Forum Topic

Karen, there is absolutely NO affordable housing. I went to the PAC meeting on Thursday 19th December. The argument from the developers is that the cinema and studios, etc... take up too much space which would otherwise be flats. In fact the developers are just extremely greedy! They gave the game away when the planning officer revealed that the CIL (old Section 106 levy) is to be just £400K, which is minute for a development of 168 luxury flats. This sum would apparently pay for just ONE (mediocre) flat in the new development OR two new flats in a poorer part of the borough, e.g. White City or Old Oak. In other words the average price of the 168 flats will be £1M (some penthouses at £5M, some smaller ones at the back at £400k), so the receipts will be £168M. Queen's Wharf was acquired by A2 Dominion for a knock-down £18M after planning permission was refused to the previous owner. Riverside Studios is free: the Council want to give it away. The cost of building is estimated by the Labour Councillor on the PAC who is a surveyor at £25-£30M. Total cost therefore is £50M, and profit is approx £118M, or nearly 250% of purchase price. No wonder the developers are rubbing their hands in glee! But we are NOT allowed to look at the developers' spreadsheet: that is confidential commercial information. Secondly, if you look at the position of the cinema and the studios they are hidden away in the centre, with no access to either the front (Crisp Road) or the back (the river). They will be surrounded by luxury flats, which will be owned by absent foreign owners, or perhaps occupied by one or two tenants, usually working couples. The atmosphere in the new cinema and studios will be very different from the present, friendly one. The empty flats will be forbidding. Would you really want to go to a place of entertainment in the middle of flats which you know are a target for burglars?

Una Hodgkins ● 4140d

Dear Mr Bailey,Thank you for drawing the deadline to my attention. I have objected again, in the following terms:"Dear Mr Goodacre,I am writing to object to the latest planning application for the Queen's Wharf and Riverside Studios site.Can you please refer to my comments and objections to previous incarnations of this project? My central objection, which is unchanged from before, is that the block of eight/nine storeys, with a boring surface of an unbroken curved block, challenges the setting of Hammersmith Bridge which is a Grade 2* listed building. This proposal shows contempt for its setting! (1) Looking from the Surrey bank opposite the new block the Bridge will become a shadow of its former elegant self, as the proposed block is too close and the height will be higher than the very top of the finial on the adjacent pier of the bridge. (2) The CGI of the proposed block seen from Lower Mall through the suspension wires of Hammersmith Bridge shows that the present detached silhouette of the Bridge will be completely lost. The draw-dock and Butlers Wharf:Can someone please decide what is to be done to enhance the draw-dock and Butlers' Wharf? The CGI conveniently air-brushes out the draw-dock completely! Who owns Butlers' Wharf? Is it the Council? If so, can the Council demand as a CIL contribution proper landscaping and an enhanced and rubbish-free draw-dock for river access? The draw-dock is currently a depot for flotsam and driftwood and will remain so if nothing is done.

Una Hodgkins ● 4193d

The Chair of the Hammersmith Society, Rosemary Pettit, and others have seen the proposals back in July. She commented in an e-mail of 5th July as follows:"Queens Wharf RiversideA number of us have been briefed by Riverside, Mount Anvil and architect Assael on the plans for this joint site development. First feedback:  it is a design improvement on the previous Queens Wharf scheme (no bow-front), and an ingenious wrap-around solution to place Riverside Studios in the basement (cinema, works, etc), the studios on the ground, a restaurant and café on the river side and housing above that with an open space/garden above the top of the studios in the middle of the development. The main entrance will be in Queen Caroline St, lorries and stage door in Crisp Road. The height is as given permission with an extra storey on the southern block.While we only saw massing proposals at our meetings basic detailing showed square windows and a cellular-type façade; the southern block is perceived by some as lego-like; just in case we were in doubt, the architect showed a pic of one he had made earlier in Lots Road. I think we generally agree that, in order to avoid an over-bearing river façade, the southern block needs to be stylistically varied from the rest.Riverside Studios was especially concerned about the treatment of the riverside as far as the bridge – what to do about it?Paul Goodacre [planning officer] was reserved about the style although he also mentioned that officers had been shown the Lots Road building. Like us he is adamant that the river wall and railings must accord with Street Smart guidelines (unlike the St George development at Fulham Reach); this is to be monitored as it will be a new wall and new railings. As to the draw-dock – also one of our concerns – Paul told them they must liaise with amenity groups (particularly HBG); we will also be interested in it, possibly as a water-sports’ resource. Paul expressed concern about Riverside’s desires for art signage on the building, and we will want to watch for that both on the land and on the river side."Rosemary has good judgment. We are going to be stuck with it. It is as high as the top of the finial on Hammersmith Bridge. It will ruin the setting of Hammersmith Bridge, which is Grade 2* listed. But the Council just sees the money, money, money to be made from the new flats (luxury overseas owners, of course. No riff-raff...)

Una Hodgkins ● 4193d