Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Benedict

The Village Atmosphere Of Old Street Roundabout

Recommended Posts

Good ramble from the londonist about one particular planning application:

Unless you’ve had your head buried in the sand since Blair morphed into Brown, the government has now put housing at the forefront of the political agenda, having realised that the current lack of residential units being built is totally inadequate.

At the frontline of this campaign is the need to build more homes in brown-field sites in our cities so that we can edge towards those housing targets of about 200,000 a year.

Unfortunately for those Londoners who think we need more housing, the 'village atmosphere' of Old Street Roundabout is not a candidate for development if Islington Council get their way.

Yes, you read that right 'village atmosphere'. At an extraordinary planning meeting, proposals to build a new 130 metre tall residential tower at 100 City Road that would contain 225 new homes, experienced widespread opposition.

• Supporters of the scheme who contacted Islington Council to voice their opinions were told by council officers it wasn’t within the borders of the council’s area.

• George Allan, chair of Islington’s south planning committee said the building was too tall. It is proposed for an area that Islington council planners have said is suitable for tall buildings.

• Old Street Roundabout was described at the planning meeting as having 'a village atmosphere' and new development would wreck the 'atmosphere'. Presumably this is an East German style village with hunking great concrete blocks and crappy traffic flow problems.

• English Heritage opposed the plans because it would overshadow Bunhill Fields – a quaint old graveyard – despite not being visible because of trees blocking the view and three towers already directly bordering the burial ground.

• The council’s heritage officer said that the loss of 70–74 City Road was unacceptable and councilors on the planning committee agreed. This is despite the fact the building is not listed by English Heritage so doesn’t have Grade II status.

• The building was officially refused for having too few homes in it. Councilors attacked it in the meeting for it having too many homes. The council’s Affordable Housing Office supported the proposal.

To refuse a building for having too little affordable housing whilst attacking it for having too much housing before the vote, and to claim it would be 'detrimental to the local character' of one of London’s ugliest traffic roundabouts just goes to show how far the planning system has to go if the government are to get anywhere near reaching their target for affordable homes.

The good news is that this power to decide buildings over a particular size is due to be taken from councils and given to the Mayor of London. You can bet that Ken will have a little more logic in his planning decisions although Londonist can just imagine Boris demanding we get

some half timbered office buildings in the City with thatched roofs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably helps if you're familiar with it . . . a total hole. If people will fight that hard against development in a fundamentally unpleasant area Gordon's got a hell of a battle on his hands getting to his affordable homes target. It doesn't even seem to be nimbyism, truly insane objections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good ramble from the londonist about one particular planning application:

Unless you’ve had your head buried in the sand since Blair morphed into Brown, the government has now put housing at the forefront of the political agenda, having realised that the current lack of residential units being built is totally inadequate.

At the frontline of this campaign is the need to build more homes in brown-field sites in our cities so that we can edge towards those housing targets of about 200,000 a year.

Unfortunately for those Londoners who think we need more housing, the 'village atmosphere' of Old Street Roundabout is not a candidate for development if Islington Council get their way.

Yes, you read that right 'village atmosphere'. At an extraordinary planning meeting, proposals to build a new 130 metre tall residential tower at 100 City Road that would contain 225 new homes, experienced widespread opposition.

• Supporters of the scheme who contacted Islington Council to voice their opinions were told by council officers it wasn’t within the borders of the council’s area.

• George Allan, chair of Islington’s south planning committee said the building was too tall. It is proposed for an area that Islington council planners have said is suitable for tall buildings.

• Old Street Roundabout was described at the planning meeting as having 'a village atmosphere' and new development would wreck the 'atmosphere'. Presumably this is an East German style village with hunking great concrete blocks and crappy traffic flow problems.

• English Heritage opposed the plans because it would overshadow Bunhill Fields – a quaint old graveyard – despite not being visible because of trees blocking the view and three towers already directly bordering the burial ground.

• The council’s heritage officer said that the loss of 70–74 City Road was unacceptable and councilors on the planning committee agreed. This is despite the fact the building is not listed by English Heritage so doesn’t have Grade II status.

• The building was officially refused for having too few homes in it. Councilors attacked it in the meeting for it having too many homes. The council’s Affordable Housing Office supported the proposal.

To refuse a building for having too little affordable housing whilst attacking it for having too much housing before the vote, and to claim it would be 'detrimental to the local character' of one of London’s ugliest traffic roundabouts just goes to show how far the planning system has to go if the government are to get anywhere near reaching their target for affordable homes.

The good news is that this power to decide buildings over a particular size is due to be taken from councils and given to the Mayor of London. You can bet that Ken will have a little more logic in his planning decisions although Londonist can just imagine Boris demanding we get

some half timbered office buildings in the City with thatched roofs.

Do you believe a decision made by Ken will be anything other than political? What is wrong with thatch it is environmentally friendly (although I am sure Health and safety will have something to say about it)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably helps if you're familiar with it . . . a total hole. If people will fight that hard against development in a fundamentally unpleasant area Gordon's got a hell of a battle on his hands getting to his affordable homes target. It doesn't even seem to be nimbyism, truly insane objections.

'total hole' doesn't begin to do it justice, building a oil refinery on that sight would improve its appearance, people should welcome a residential tower block, even a crappy one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
English Heritage opposed the plans because it would overshadow Bunhill Fields – a quaint old graveyard – despite not being visible because of trees blocking the view and three towers already directly bordering the burial ground.

How terrible for the residents of the graveyard to have their daylight taken away.......oh yeah, that's right, they're dead....

It's not like we should prioritise the needs of people who are alive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'total hole' doesn't begin to do it justice, building a oil refinery on that sight would improve its appearance, people should welcome a residential tower block, even a crappy one.

Indeed . . .

Old_St_Roundabout_1.jpg

A picture of it for those unfamiliar . . . oh so very villagey isn't it? Just conjures up images of cricket on the green on a sunday afternoon.

Edited by Benedict

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If by "Village" you mean full of drunken idiots and thieving scumbags every night, and by "atmosphere" you mean the heady mix of kebab smell and car fumes then village atmosphere would be correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If by "Village" you mean full of drunken idiots and thieving scumbags every night, and by "atmosphere" you mean the heady mix of kebab smell and car fumes then village atmosphere would be correct.

You mean my rustic ideal of middle england is slightly out of date? What a bleak world we live in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean my rustic ideal of middle england is slightly out of date? What a bleak world we live in.

:lol:

Stop it! You are killing me.

Seriously though: Is London really short of flats?

I was speaking to a friend from way back when I was a fresh faced intern. After assuring me that there was a shortage, I found out that his old flat near London Bridge was on the rental market for the same rent as he paid in 2000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol:

Stop it! You are killing me.

Seriously though: Is London really short of flats?

I was speaking to a friend from way back when I was a fresh faced intern. After assuring me that there was a shortage, I found out that his old flat near London Bridge was on the rental market for the same rent as he paid in 2000.

There's loads of flats, these would be easy walking distance to the city & reasonable walking distance to the west end though, plus plenty of restaurants & bars nearby even if it becomes a ghost town at weekends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 356 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.