|
|
 |
| |
‘Y’ we need an answer on security and sports centre
• FLAWS in the Dalby Street development in front of the Talacre Sports Centre have been the subject of much correspondence in the New Journal.
But one has now come to light that could endanger the public.
Last month, the developer (Findon Urban Lofts Ltd, owner of Cornwall Overseas Development) submitted plans for what they described as minor changes to the exterior. The architect’s drawings showed Y-shaped columns within the pedestrian route.
We pointed out to Camden that this was not consistent with “the agreed pedestrian access plan” which states clearly and simply in an associated S106 legal agreement (paragraph seven) “That visibility along the pedestrian access way shall be such that there shall be no areas that cannot be seen by a pedestrian walking along the footpath”.
On November 11, Camden agreed to the developer’s requests while adding “informatives” which say to the developer:
“One. You are advised that this decision only applies to the building itself and does not apply to any changes to external areas surrounding the building including the rear service road, front footpath, turning circle and parking areas.
“Two. You are reminded of the need to comply with all conditions attached to the planning permission granted on 10.1.06 (ref 2005/4187/P) for the substantive scheme and with all obligations of the associated S106 legal agreements”
Camden told us that the columns are essential for the building to stand up and that they were always shown on plans. That may well be the case. They also told us that these columns “will not provide hiding places for people”.
How can this possibly be the case?
Not only can people behind the columns and not be seen, but people can climb into the fork of the Y shapes.
This is no minor matter. The issue of security on the only pedestrian route to and from the sports centre after dark (4.30pm at present) was of crucial importance in all discussions including at the public inquiry and features in the inspector’s report.
Can Camden tell us whether they will allow the developer to start constructing a building that will be in contravention of an agreement signed as recently as September 30, 2008?
This needs an immediate answer.
Martin Plaut
Ryland Road, NW5
Only a ‘yes’ will do
• THE “Do you want a Town Green?” questionnaire is out and about in the Talacre area and elsewhere.
Its recipients are puzzled by its wording which is designed to put the fear of the devil around.
On both sides, there is an excess of speculation and scaremongering, except for the one fact the council cannot suppress: namely, on the last day of September this year, they signed a legal agreement stating that a construction truck route, cutting the park in two, was authorised.
Only a “yes” to a Town Green will save the day.
DV Felix
Southampton Road, NW5
Flawed
• THE long-anticipated public consultation over the Town Green registration for Talacre has finally arrived.
It is, however, a disappointment to those who wanted an honest, balanced and democratic debate over the issues of protecting our park.
The survey taking place is flawed beyond belief. Claims that a Town Green prevents reasonable change is absurd. How was that other “town green” at South End Green refurbished?
The council also suggests that a Town Green at Talacre would mean all-night opening in the opinion of their legal advisers. Other lawyers say otherwise. An even-handed approach to the survey would give other opinions. Town Green is essential to stop the misuse of Talacre Gardens by Camden’s planners who are apparently prepared to allow it to become a developer’s playground! Sadly, the council’s approach is biased.
It points the public to voting against a Town Green option. The only way to counteract this imbalance is for residents to do their own research and vote accordingly.
Remember the recent threats to Talacre Gardens? In 2004, Camden granted planning permission for an encroachment into the park to make way for a restaurant’s exclusive sitting area.
Developers’ more recent plans show a parking lot in Talacre Gardens.
And a contract entered into by Camden as late as September 30 this year clearly indicates a truck route going through Talacre Gardens would take place if the developers are granted the stopping-up order by the GLA in order to proceed with their seven-story building at Dalby Street.
It is a sorry state of affairs when the public does not feel entirely safe in believing that their officers act on their behalf. In fact, they are working against our best interests. I am definitely going to vote for a Town Green option on my survey.
Beverly Gardner
Address supplied, NW5
Suspicions
• I HAVE the deepest suspicions about Camden Council’s intentions towards our much-appreciated local Open Space, Talacre Gardens; so I have been very pleased to see from your letters pages how many of my neighbours share these.
We do know something: for instance that the planning permission for the block of flats on the south east corner is dependent upon closing the road, Dalby Street, that currently provides the only public access to the very popular sports centre. We were also told, when a public inquiry was held into the intended closure of this road, that access to the centre would be guaranteed through various “access plans”, legally binding on both council and developer.
The success of these would depend, ultimately, on a high level of “marshalling”, paying for which would demand a significant cash deposit in advance of any construction work. We were encouraged to support the planning application because the doctors’ surgery on Prince of Wales Road would move to purpose-designed premises in the new block, with the implication of a better service for patients. But are we being told the whole story? The recent consultation about parking bays in Talacre Road asked residents’ views about converting eight residents’ parking bays into one-hour, pay-and -display.
But they would be no use to someone visiting the sports centre for a game, and if you were just dropping someone off, of course, you’d use the marshalled access road and not bother to park at all.
So why convert these bays? And then there’s the question of their location, close to the existing pathway across the Gardens, which is currently shut after nightfall. One of the early plans for the new block of flats showed a construction vehicle route cutting right across the gardens, dividing them into two, unconnected, parts. This idea was supposed to have been rejected following objections from Gardens’ users, but there are now rumours that the council has signed two agreements with the firm behind the development of the new flats. One of these, the public one, discussed at the inquiry, shows access to the sports centre along the new, marshalled roadway and walkway past the new flats. But the other would see access to the sports centre right across the Gardens.
Is that why the converted parking bays are going to be put where they are?
But it’s not too late for us, the ultimate losers if Talacre Gardens were to be bisected by the sports centre access route, since the consultation (all 12 pages of it) about the application to register the Gardens as a Town Green is still current. Anybody who is as suspicious of what’s going on there as I am should respond to this consultation, by voting overwhelmingly for Town Green status.
It’s the only way of putting a stop to this kind of shenanigans.
James Brander
Hadley Street, NW1
Green vote
• YASMIN Allen’s letter (Proud of our park, November 6) is a call to duty to all local residents and other park users who enjoy the amenities at Talacre Gardens.
Most of the 11,000 residents in the Haverstock ward are social housing tenants with no access to any personal outdoor space. Talacre Gardens is their only green space. The park also attracts numerous visitors thanks to the popular Talacre Community Sports Centre. This is, therefore, a park which belongs to everyone in Camden. It was not enough for the 169 members of the Friends of Talacre Gardens to have put in an application to register the park as Town Green. This application was turned down by Camden. Unless those who care about this park make an effort to contact Camden to order a consultation form and vote for a Town Green, then Talacre Gardens may be lost.
The consultation paper is long and definitely designed to put people off the idea of a Town Green.
I would urge those who are concerned, however, to persevere. Call Camden at 020 7974 2704 or email: talacregardens@camden. gov.uk and order a questionnaire.
The consultation ends on November 28, so please be quick.
Celine La Freniere
Talacre Road, NW5
‘Rotten borough’-style
• IN Camden we have a current example of disenfranchisement.
The council seem to be prepared to overlook the fact that half of us all are single person households, very many of whom live in sub-divided old family dwellings sharing the same street number.
Those wishing to respond to the council’s Town Green questionnaire are being denied the chance if another person in their building, with the same street number, has already asked for the form. This is a “rotten borough” attitude that threatens the validity of the entire exercise.
The council should welcome all opinion-givers in separate households regardless of street numbers; it should stop the clock and start it ticking for three weeks from the date they rectify this wrong-headed policy. If they don’t they are left open to a serious challenge of excluding many entitled to be heard. This nutty management policy would get short shrift if applied at election time.
Peter Cuming
Address supplied, NW5
|
 |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
