| Topic: | Re:Opinions from Regeneration meeting 21 November 2012 | |
| Posted by: | Michael Brandt | |
| Date/Time: | 24/11/12 10:56:00 |
| I thought it was a vey civilised and open meeting. Hopefully, the councillors and officers present took note that maybe that's the way some if it's own meetings should be conducted in particular, planning ones where currently no-one can contribute a single point that may get missed or surface during a discussion. I appreciate that councillors turned up and that they did not comment or steal the show, but I do hope they take on board the measure of feeling that this and other recent developments large and small are having on the residents of Brentford, be they rich, poor or in the middle. Not so reassuring were the matey handshakes in quieter corners after the meeting between a few councillors and the developers team, or the unwillingness of a few to engage even eye contact or conversation with anyone other than their pals. Nonetheless, Cllr. Cadbury's prompt input here is appreciated, and she can now be in no doubt that a lot of concerns are not about one's political colours but an overwhelming desire for residents of Brentford to see their home town properly improved and not further damaged by developments. I have to say I was disappointed with quite a few aspects, not least the architects somewhat poor interpretation of heritage and design. To single out just a few aspects: Parking has to be a major improvement and really if this town is to have any sort of good retail and commercial and social future, it has to incorporate cheap parking for that as well as catering more than adequately for residential parking. The car is the most liberating invention of our age and for all it's ills it's here to stay, but already we are starting use it far more sparingly, but they have to be kept somewhere when not in use. It will also be no good if the developers incorporate a fully adequate parking space quota and then like GWQ, management companies charge a fortune for residents to use them. Leading to GWQ residents parking in streets outside the estate. These changes that occur need 'written in stone' rules to be prevented. Also not much has been said about those who will live in these estates. I don't think there can be enough mistresses left to fill yet another riverside apartment block. It really is important that these are flats for families, couples and singles to live in and lay down roots of a proper home. Not a load of buy to lets and short term tenancies. Which has happened in all of the other recent developments here and why we have such dead areas here. 20 years from now the majority of the population will be over 55 and a very significant population over 65. No planning seems to incorporate almshouses, sheltered housing and easy access homes and quality homes for retirees and those who want to downsize but stay in the area. These places need gardens and pleasant restful surroundings and low level access. None of this is happening and given the length of this development the problem will be on us before it's completion. Now is the time to get this in order. |