As you know we asked you to send in your comments to Persimmon. This is the letter we sent to Persimmon in relation to the Public Consultation.
We will let you know when Persimmon reply.
Please find below the formal Bannerbrook Residents Association response to the Public Consultation held on 30th October 2019 at The Penny Farthing, where the land previously earmarked for a school and now a new development.
This is in relation to “Land at Banner Lane – Former School site”, thus Bannerbrook Residents Association would like to make the following comments:
1. The purchasers of properties at Bannerbrook Park estate purchased their property on the understanding that a school was to be built on this site.
2. A school would not only be a school but would also provide a social facility for the residents, i.e.
o After hours the school would provide a venue that could be used for clubs, fitness classes, evening classes and meetings etc.
o The youth on this estate need to have the facility of a supervised youth club to keep them off the streets especially during evenings in the winter.
3. If the school is not to be built any new scheme should include a suitable building that could be used by the community. It should be large enough for 100 to 200 people to attend meetings and functions + parking for the people attending.
4. The proposed scheme put forward by Persimmon did not address any of these requirements. Do you have any alternative plans for this land?
5. There is major concern about the lack of Parking in the area with residents being forced to park in roadways, on verges and on the bends etc. This is currently causing major issues around the current apartment complex The Venue and the length of Monticello Way so any overspill from this potential development will only add to the existing problems.
6. Assuming that the 93 units house two occupants each with a vehicle then that equates to 186 vehicles of which 67 go with the houses and of the 61 apartments, 1 and a half spaces are being allocated. This leaves a shortfall of around 30 vehicles that would have to park on an already congested and very busy Monticello Way. That doesn’t take into account visitors to any of the 93 potential properties, so the 30 figure will increase causing more parking nightmares around that area.
7. Any new scheme should not compound the car parking problem but help relieve the existing parking issues and should provide adequate space for vehicle access and parking for both residents and visitors.
8. Will this proposed development be subject to an Estate Maintenance Charge? If so, would this be a new Management Company and new charge? Or would it fall under the existing Estate Maintenance Charge already charged to those properties on the northern side of the park but not the southern? This development is in fact bordering the northern side but more on the southern side of the park.
9. What would the anticipated monthly Estate Maintenance Charge be?
10. Will Greenbelt be involved in the collection of the Estate Maintenance Charge and the maintenance of the land?
11. Will Persimmon state on record that they will guarantee to provide full disclosure of details to prospective buyers to allow the FME1 form from the Law Society to be completed prior to buyer reservation?
12. Is the access road to the new apartments wide enough to cover 2 car widths?
13. Is the access road going to be double yellow lined else there is the possible double parking issues restricting movement of cars from the apartments? If not, how will the refuse collectors and emergency services access this part of the estate given the current issues on Monticello Way and Astoria Drive?
14. Overspill parking from the new apartments will flood the new access road thus making life difficult for the new occupants of the houses on this development, let alone Monticello Way. How will this be addressed?
15. With the prospective new development, could the car parking area not be underneath the apartments with an entrance off Banner Lane under the central apartment block?
16. Is there a plan to paint white lines around the estate at key junctions (notably Monticello Way / Astoria Drive and Astoria Drive / Gramercy Park)? We already have cars speeding and not giving way to those on the right.
17. Will there be a paved raised junction off Monticello Way at the new access road junction?
18. Will the new proposed development receive FTTC or FTTP broadband access?
19. How do you plan to allow all of these new homes / apartments to benefit from Electric Charging facilities as announced on 15th July 2019?
20. The walk from Banner Lane to Monticello Way could allow thieves to congregate. Is this wise to have a cut through? Would it be well lit? Would the lights be maintained better than the current set on the estate which has been left for years and only being addressed as part of the adoption process?
The Residents Association looks forward to receiving a detailed response from Persimmon in relation to the matters raised above.
Bannerbrook Park Residents Association