Subject:	FW: 22/2204/FUL Planning Comments



From:  
Sent: 08/06/2023 17:09:36 
To: envprotection@richmond.gov.uk 
Subject: 22/2204/FUL Planning Comments
 

 
Dear Development Management Team, 
 
Thank you for your letter dated 19 May 2023 regarding the proposed amendments to the St 
Clare Business Park Development. 
 
Unfortunately, the revisions to the proposal have not addressed two exceptionally fundamental 
flaws in the project. That being the size of the main block development and the lack of parking 
provision. 
 
Size of Main Block Development
 
The height of the main block of flats has not been reduced, it will remain a five storey structure 
which is totally out of keeping with the area surrounding Hampton Hill. The only other building 
of this size in the area is on the high street and as was noted in the Planning Inspectorate 
dismissal 19/3201/FUL this example is not in keeping with the local character which is 
"traditional and low rise development". 
 
The main block remaining at five storeys will also have a materially negative impact on 
neighbours on the railway side of School Road who will have balconies of the flats overlooking 
their properties and garden as well as blocking sunlight into those houses and gardens. 
 
I would like your team to consider where the next nearest five storey development is to the 
proposed site (excluding the one on the High Street previously mentioned as out of character). 
The lack of high rise development is a key characteristic of Hampton Hill and the amendments 
to the plan do not address the issues raised already on this application and those raised for the 
prior application of 19/3201/FUL. 
 
Parking
Hampton Hill already has an issue with parking in and around Windmill Road, Holly Road, 
School Road, School Road Avenue and Wolsey Road. Existing residents often have to park 
streets away from their homes given the lack of available spaces. 
 
The current proposal has 83 spaces for 100 residences. Given that there are no residents' 
parking zones in Hampton Hill and according to the ONS the average UK Household has 1.2 cars 
then there is a definite lack of parking provision. 
 
I would invite the team to consider where an additional 37 cars would park, assuming that the 
occupants of this development would on average have the same number of cars as all UK 
households. 
 
The lack of parking provision and lack of availability of on-street parking surrounding the 
development is highly likely to lead to disruptive and dangerous parking as well as inviting local 
tensions. Rather than making Hampton Hill a better place to live it will make it worse.
 
 
Conclusion
Overall this development proposal continues to create properties at the expense of existing 
residents in Hampton Hill. It provides little to no additional amenity whilst creating an 
overbearing, light limiting and permanently disruptive presence. 
 
I hope that the decision is taken to reject this proposal and continue to be in line with the 
previous decisions and commentary from both Richmond and the Planning Inspectorate. 
 
Best, 
 
Richard Lockington 
12 School Road, Hampton Hill, TW12 1QL