2.3.2

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2

Support

Grafton Area of Major Change SPD 2017

Representation ID: 31872

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Historic England

Representation:

2.3.2 including nineteenth century terraced housing and some twentieth century housing.

Full text:

2.3.2 including nineteenth century terraced housing and some twentieth century housing.

Object

Grafton Area of Major Change SPD 2017

Representation ID: 32147

Received: 01/11/2017

Respondent: Marion Bailey

Representation:

The scale of Grafton has increased. This does not give license to increase other buildings in the low rise area!

Full text:

2.3.2 The scale of Grafton has increased. This does not give license to increase other buildings in the low rise area!
2.2.9 Yes cycling occurs 10-4 but is a hazard for the infirm and families. An alternative cycle route should be provided for non-shoppers (I think most of the cyclists are not shopping!)
2.2.16 and 2.2.3 Access to Adam and Eve car park is poor. Visibility to traffic approaching from Paradise Street is poor.
The rear of East Road premises which back onto car park should not be considered as 'frontage'.
2.4.9 Agree with designation oh historical buildings. They are delightfully 'small scale'.
2.4.9 What are these improvements to green and hard areas in John / City / Paradise?
2.4.19 Agreed
2.5.3 Photo 23. Charlie's Coffer Companay overspills its space - delightful as it service is. A cart; The tables / chairs exceed allowance. Difficult corner with Paradise Street. Large seating area outside Valeries restricts pedestrians.
2.5.7 Opps for green space (not just hard landscaping).
2.6.2 New student accommodation open between Newmarket / East / New Street. Create housing for workers!
2.7.2 Area let down by poor quality shops. Charity, betting, cheap food. Why not encourage controls / craft ("Auk" went to central area!) instead of just "artisan food".
3.2.7 Area not suitable for hotel.
4.2.1 Extend primary route to East Road but connect with busses, car park and buke park.
4.4.13 Agree no.17 should dominate. That means surroundings must be lower.
4.4.14 Respect to low buildings. Don't smother them by 5-6 stories nearby.
4.4.17 Tall blocks make the nearby conservation area feel disrespected, absurd, and in time (as can be seen by the language used to describe hoe much bigger Grafton and how courts are) will lead to increased heights becoming the norm - I see its suggested 'up to 6 or 6 storeys". This is disproportionate - even 4 storeys should be exceptional. The illustration F.39 is bland and detracts from the beauty of no.17 which gives me pleasure everytime I look upwards. Flat squares do not draw the eye to the beauty!
4.4.24 Taxi movement is an issue and 'after hours' access would encourage vehicular access.
4.4.28 Figure 42 is imaginative.
4.5.3 Add an extra chair to each of those tables and there is little space for pedestrians. And cyclist will be weaving between pushchairs. Please be realistic. Add mobility scooter. Older people with shopping bags on wheels. The vision is unrealistic. Re-route cyclists. Restrict café fronts. Give priority to pedestrians.
4.5.7 Trees on East Road look good but surely reducing lanes for vehicles will cause huge problems?
Biggest concern - Height! Bland, uniform architecture. Safety of pedestrians.
Thank you for organising this consultation (even if I received notice rather late). Commenting on such a long document online is difficult.