SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Planning Rules

1824 Views 12 Replies 6 Participants Last post by  gd
Hi Guys,

I'm very sorry to use a new thread but could really, really do with your help and didn't know where to post it - and i know you guys are the experts!

Basically where i live (Nr Baundenberg Projket - Norman Foster) all the residents of the Baundenberg park their cars on the street because Urban Splash charge £10,000 for a parking space. Which is fair enough, at the moment as there's enough space. However, they're proposing to build another 194 apartments next to their current devlopment.

I have no objections of such against the scheme although I do think free parking should be provided for the residents.


Objections wise I feel like trafford council is just railroading this through without really caring about anyones opinions. So where do you start to appeal to if you think your local council don't wanna know?

Cheers
glyn
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
unfortunately Urban Splash can charge what they like for those spaces. In the city centre they are upwards of £20,000 so £10,000 doesn't seem so bad to me...

Are you on a very long lease (125 years) out of interest?
Planning aurthorites should have clear guidelines concerning the amount of parking provided in new developments.
In Manchester i think it is 1.2 spaces per domicile.
Sadly its only a guideline and rarely strictly enforced and if a developer wants to charge for it - so be it. :(

From a planning point of view howver i think that if it can be proven that the current development is causing an excess of traffic and parking problems then i think you have a strong argument that any new development must have dedicated parking.
Get onto your local councillor and see if they can make representations to the planning commitee when this new application is considered.

I personally think you have a justifiable grievance and if you feel strongly enough you should put in a formal opposition to this new application on the grounds of increased traffic and parking problems.
I agree. I think Urban Splash have already proposed a lower parking per domicile rate on the new dev, but have qualified it in terms of on street parking. Personally I would tell them to **** off. But then again, I can be bought.
I agree.

There is a very big gap between the supposed "green" agenda of the political parties and their actual behaviour.

I mean how much of Peel's developments around TC would have been allowed under continental planning laws which would demand public transport access.

However all the parties once in power are veyr keen to see new developments occur.

Right or wrong thats how it is. It will take either a very big culture change or a even bigger tidal flood to change peoples minds in the UK. Indeed with a mini recession (or price readjustment as I think it should be called), then these types of sensitive issues will become very much secondary.
thanks guys.. appreciate it!
But then again, I can be bought.
Which you have demonstrated on several occasions. :lol:

I am just cut and pasting your comments and intend to enbolden the the words 'Urban Splash can **** off" along with a copy of your CV and contact details to Mr Tom Bloxham (cc-ing Mr Jonathan Flakingham aswell).
Hope you dont mind. :hug:
So you're telling me that they can say that a devlopment has x amount of spaces but they mean... the road can hold x amount of spaces?
So you're telling me that they can say that a devlopment has x amount of spaces but they mean... the road can hold x amount of spaces?
That would be a very shakey argument on US's part and i would hope the planners would treat it with the contempt it deserves.
However i hope planners would do lots of things and they dont.
Perhaps if the planners had loads of local people mithering them about it they will 'do the right thing'.

To use on street parking as a legitimate part of an application is very very bad form and not really valid.
I would find out what Trafford's guidelines on spaces per domicile and 'remind' the planners of it.
Dont be patronised by them - fight your corner (if you give enough of a shit that is)
Check to see if the planning application includes a traffic impact assessment. If it does, it'll be worth analysing the methodology they've used to see if they have a sound rationale for the level and nature of parking provision.
Which you have demonstrated on several occasions. :lol:

I am just cut and pasting your comments and intend to enbolden the the words 'Urban Splash can **** off" along with a copy of your CV and contact details to Mr Tom Bloxham (cc-ing Mr Jonathan Flakingham aswell).
Hope you dont mind. :hug:
so is the cheque in the post?
I remember Macclesfield Borough Council used to knock things back due to lack of parking, on an almost weekly basis. It was almost like their ace card when they couldn't find any other valid reason for halting the modernisation of the town.
cheers fellas... i'm gonna stand up for the little guy!!!!:lol:

used to respect Urban Splash.. but not so much these days!
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top