 2015 11:30:28 GMT
I will also be strongly objecting to the plans to build a 4 storey ‘monster’ block of flats right in the middle of the estate.
Here are the key points…
- Refer to “Waverley design code March 2013” (rotherham.planportal.co.uk/view.aspx?id=RB2012/1428&filename=5664171-31-1_01_A.PDF)
The new barrats planning applications is located in phase 1d (reference page 17) It is clearly stated on page 31 the following "Development within this phase will therefore be a predominant MIX OF 2 AND 2.5 STOREY DWELLINGS WITH SOME ELEMENTS OF 3 STOREY DWELLINGS in key locations and along key routes.” - Refer to “Waverley design code August 2014” (roam.rotherham.gov.uk/PlanNet/documentstore%5C5666899-66-1_01_1.PDF)
The barrats planning application is now in “Waverley central” (reference page 6) It is again stated on page 30 “Typically 2.5 and 3 storey, limited amount of 2 storey units possible”. There is even a drawing on page 31 and 32. - Refer back to “Waverley design code March 2013”
Parking. On page 54 it clearly states that for flats “1 Parking Space per flat plus 50% allocated for visitors” There are 42 apartments planned, therefore 63 parking spaces required. I can not see any where this number of spaces on the proposed plans. Also lets use some common sense here. New apartments are going to be bought mainly by young professional couples. They are highly likely to have 2 cars, plus social with friends regularly. So we need at least 2 spaces per flat, therefore 84 in total. - Again let’s use some common sense. Building a 2 x 4 storey monster block of flats in the MIDDLE of the estate is going to look TERRIBLE.
Putting aside these terrible 4 storey flats for a moment. What concerns me even more than this, is the fact that these Waverley design codes can be broken so easily. We all need to object to these plans otherwise what's next?! In summary - These flats must be reduced to 3 storey, plus the width reduced as well rather than 1 massive block. The rest of the proposed plan actually looks good, its just these flats! I would urge everyone to object. Plus some sort of petition as was mentioned by other people.
This is worded so well. I managed after calling a few different numbers to obtain the email adress for barratts director of planning a pa who has passed the email on with images from the outline strategy booklet. She said if we have something saying it should only be three storeys then we should send it. So I stole your paragraph
|
|
|
Post by parnell on Jun 18, 2015 11:39:15 GMT
I think the points bakerville has made should be stated word for word at the councillor meeting next week and see what their response is, that should be a good indication of wether the councillor and the planners give a crap what we think or wether there just trying to lower our expectations. I've gotta say that if the plans can be disregarded so easily then I will seriously consider selling up and moving elsewhere as I was sold and loved the Waverley concept and that's the main reason we moved here.
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 18, 2015 11:58:45 GMT
That's the same for us. I love my house just don't love the plans opposite.
I've also emailed the councillor the above post too, and have emailed heather from harworth estates.
Hopefully from all three, barrats, harworth, and rotherham council, someone must have an answer as to why they can break the design strategy booklet, and If so what they are going to do about it.
The consultation wan didn't know too much about this booklet which is why I feel barratt should be made aware of it.
Harworth are the company promising a community, but are the one slowly taking it away !
|
|
|
Post by teddyowner on Jun 18, 2015 15:26:50 GMT
I will also be strongly objecting to the plans to build a 4 storey ‘monster’ block of flats right in the middle of the estate.
Here are the key points…
- Refer to “Waverley design code March 2013” (rotherham.planportal.co.uk/view.aspx?id=RB2012/1428&filename=5664171-31-1_01_A.PDF)
The new barrats planning applications is located in phase 1d (reference page 17) It is clearly stated on page 31 the following "Development within this phase will therefore be a predominant MIX OF 2 AND 2.5 STOREY DWELLINGS WITH SOME ELEMENTS OF 3 STOREY DWELLINGS in key locations and along key routes.” - Refer to “Waverley design code August 2014” (roam.rotherham.gov.uk/PlanNet/documentstore%5C5666899-66-1_01_1.PDF)
The barrats planning application is now in “Waverley central” (reference page 6) It is again stated on page 30 “Typically 2.5 and 3 storey, limited amount of 2 storey units possible”. There is even a drawing on page 31 and 32. - Refer back to “Waverley design code March 2013”
Parking. On page 54 it clearly states that for flats “1 Parking Space per flat plus 50% allocated for visitors” There are 42 apartments planned, therefore 63 parking spaces required. I can not see any where this number of spaces on the proposed plans. Also lets use some common sense here. New apartments are going to be bought mainly by young professional couples. They are highly likely to have 2 cars, plus social with friends regularly. So we need at least 2 spaces per flat, therefore 84 in total. - Again let’s use some common sense. Building a 2 x 4 storey monster block of flats in the MIDDLE of the estate is going to look TERRIBLE.
Putting aside these terrible 4 storey flats for a moment. What concerns me even more than this, is the fact that these Waverley design codes can be broken so easily. We all need to object to these plans otherwise what's next?! In summary - These flats must be reduced to 3 storey, plus the width reduced as well rather than 1 massive block. The rest of the proposed plan actually looks good, its just these flats! I would urge everyone to object. Plus some sort of petition as was mentioned by other people.
Well put bakerville I'd also add Highfield Lane is the main thoroughfare and is highlighted in the master plan as a potential bus route so should not be relied upon for visitor parking What is the density per hectare of this development, is it greater than on the local plan? There is a specified minimum distance of 6 metres from the roadway to property frontages on the East side of Highfield lane and one of the blocks looks to be only a pavement width away. The local centre has moved and as such there is no need to phase an increase in height into the streetscene. Parking courtyards need to be designed properly to ensure they have good visibility to prevent crime, do these meet the standards in the plan? Sustainability? Will these flats have any facility for solar renewables given that there are so many of them and only limited roof space? We need to specify WHY we object to the plans and WHY we think it doesn't meet the local plan,not just say we don't like it.
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 18, 2015 18:25:12 GMT
I can give you all the email for barrats planning department? Maybe it they get a lot they'd change things? Or should we just wait for rotherham?
|
|
|
Post by nightowl on Jun 18, 2015 18:46:33 GMT
I will also be strongly objecting to the plans to build a 4 storey ‘monster’ block of flats right in the middle of the estate.
Here are the key points…
- Refer to “Waverley design code March 2013” (rotherham.planportal.co.uk/view.aspx?id=RB2012/1428&filename=5664171-31-1_01_A.PDF)
The new barrats planning applications is located in phase 1d (reference page 17) It is clearly stated on page 31 the following "Development within this phase will therefore be a predominant MIX OF 2 AND 2.5 STOREY DWELLINGS WITH SOME ELEMENTS OF 3 STOREY DWELLINGS in key locations and along key routes.” - Refer to “Waverley design code August 2014” (roam.rotherham.gov.uk/PlanNet/documentstore%5C5666899-66-1_01_1.PDF)
The barrats planning application is now in “Waverley central” (reference page 6) It is again stated on page 30 “Typically 2.5 and 3 storey, limited amount of 2 storey units possible”. There is even a drawing on page 31 and 32. - Refer back to “Waverley design code March 2013”
Parking. On page 54 it clearly states that for flats “1 Parking Space per flat plus 50% allocated for visitors” There are 42 apartments planned, therefore 63 parking spaces required. I can not see any where this number of spaces on the proposed plans. Also lets use some common sense here. New apartments are going to be bought mainly by young professional couples. They are highly likely to have 2 cars, plus social with friends regularly. So we need at least 2 spaces per flat, therefore 84 in total. - Again let’s use some common sense. Building a 2 x 4 storey monster block of flats in the MIDDLE of the estate is going to look TERRIBLE.
Putting aside these terrible 4 storey flats for a moment. What concerns me even more than this, is the fact that these Waverley design codes can be broken so easily. We all need to object to these plans otherwise what's next?! In summary - These flats must be reduced to 3 storey, plus the width reduced as well rather than 1 massive block. The rest of the proposed plan actually looks good, its just these flats! I would urge everyone to object. Plus some sort of petition as was mentioned by other people.
Spot on! Just to add, yes they are breaking the design code, and planning to do so next to homes already bought or signed for, where people who investigated this would have had no idea this monstrosity was going to be proposed. If they were going to try and do it, then why not at least propose the flats for the other end of the proposed land parcel (towards the lake end), which is currently not near any built or reserved houses... That way people would have a clear choice of whether they are prepared to buy near this beast, instead of having an unfair situation where a massive block is thrust upon current residents or reserved buyers completely out of the blue and without fitting the criteria expected.... I will be objecting....
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 18, 2015 18:50:34 GMT
I agree with flipping it round for the same reasons. As soon as I hear back from barratt I'll post their reply on here
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2015 21:17:10 GMT
Don't know if this has already been posted: planninglawblog.blogspot.co.uk/p/how-to-object.html?m=1Just some advice about planning objections. Specifically it advises against petitions and using a set letter. It carries more weight if lots of people write in their own words why they don't agree with the plan and how it affects them. I think of all people currently in their houses I will be affected most due to my proximity to the large block of flats (although I am in no way claiming others won't be affected). I will be objecting to the erection of a behemoth block of flats looming over my home in the strongest possible terms! These plans have not been thought through or the people that have planned them are nefarious and purely self-serving with absolutely no sense of the word community.
|
|
|
Post by spencer1992 on Jun 18, 2015 22:48:57 GMT
That's some great information. Will be able to object pretty well now I wonder how many people will object?
|
|
|
Post by parnell on Jun 19, 2015 5:47:24 GMT
I think you can create a poll on the forum to see how many people will object
|
|
|
Post by swadey on Jun 19, 2015 9:51:03 GMT
Hi -
I've only just moved in, and joined this forum.
My house & garden would be totally overlooked if the planned development took place.
I'll certainly be objecting, and as neilp says : It carries more weight if lots of people write in their own words why they don't agree with the plan, and how it affects them.
Once I have compiled my thoughts I'll bung them on the board :-)
|
|
|
Post by Rich on Jun 19, 2015 10:52:00 GMT
Had a very brief chat with Duncan last night (Harworth Estates for anyone who wasn't aware). He's aware of this thread and our concerns. I'm trying to arrange a group meeting with Harworth as I think it's long overdue and this is clearly a pressing matter. Will update when I know more. Oh and Highfield Lane will be double-yellow-lined
|
|