‘RE-CONSULTATION’ OF APPLICATION 23/0949/FUL NOW UNDERWAY
What do YOU say? Have the revisions successfully transformed an unacceptably ‘poor response to the setting’ into a well-designed development St James’ needs?
The original proposal, shown above, was highly and widely criticised by professionals as well as local residents in the many responses to the consultation last August / September, identifying it as ‘over-development’, ‘poor response unsympathetic to its context’, ‘fundamentally unsuitable for this site’, ‘overbearing on nearby properties’ etc.
A damning verdict – and the applicant was advised by planning officers they would not be able to recommend approval. So, pre-empting refusal, a revised proposal has been submitted.
How does this compare? (see below)
Unless you are of the opinion that this is the kind of development St James needs and believe that some tinkering with specific design issues has responded satisfactorily to the overarching design objection, and that the proposal can no longer be described as overbearing and fundamentally unsuitable for the site, and in addition are not concerned there would be a worsening community balance caused either by the proposed co-living use, nor the implicitly evidenced intended use as student accommodation ……… please add your response to the outcry, whether or not you objected during the initial consultation. Click for further information and commentary here.
Closing date for comments now confirmed as 5 May
