So I notice there has been a lot more activity around that vacant space opposite the station, has anyone heard of what might be coming our way?

Views: 1483

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Details are available on the Richmond planning website: 

http://www2.richmond.gov.uk/PlanData2/Planning_CaseNo.aspx?strCASEN... 

Whilst a decision was apparently due in April, this must have slipped quite a bit as the ability to add comments in support or objecting to the proposals appears to be available.

The report in particular sets out the plans for the units, which include a takeaway/delivery pizza service.

I note the report goes into some detail regarding avoidance of cooking smells/requirement for venting by using a "revolutionary" cooking process, and that:

"the business model and marketing strategy ... will be predominantly operational as delivery service and only aim a small percentage of its take via in-shop takeaway to provide for commuters of the train during the evening on their walks home."

So, someone's invented a way of cooking that produces no smells (open plan kitchen owners everywhere, rejoice), but there may be lots of mopeds parked out the front, and coming and going until late in the evening. Lucky residents and businesses of Station Road!

Not to mention that this shop would be in direct competition with Plenty who I assume still do pizzas in the evenings (I've not managed to get there myself but I hear great things).

I also note the quite spectacular statement that 

"As previously seen in the parking survey produced for the rear flat 5 at ground floor for the building, there is ample parking for road users during the evening hours in and around the site."

Hmmm.

Thanks for the information Clive, obvioulsy there are are going to be interesting weeks ahead and I'm sure some strong opinions on here!

The report summary suggests that "the proposal has many positives that can arise from it
and no real negatives due to the thought of the proposed tenants in
operating the units and their understanding of the local community
and the surrounds of the shop."

Do we really want delivery mopeds parked outside the unit where there is a bus stop?  I'm not sure that another takeaway next door to Cafe Plenty is a "positive".

Hampton certainly does not need this. Plenty is amazing and serves the people of Hampton. .

Thanks for the link Clive, somehow this application seems to have slipped by everyone.  I religiously look at all planning applications as published in the R&T and I don't honestly remember this one nor it appears does anyone else.  How can that be?

Reading the Design and Access Statement #1.0 Background The first page starts off with errors Para 3 states 'Waitrose, the restaurants and takeaways operating on and around the Station Road parade all close at a time not dissimilar to 10pm'. Waitrose close at 9pm and 4pm Sunday, most of the other premises are closed by 6pm apart from Plenty about 9 and the Chinese a little later.

None of them operate a nuisance service of vehicles or motorcycles. 

It would seem another 'Hot Food Take-away is the last thing we need, there are a considerable number of Fast Food outlets that at present co-exist with cafes and restaurants.  The need for another ugly take away (visit the Planning Application and look at the visuals) with all the associated problems, the comings and goings, noise and smells.  Irrespective of the claims, (having spoken to colleagues involved with major catering, who said if there were such odourless cooking devices it really would be unique and if such a phenomena existed they would know about it, and they don't!), this proposal really must be very low on Hamptons' wish list.

#2.0 The Proposal

Why would it be of concern or interest to the people of Hampton if this provides a solution for the landlord in terms of usage of retail unit, that is hardly relevant.

#4.2 Surroundings, Transport & Parking

'The site is directly opposite a major train station in a parade of shops with several other units that offer a takeaway and delivery service that can be found'. So why do we want another one?

The Design and Access Statement is so littered with nonsense and clearly written by someone who is neither familiar with Hampton or the amenities. QUOTE 'As previously seen in the parking survey produced for the rear flat 5 at ground floor for the building, there is ample parking for road users during the evening hours in and around the site'....'It is also important to highlight that the business model and marketing strategy means it will be predominantly operational as delivery service'....'There are provisions for light vehicular delivery parking at the front of the site will cater for the delivery service of the job'.  Really!

I'm glad it wasn't just me who read the application report wondering whether they were writing about the same Hampton.

Cllr Roberts - quick question: Whilst I understand the need to collate names and addresses of those commenting on planning applications to ensure that they are genuine comments, does publishing those details in full on the council's web pages discourage people from commenting, and even leave individuals open to potential abuse (or worse seeing as full addresses are included) - from others or indeed perhaps disgruntled applicants? Can you look into this? I would have thought that redacting some of the contact details might encourage more participation from residents. It should be sufficient to note the road in which those leaving comments live, should it not?

Thanks

I'm assuming, like most people probably that this is going to be a Pizza chain beginning with D however there are some nice chains around, for example http://www.basilico.co.uk/ and if it were to be the later option then I certainly welcome them - I'm sure its probably not though....does anyone know for sure

What a shame if it is another takeaway selling fat filling food... I don't live on that road, but the 'Village Grill' attracts a rather unpleasant anti-social teenage (and younger!) element, I hope this doesn't happen on this site too. 

Clive

You have identified a major problem with objecting to Planning Applications when full disclosure of names, addresses etc. are published. We objected to a series of undesirable Planning Applications as did at least 40+ other residents. The upshot was some of those who had objected received late night visits by the applicant. As a direct consequence of that some were too frightened to object to the series of similar applications that followed.

Clive said:

Cllr Roberts - quick question: Whilst I understand the need to collate names and addresses of those commenting on planning applications to ensure that they are genuine comments, does publishing those details in full on the council's web pages discourage people from commenting, and even leave individuals open to potential abuse (or worse seeing as full addresses are included) - from others or indeed perhaps disgruntled applicants? Can you look into this? I would have thought that redacting some of the contact details might encourage more participation from residents. It should be sufficient to note the road in which those leaving comments live, should it not?

Thanks

Hello Clive

It's not an easy one, I grant you. I suppose it's a matter of transparency and one would hope that people who are applying for an application wouldn't seek redress or recrimination against those who oppose their plans.  That said, in other circumstances such as licensing the objections received and included in bundles of papers have the names and addresses redacted.  Often the redaction is completely ludicrous such as when the details are removed but still the letter reads 'I live in the 1st floor flat directly above the premises in question!'

I will, however, raise your point with the relevant officers in the environment directorate and see if they have any comment to make

Just touching on this particular application, I was made aware of it a few months ago and raised it with council officers as I was rather surprised to see it without any apparent comment. I understand that the officers were waiting on further information to be supplied but this wasn't forthcoming so other cases took priority.

So this is still a live file but no decision has yet been taken and I understand that objections would still be considered. If the deal goes through then it may become live (or rather more live) issue but that would, I believe, necessitate a new application.

G
 
Clive said:

Cllr Roberts - quick question: Whilst I understand the need to collate names and addresses of those commenting on planning applications to ensure that they are genuine comments, does publishing those details in full on the council's web pages discourage people from commenting, and even leave individuals open to potential abuse (or worse seeing as full addresses are included) - from others or indeed perhaps disgruntled applicants? Can you look into this? I would have thought that redacting some of the contact details might encourage more participation from residents. It should be sufficient to note the road in which those leaving comments live, should it not?

Thanks

Ian did that really happen? That's outrageous. If someone wants to state which flat they in then that's their choice but otherwise surely the application process can hide the name and address once they have seen that it a genuine objection or agreement?

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2020   Created by Matt D.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service