|
|
 |
| |
Planning
issues are important to us all
• Richard Simpson has outlined the growing unease
over planning in Camden (Planning Shouldn’t Make Things
Worse, February 9).
Peter Bishop is the Director of Planning. It should be his
responsibility, therefore, to ensure that proposed schemes do
not conflict with Camden’s own policies and that rules
used to determine applications are consistent. If he fails in
delivering this or considering local objections, then it falls,
I believe, on Labour Environment Chief Councillor John Thane
to sort the situation out.
The problem here, however, is that Cllr Thane might possibly
be the driving force behind some of those bad planing decisions.
Reckless decisions made recently at Dalby Street in Kentish
Town and in the Vale of Health and some in the works, such as
the redevelopment scheme in Regent’s Park that Mr Simpson
wrote about, seem to indicate that Labour are preparing for
a quick exit in May and want to push for and approve as many
deals with their favoured developers as they can.
Isn’t it time we take control of our own interests and
let the planners realise they work for us and have a duty of
care towards local people?
Hopefully, if it is confirmed that Cllr Thane is responsible
for planning, then his constituents will do us a favour and
vote him out in May.
What I want is a party that will come forward and address this
important issue competently and promise to reform the Planning
system in Camden.
Make the system fair, transparent and beyond reproach.
MICHAEL PATTERSON BROWN
Gloucester Avenue, NW1
• While it’s easy to take a swipe at the planning
process and committee (Forum and Letters, February 9), the process
requires that many factors need to be weighed up.
Last Thursday’s debate about the Osnaburgh Street redevelopment
was one such example.
For years the Regent’s Park Estate and the business district
between Osnaburgh Street/Euston Road have been two totally distinct
communities even though they are separated by just one street.
It was as if the business district had it’s back turned
on residents.
While it is of course right, and material, for some councillors
from the north of the borough to argue about the size of the
proposed tower and its impact on views, we shouldn’t overlook
the real design and regeneration benefits of the new buildings.
Right from the start, local representatives from local regeneration
group West Euston Partnership were involved in detailed discussions
with the developer, British Land, to ‘soften’ the
harsh barrier along Longwall Street, create a new square and
better routes through the Regent’s Park Estate. Affordable
housing and community space will also be provided.
Local groups such as WEP were highly involved and consulted
by British Land throughout this process and spoke in favour
of the development – something I rarely saw when I was
on the committee myself.
While some still have mixed views on the Tower, I am pleased
the committee took the right decision to go ahead with the development,
which now promises to renew an area and a communities divided
for too long by contrasting styles of architecture and design.
Cllr Theo Blackwell (Lab)
Regent’s Park Ward |
|
|
|
