Home»
Horsham today»
Horsham Past»
Current issues»
Planning»
Articles»
Archive»
Publications»
Walks»
Links»
About us»
|
Planning: letters of
representation |
February 2015 |
Application Comments on DC/15/0154
Application Summary |
Address: |
Winterton Court, New Street |
Proposal: |
Demolition of existing dwellings and
erection of 69 dwellings (comprising 25no
1-bedroom flats, 40no 2-bedroom flats and
4no 3-bedroom houses) with associated car
parking, bicycle storage, landscaping and
external works, served by altered access
onto Standings Court |
Case Officer: |
Rosemary Foreman |
Click for
further information |
Comments Details |
Commenter Type: |
Member of the Public |
Stance: |
Customer objects to the Planning Application |
Reasons for comment: |
- Design
- Highway Access and Parking
- Loss of General Amenity
- Overdevelopment
- Privacy Light and Noise |
Comments: |
I am writing on behalf of the Horsham
Society to object strongly to this
application. We understand and support the
redevelopment of this land for social
housing including a significant increase in
housing density but we do not think the
current scheme is satisfactory in terms of
design, nor does it meet the standards
achieved by Saxon Weald in other
developments, particularly Standings Court.
There is a significant shortfall in parking
provision. Given the existing parking
problems in New Street and the surrounding
roads it is essential that the development
should provide sufficient parking spaces to
fully satisfy its needs in respect of the
families that will occupy the properties and
visitors. Block B is one storey too high and
would present a particularly oppressive,
unattractive and unacceptable view from the
adjoining properties in New Street. The
overall design of all the blocks is in our
view unimaginative and industrial in
appearance. We are disappointed to see that
the buildings will not comply with Code 5
standards. Put simply, this is not good
enough and does not do justice to the site,
its setting, and the reputation of Saxon
Weald. A complete rethink is needed. We
have an open mind as to the number of homes
that could satisfactorily be accommodated on
this site with a better, more appropriate,
design but as presented this application
amounts to over development. John Steele
Secretary, Planning Sub Committee |
|
|
|