|Marie Curie Site|
|Sunday, 20 November 2011 12:21|
Re: Marie Curie Site Planning Application TA/2011/1316 Independence Homes Ltd
Independence Homes Limited, the owners of the above site, are not a registered charity but a Private Limited Company that makes profits and distributes dividends to its shareholders.
Our objections to their proposals on this very important part of the Harestone Valley is not on the use proposed but on the size and mass of development proposed in 5 blocks all of which exceed significantly the floor area and mass of existing buildings. The development as currently detailed will be detrimental to residents immediately surrounding the site and to those with views across the Valley. It will result in at least 40% of the mature trees on the site being either removed or at risk of damage. The proposals do not follow the principles and safeguards of either the Urban Design Concept Statement for the site or the Policies laid out in the Harestone Valley Plan.
In the Concept Statement, if Harestone House is to be replaced the new building should be restricted to the existing footprint, should avoid existing trees and should be of a similar scale and mass to the building being replaced. By following these principles not only would existing trees around the building be retained but the effect of the new building on residents would be minimised.
There is no reason for the the apartment block not to follow these principles other than it may reduce the number of apartments and hence profitability but this number of apartments is not critical to the rationale for a Care Home on the site. Similarly it is difficult to understand the need for two 5 Bed houses on the site when these not only require the removal of mature TPO trees but also displace existing car parking to other parts of the site closer to residents.
We are sure most residents will welcome the idea of a new care home and accommodation for epileptics but this does not need to be at the expense of the amenity value and privacy of other residents or to the loss of mature tree which will take many decades to replace.
We would urge residents to oppose these proposals in their present form and seek with Independence Homes Limited to find proposals that will not damage the value of this site and its present buildings but which will make a positive contribution of lasting value to the community living in Harestone Valley. These can be achieved by proposals that respect and work within the Urban Design Concept Statement and the policies of the Harestone Valley Plan.
The present proposals do not conform and should be refused if Independence Homes Limited is not prepared to accept changes.
We hope other residents will agree and express their objections to Tandridge Planners either by letter or the internet facility on the Tandridge Council web site.
Mike and Helen Smith, Caterham Valley.