Assorted objections

From Regent's Canal CAAC

We consider the site is grossly overdeveloped to the detriment of the canal and its environment and that it is contrary to the objectives of the Regents Canal Appraisal and Management Plan .

Our committee associates with the criticisms of the Canal and River Trust particularly as regards the bulk of the Block B .

We are concerned that it will have a damaging impact on the Canal both residential boats and natural by the removal of light and sky view

On our design opinion; we find the disorganized ,miscellaneous group of buildings incoherent as a town scape . The landscaping leads to a complex inconvenient public area ,especially for disabled and Wheelchair users .

We invite the Council to Refuse this Application


Anthony Richardson, Secretary, Regents Canal Conservation Area Advisory Committee

Please register my objection to planning application 2017/5497/P (2-6 St Pancras Way).

You will find my name (and the group I represent, the Friends of Regent's Canal) in the community involvement statement because I attended some exhibitions and a public meeting at the council offices. However, despite registering my details and comments at these events I did not receive any notifications that the application had been submitted. As a result, we have missed the opportunity to hold a group discussion on the final plan. I trust that you will still accept comments after the new year, once I have had some feedback from my colleagues.

I share the concerns of nearby residents and canal users who object to the height and scale of the proposed buildings. The buildings will enclose the canal to the extent that it will no longer serve as a tranquil open space where Londoners can escape from urban noise and chaos.

I also object to the lack of access points between the canal and the surrounding roads. This development is an ideal opportunity to open up the offside of the canal to allow deliveries from canal boats to road vehicles (for example cargo bikes, electric vans) for onward transfer to the congestion zone. But the drawings suggest that the whole waterside will be used as a pedestrian precinct.

I also object to paragraph 7.38 of the Transport plan. There is no mention of using the canal to transfer waste to nearby waterside recycling plants. Again this is a missed opportunity for reducing unnecessary road traffic.

"7.38 Waste will be collected on-street from the proposed footway loading bay or from the kerbside of St Pancras Way (for Plots A and B), and from the service yard for Plot C. Alternatively, refuse vehicles can wait kerbside adjacent on Granary Street to collect waste rather than entering the service yard. It is envisaged that the preferred approach will be confirmed and agreed by the relevant waste contractor/s"

I will follow up with further comments once I have read the planning documents in more detail.

Ian Shacklock

Again, at 2017/5497/P, a developer is proposing a too-high development along the Canal.

3 development proposals along the Canal recently have got in to planning trouble:

Camden's Bangor Wharf,

Islington's Regents Wharf

Hackney's Angel Wharf

The Camden Tom Baker proposal is yet another: too high, too big, not adequately sensitive to local residents and local concerns.

In terms of factual numbers, it essentially comes down to a light issue: is the proposed development contravening BRE guidelines?

If so, then the proposal should be significantly altered.

My suggestion is a maximum of 5 stories, with any additional roof stories being set back '45 degrees' on leading edges.