Cllr Tom Stephens posted this on the Next Door website earlier today
As one of Sudbury’s local Councillors, I’m pleased to confirm that the planning inspector has today *REJECTED* Pocket Living’s proposal to build 1-bedroom flats in Sudbury Town station car park. Residents will recall that Brent Council’s own Planning Committee refused the development on 11 June 2020. Alongside Sudbury residents, myself and fellow Councillor Mary Daly spoke against the development and sent strong written objections. Like you, we were concerned about the impact the would have on parking in the area - especially disabled parking - and the lack of any genuinely affordable, family housing. The developer then appealed to the Planning Inspector and the inspector has been considering the case for several months.
We argued the Planning Inspector should reject Pocket Living’s appeal and refuse the development, as did Brent Council. We attended the hearings and the site visits and spoke against the developments then. We are delighted to inform you that on 19th January, the Planning Inspector dismissed Pocket Living’s appeal and rejected the development. They argued that the development won’t provide the appropriate level of affordable housing or mix of housing unit types - a clear breach of a Brent Council’s local plan. We hope this will come as good news. We are pleased to have opposed this development from day 1 and to have worked alongside residents to send in objections. We will continue to oppose it.
There is quite a history to this development proposal see LINK and confusion over deferral LINK.
Paul Lorber raised an official complaint about how the application was handled LINK
Following the deferral the developer came back to Brent Planning Committee with a revised proposal and Wembley Matters reported:
After a lengthy discussion Brent Planning Committee again rejected the TfL application for a development of 'pocket homes' on the car park at Sudbury Town Station. Despite a £600k offer by the developer towards the build costs of 6 three bedroomed homes outside the area, the committee stuck to their original objection on grounds of lack of family homes for the site itself, the loss of the car park and its impact on acessiblity for people with protected characteristics; and the applications lack of compliance with Local and London plans. Three members of the public and two councillors made very persuasive presentations opposing the application.
TfL are intent on developing other station car parks so the result of this appeal and the grounds for refusal will be widely studied.
10 comments:
Cllr. Thomas Stephens it is surprising that you would try to claim any Cllr played a role in this application being rejected. Cllr Saqib Butt voted in favour at the Planning Committee meeting.
This is a great victory for local residents and especially Sudbury Town Residents Association who invested a lot of money and time in defencing the local area from overdevelopment.
Let us not forget however that this application was inspired by the Labour Mayor of London who decided to sell off most of the Car Park and make secret arrangements with a developer without any consultation with local residents or taking account of local needs. The Labour Mayor had already deprived local people of the No.245 bus service that used to serve Sudbury Town Underground Station. Sadly this is how Labour Politicians treat local people.
Let's not forget however that to meet the Labour Mayor's enormous targets the Brent Labour run Council have designated large parts of Sudbury (including Station Approach) as development "corridor". The Labour submission to the Local Plan shows a picture of half of Station Approach (the road leading to Sudbury Town Underground Station) as suitable for demolition and to be replaced by higher density blocks of flats. This is sadly not a joke as Labour Councillors have already approved a 6 storey block of flats on the site of Keelers (now closed tyre & exhaust centre) without any car parking close to Bridgewater Road roundabout.
There are very many battles still to fight over the coming years to stop the Labour planned destruction of the Sudbury residential area.
And shocking there is no mention of STRA the Neighbourhood Forum of Sudbury Town. Local people donated to a fund and instructed lawyers. STRA's Barrister wrote to the Planning Committee and they rejected the planning application. The same Barrister attended the Appeal Hearing and the Station Site Visit with the Inspector.
Cllr. Stephens it is your duty to properly inform the people of Sudbury Town about their Neighbourhood Forum, which must be non-political. To undermine the Neighbourhood Forum is undermining people's rights and seeking to fulfill your own political agenda.
Cllrs approved the Draft Local Plan in 2017 and approved development of blocks of flats on Sudbury Town Station Car Park of 5 storeys high. Can Cllr Stephens explain why the Cllrs approved the car park as a Site Allocation for development in the Draft Local Plan?
David Glover, Planning Manager and Planning Officers at Brent Council recommended the Planning Committee approve the application in writing and at the Planning Committee meetings in 2020. The Planning Committee were keen to approve and only after a legal notice letter from STRA's lawyers - the Charity Solicitors - Environmental Law Foundation - the Planning Committee decided to refuse permission at the last meeting.
This is very good news for Sudbury Town, and STRA must take a large chunk of the credit for it, although Cllrs. Mary Daly and Thomas Stephens also made well reasoned statements to Planning Committee opposing the application on behalf of residents in Sudbury Ward.
It will be interesting to find out what the Secretary of State (now Michael Gove, rather than Robert Jenrick who actually called it in) decides on the Wembley Park Station Car Park planning application. That was one which Brent's Planning Committee accepted, by a majority, over a year ago, on the recommendation of Planning Officers, but which was also fiercely opposed by residents because it breached Brent planning policies.
Another victory for the nimby middle classes.
It is a carpark and people need homes. Better to build on brownfield than greenbelt.
Dear Anonymous (19 January at 21:19),
You are entitled to your own opinions, but I think the evidence shows that this was actually a victory for common sense, and the upholding of Brent's adopted planning policies.
What about the site allocation proposed building of housing on two school land uses and building on Brent Kilburns for 70 years in public use only park sized parks woodland area? Both are new Brent Local Plan South Kilburn waved through apparently by Plan Inspectors?
The already existing alternative is a large park land use where people are piled-up in towered flats without gardens and school land uses adjacent to where people are piled-up in towered flats.
Post a Comment