18th December 2023
Without Prejudice
Objection to PLANNING APPLICATION: 2023/01093/FUL – relating to Shepherd’s Bush Market land and other neighbouring areas.
"Never seen such a Planning Application treated in such a deplorable non-Democratic way as by this Labour Council."
The Hammersmith & Fulham Council has chosen to hold a Planning and Development Control Committee meeting on Tuesday evening 19th December 2023 (perhaps one of the busiest weeks of the year), whereby the planning application - reference 2023/01093/FUL relating to Shepherd’s Bush Market and other neighbouring land areas will be considered.
There is a strong sense that the community is exceedingly frustrated with the lack of transparency and democracy surrounding this application that will greatly damage the lives of residents and market traders.
The application may be viewed as a scheme to increase the value of land areas that immediately border with Shepherd’s Bush Market. The use of the market land may be hugely compromised, and the neighbouring land area will get to encroach onto the market land so to increase their own building footprint and exploit the market land for additional access routes.
The proposals of the applicant - YC Shepherd’s Bush Market Ltd., are viewed as a scheme that may gradually remove all of the tenants who currently hold Transport for London lease and outprice the market businesses from the market within the next lease term.
Who owns the neighbouring land area formally known as the Old Laundry Site Area ? Yes, you guessed it…The Hammersmith & Fulham Council.
The following is a letter recently sent to the Hammersmith & Fulham Council planning department from local resident - Lynette Southall.
Dear Sirs,
I have been a long-term Resident of Pennard Road of some 43 years, and in all my years have never seen such a Planning Application treated in such a deplorable non-Democratic way as by this Labour Council.
I have attended every possible public consultation meeting with Yoo Capital over the past couple of years. It has been clear all along that the voices of Residents impacted by the proposed development were meaningless and of no interest, as if it was considered and treated as an already ‘done deal’ with the Council, that Yoo Capital can build whatever they want, as long as the market got refurbished, and some affordable housing built.
These consultation meetings were mere lip service to procedure. No Council representatives have been present at any point, and there has been a failure of Councillors to meet, or respond to Local Residents, or Market Traders (for that matter), to discuss the impacts or implications of said development. Everything seems to be based on Yoo Capitals ‘recommendations’, which have the agenda to make this work as a commercial proposition, sell up and move on in some 7 years’ time, leaving the rest of us to suffer. There has been a clear lack of transparency. I am tired of hearing local gossip about the underhanded way Yoo Capital has dealt with these affairs with local Market Traders in order to get them to support their proposed planning application. Exposure of this in the whistleblowing Press will not bode well for the Council!
This is a MAJOR Planning Application with major long-term implications for the local community. A meagre 5 minutes in one Council meeting after a consultation period of circa 2 years is clearly insufficient time for anybody to voice any opinions, or grounds for objections on such a very important Planning Proposal, especially when the Council has not been proactive in any way at engaging with the local community over this entire period, contrary to what has been purported by the Council…. Where is the Democracy? There are numerous people that would like to make representations, but the opportunity is not available, places are limited to just 5 Speakers and less than 5 minutes. We used to be able to speak in turn at Council meetings, but not anymore. Even access to these meetings is restricted.
Reference to Meeting of Planning and Development Control Committee 5 December
The Greenside Residents Association represents the voices of those that live in Pennard Road, yet at your meeting of 5 December there was only a mere mention of the group with no attention given to their concerns or objections. It is clear that you express no interest or concern. You just want to motor on and get it through Planning ASAP, without acknowledging any opposition from those impacted…. It is a total disgrace!
There are clearly many issues arising from the impacts of this Development on local Residents.
On 5 December the only topic which was examined was the issues of light, which were seemingly played down and eroded by science. Accordingly lower levels of light may be within what you or Yoo Capital may deem as plausibly acceptable, however these lower levels of light are in no way acceptable to us. We are the ones that will have to suffer for the rest of our lives from the impact thereof. We have a Right to Light. Are we all supposed to live in dark, dingy, depressing dungeons for the rest of our lives? It is a misconception to assume that all rooms facing West on Pennard Roadare all bedrooms and not ‘living rooms’ and therefore of no consequence.
If the proposed buildings were substantially reduced in height and proximity to neighbouring properties perhaps this would not be such a problem?
The proposed development is on a relatively small, landlocked piece of land, behind our residential properties in Pennard Road, which is a Conservation area. The gargantuan scale and overdevelopment of said development on this very small plot of land will tower above our properties and have a major impact on the Conservation aspects of our street and our quality of life.
Summary of Objections within the Planning Guidelines are as follows:
· Layout & Density of Building
· Effect on listed building & Conservation area
· Overlooking & loss of privacy
· Loss of light & overshadowing
· Parking
· Noise
None of the above issues have been fully explored by the Council and the majority of points certainly not discussed in the meeting. Clearly there are MAJOR implications from ALL of the above. How can these issues not be addressed?
The general consensus amongst Residents is that the proposed gargantuan scale and the intense overdevelopment of this site does not make sense and cannot work in reality given all the practical elements that have not been considered. It is far too over ambitious in scale given the small landlocked plot in which it stands, and the lower height and proximity of adjacent residential neighbouring Victorian properties which exist within a Conservation area. Notably the substantive scale of these proposed buildings has been played down by artistic licence in any visual imagery submitted to make them look smaller than they will be in reality. Also, visually one is cajoled into not registering the sense of how ‘squashed in’ and claustrophobic everything will be in real life.
There has been no mention of the buildings and balconies which will overlook our properties, hence greatly intrude on our privacy. These tall buildings will have a vantage point over our private dwellings and gardens...
No mention of the impact on Parking in the ‘G’ Zone which is already highly stressed and very oversubscribed…
No mention of the noise which will emanate from such a densely occupied development.
There are so many issues which the Council needs to discuss with Residents, yet they have been nowhere to be seen! After all we are the ones that live here, and we know and understand our area best. I have only touched lightly on but a few of the issues and question what the Council has been doing all this time to alleviate peoples’ concerns? We are meant to live in a democratic country.
We as Residents welcome improvements to the area but not one that impacts so negatively on local amenity and the quality of life of Shepherds Bush residents.
I would much appreciate a response to my email, as indeed would other residents and concerned parties.
Yours faithfully,
Lynette Southall