Letter to McCarthy and Stone

PLEASE REMEMBER THEY WANT RESPONSES BY 24 FEBRUARY.

This letter can be used as a template to convey our concerns.

Dear Messrs McCarthy and Stone,

Proposals for land at the Greaves Hotel,

Greaves Rd.

, Lancaster

.

We attended your public exhibition re the above at the Greaves Park Hotel on 7 February. Like many of our neighbours, we were extremely concerned about the plans displayed, and are writing now to set out a range of objections to your proposed developments. These are summarised below, with the rationale for them set out in the accompanying document. Whilst these are our personal views, we believe they also encompass variously most of the views of most of the residents in the area.

The objections are based on the following:

1. Lack of compatibility/sympathy with the Greaves area generally, in terms of size, design and density of the proposed building.

2. Lack of consistency with the local Regeneration and Policy Service (RPS) heritage asset preservation requirements, and disregard of local policies in relation to sustainable communities and conservation areas.

3. Lack of attention to spatial planning, in terms of consideration of the nature of places and how they function resulting in an adverse impact on the quality of the environment and lifestyle of the residents of the Greaves area . This is most evident in the following areas:

3.1  Unrealistic and inaccurate planning for parking

3.2  Privacy and light issues—potential breach of the 21 Metres of Separation Rule in relation to Ash Grove

3.3  Failure to consider environmental and social impact of changed access to hours of direct sunlight and increased shade in the area

3.4  Adverse effects of noise and traffic pollution

    

4. Adverse impact on the Conservation Area (Belle Vue Terrace(BVT)) opposite:

4.1  Contravention of local policies on views across a conservation area

4.2  Likely loss of hours of sunlight on BVT, with potential for detrimental effect on domestic and public gardens/ecosystems, trees with preservation orders

4.3  Increased traffic noise and pollution

4.4  Loss of privacy and quality of lifestyle and environment for residents

4.5  Potential effect on appropriate maintenance and sustainability of the conservation area, and change to social demographics.

   

      5.Questionable assessment of fitness for purpose of this location on a main trunk road on your client                        group itself. Impact on  marketability. No spare capacity; no attention to future-proofing for changing needs over a 30-40 year period.

In short, we believe that there has been inadequate research and spatial planning undertaken into the desirability and feasibility of this site in terms of people and quality of lifestyle, environmental issues, light and shade, ecosystems, traffic and noise pollution, housing density, parking, privacy, long – term impact on the social and physical environment. There has, therefore, been a consequent disregard of local planning strategies and policies, both generally and in relation to the heritage assets of the area.

Clearly, like any business, you want to get maximum capacity to profit appropriately from this venture. However, you seem to be trying unrealistically to fit a quart into a pint pot, regardless of the effects of the spillover. We are afraid your plans are ill-conceived, and , as they stand, would severely affect the quality of the environment and increasingly blight the quality of life-style of the residents  of this area for  years to come.

I am sure you will appreciate from this submission that we have considered your proposals seriously and in depth. We do not take this step lightly, but, for all the reasons provided, we must therefore register our strong objection to your proposed development, and will be copying this letter to the RPS and to our neighbours.

Yours sincerely,

McCarthy and Stone’s webpage about the development. There is a link to their pictures/ design proposal.

http://www.consultation-online.co.uk/lancaster .