Letter: The Application Raises Questions Whether Homes Should Be Built On Weyside Urban Village Site

Published on: 10 Jan, 2021
Updated on: 10 Jan, 2021

From: Jim Allen

In response to: Weyside Urban Village planning application published.

The planning application for the Weyside Urban Village consists of 247 badly collated documents with around 1.8Gb of data, much unsearchable. I’ve currently compiled 30 plus pages of ‘observations’. It raises the question: should houses should be built on such a site?

Outline plan for the Weyside Urban Village.

The documents show reduced minimum parking standards being used, asbestos in 37% of the samples from the site and my calculations show Waterside Road will be in shadow until after 10am in winter months.

The “running river”, dug between 1610-30 by Sir Richard Weston, is the oldest historical feature on the site but it is dismissed in the application as a mere undatable open sewer.

Is it financially viable to pay a PLC statutory water undertaker to enlarge his plant on a new site and with the cost of clean up as proposed? (see Thames Water responds to Weyside sewage treatment issues).

Will each new homeowner need to be informed of the asbestos left under and around their homes? How will this affect house prices?

Will residents be living with 12 years of dust and asbestos-contaminated dirt from construction?

Will water mains and sewers, along with power cables, be repairable without an asbestos licenced contractor?

Residents at the development will have a nice 30-minute walk in the rain to the main station. I cannot find any plan for integrated transport in the application. The Sustainable Movement Corridor (SMC) does not go to the railway station – unless it has changed since I last looked.

There are approximately 20 legal reasons to object to a planning application – this project ticks the boxes of 17 or 18.

Share This Post