While Richmond Council has accepted many of the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) inspector's recommendations, there is a last consultation currently under way.

The council is asking for comments on the areas where it proposes modifications to the inspector's recommendations because it disagrees with them.

Areas of disagreement on policy include affordable housing targets, live-work units, and special reference to affordable housing for elderly people, amongst others.

And controversy continues over development proposals for land behind Kingsbury House in Kings Road, Richmond, where the council rejects the inspector's recommendation that it should be low-rise housing for elderly people.

The inspector recommended: "The development should be for occupants of retirement age and consist of lowrise small dwellings without garages, but with access drive and turning space for visitors, and landscaping incorporating existing trees. The development should be compatible with the existing use of Kingsbury House, not detract from the amenities enjoyed by residents of the surrounding area, and preserve the character of the Conservation Area."

Richmond Council states, on the other hand, that it does not agree. "The Inspector’s recommendation appears to be based on the need for neighbourliness, particularly in relation to Kingsbury House. On balance, it is not considered essential to restrict the development to occupants of retirement age to achieve neighbourliness, nor to specify that the proposal to be low rise, small dwellings, The planning advice has consistently been that development in the form of flats would be in keeping with the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area. Further, that this form of development would be more likely to facilitiate the retention of important boundary trees, minimise hard surfacing and maximise soft landscaped areas, nature conservation interests and boundary screening."

The council has also proposed changes to the inspector's recommendations for Twickenham Riverside, stating that public conveniences could be included with other uses rather than provided in the traditional way. The council also says that open space - recommended as immutable by the planning inspector - should not be considered as a predominant use of the site but should "form an important element".

"The UDP proposal needs to include some flexibility to provide for an economically viable scheme and to provide an open space element which is at an appropriate functional and visual scale and disposition, taking into account other elements," states the new council recommendation.

Nor, says the council, would it be practicable or desirable for any planning brief for the site to indicate the precise area of open space.

Richmond Council has rejected the inspector's recommendation to include Mereway Cottages and gardens at Craneford Way within Metropolitan Open Land, stating it prefers flexibility.

The council is hoping there will be minimal comment in order to avoid any further inquiry.

See the council's proposed modifications to the UDP inspector's recommendations

Monday, July 26, 2004

If you wish to comment on this or other stories in the Journal please go to our Letters Pages

The Journal is produced as a service to the Community by Online Communities Ltd
an independent, non-profit, community group making the community websites for Richmond upon Thames.


www.oncom.org.uk

© 2004 Online Communities Ltd