2.4.9

2.4.9 bullet point 2 needs re-wording. As it currently is drafted it suggests you are protecting houses from enhancements. Please re-order, placing the protection houses clause last to read:
'Enhance surrounding residential streets: care of trees, enhancements to the public realm and protecting houses from inappropriate development'

Method: Telephone discussion with Bruce Waller (Senior Planning Policy Officer) regarding the following issues raised:
- Access to Paradise Street should only be used for residential uses and not for either deliveries accessing shops along Fitzroy Street/Burleigh Street or for construction purposes.
- Current and future servicing of any new or existing retail uses should avoid residential streets, e.g. Paradise Street. The streets are often blocked by retail service vehicles and construction vehicles having to turnaround to leave the area. These activities block access for local people and create a considerable amount of noise throughout both the day and night.
- Please remove the bollards along City Rd to allow service vehicles access to the shops along Fitzroy Street/Burleigh Street to avoid them having to use Paradise Street and other local roads.

The works of the early 1980s were an act of sheer vandalism. The remaining late Georgian and Victorian areas need preservation and enhancement. More trees are desperately needed. However, the through cycle route along City Road, which is currently obstructed by car parking and a badly placed tree, needs work to keep the tree but keep the cycle route open.

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.