Continuing the Dame's focus on the need for urgent changes in local planning policy we take a look at the hot topic of taking......
Greater control of demolition in Conservation Areas
Greater control of demolition in Conservation Areas
In a recent case planning officers appear willing to recommend approval of the demolition of a building in a Conservation Area, retaining only the front facade.
Two changes should be made: (i) "substantial demolition" (as in this case) should be treated in the same way as for complete demolition, and (ii) applications for substantial demolition should be refused unless they can demonstrate strong countervailing public benefit.
 |
| Totally Faux |
Ideally, these changes should be made to the Consolidated Local Plan, failing which the Council should use its powers of discretion to refuse them anyway.
The big question is why is the Dame making these noises? Councillors of the ruling Party should be making these representations to their Leader and Cllr Campbell should be insisting on the policy changes.
ReplyDeleteBut dizzy is too busy doing Grenfell interviews and feeling important at her Sloane Square dinner parties.
And the person who is running the Council? Cllr Pascall?? He is a self styled planning expert. Why is HE not pulling his finger out....
13.37. Because his finger was never in.
DeleteWhat a silly and shallow person 12.09 is
DeletePascall should be kicked out...hopeless and thick.
DeleteHas dizzy addressed about a huge concentration of carcinogens in Grenfell neighbourhood?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/12/toxins-found-in-grenfell-tower-soil-study-finds
It's quite a large area, even stretching towards the Shepherds Bush roundabout as well.
DeleteAre the Council going to tell us it's going to be OK like what they said about the air quality?
"we will work with our health partners to examine....."
Deletehttps://www.rbkc.gov.uk/press-release/message-our-residents-following-todays-guardian-article-about-possible-soil
Thank you 16:41.
DeleteI want to read the report.
Wow. Huge new speaking and TV appearance opportunity for dizzy. Tune in to Radio 4 folks.......
ReplyDeleteThe fire created a serious human problem. If this report about dangerous substances is correct it creates a huge financial problem which will be many times beyond the financial capacity of The Royal Borough to cope with. There will have to be a major intervention from central Government. Also, real estate will plummet in value and properties will be unsalable. The Tories may come to regret winning the local election.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about devaluation of houses in N. Ken as well 12:07.
DeleteIndeed, the ASBESTOS problem at Grenfell is serious. I understand that the ruin is wrapped up, to not obliterate the visual aspect of the disaster, but more IMPORTANTLY, to prevent the existing ASBESTOS particles from becoming airborne and inhaled by passers by. Demolition of the Tower will be very expensive task. It cannot be demolished in the old fashion sense of the word. ASBESTOS will have to be removed first. This takes time and MONEY. Millions of £.
ReplyDeleteOn second thought, if everyone wanted to vacate the area, people from the area will be rehoused elsewhere outside of the borough because there is nowhere else to house them even if the Sutton Estate is restored. Though Earls Court could be dedicated to social housing but that will take years for them to build. Then the borough will have an empty land/neighbourhood. You don't think they calculated this far? I mean if they were counting on the fire, they must have thought that asbestos would be a massive problem afterwards. Rather convenient way to get rid of not just the Grenfell tower residents but the whole area!
DeletePS> Apparently, RBKC were aware of this problem, but failed to address it or make it public. Can you imagine what this might have created?
ReplyDeleteBut we were aware of the Asbestos problem from Day 1 and they re-assured us that air quality was fine.
Delete