Development of electricity substation would turn surrounding roads into a 'nightmare', it is claimed

Proposed building

Proposed building

The site as it is currently

First published in News
Last updated
East London and West Essex Guardian Series: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter - Epping Forest

The demolition of an electrical substation to make way for 11 flats would cause "chaos" in surrounding roads, it is claimed.

Epping Forest District Council has recommended the approval of a plan to create nine two-bedroom and two one-bedroom flats at the site of the London Underground facility in Station Way, Buckhurst Hill.

A previous proposal from developer Greenplace Capital Ltd were refused on the grounds that the proposed building was too bulky and ithere was insufficient parking.

Now similar concerns have been raised about the new application, which is around 10m high.

Malcolm Godwin, 63, of Station Way, said: “If it goes ahead it would be chaos.

“There’s already insufficient parking here and a development of that size will make the roads a nightmare.

“I don’t think you’ll find anyone who doesn’t want to see something built there but I think it should be something about half the size.

“The residents here are reasonable; the council should listen to us.”

The plans include 12 car parking spaces, which some residents feel is insufficient.

Devendra Patel, 65, owner of Valley News newsagents in Station way, said: “As soon as there is a school bus or a lorry with all the parked cars someone has to give way and it’s chaos.”

However, Helen Partridge, 27, of Walnut Way has a property which backs on to the development site and she cautiously welcomes the proposal.

She said: “I’m in favour to an extent.

"I’ve been told that there will be obscured glass on our side of the building people won’t be able to overlook our garden.

"It’s ugly as it is and there are a lot of vermin around so it’s good it’s being redeveloped."

The pans will be considered by members of the Planning Subcommittee South on March 5 at Roding Valley High School in Brook Road, Loughton, at 7.30pm.

Comments (4)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:35am Wed 26 Feb 14

hursthill says...

What relevance is it that Mr Patel is 65 & Ms Partridge is 27 ? How old is the journalist Mr Eggboro ?
What relevance is it that Mr Patel is 65 & Ms Partridge is 27 ? How old is the journalist Mr Eggboro ? hursthill
  • Score: 0

12:22pm Wed 26 Feb 14

LocalBH says...

"The plans include 12 car parking spaces, which some residents feel is insufficient".

Please get your facts correct. It is not only local residents who feel that the number of parking spaces is insufficient, it is also local planning guidelines that says they are insufficient. A development of 9 2-bed and 2 1-bed apartments should have at least 22 parking spaces. The proposed development only has 12 and 2 of these are for disabled drivers and hence should not normally be occupied. This means that there is less than 1 non-disabled parking space per flat! Parking in the area is already a significant issue; and the scale of this development will only aggravate this issue. The size and footprint of the development is also out of scale for the site.
Yes, residents in the area would probably like to see the site redeveloped - but into something that is appropriate in scale and character for the area.
"The plans include 12 car parking spaces, which some residents feel is insufficient". Please get your facts correct. It is not only local residents who feel that the number of parking spaces is insufficient, it is also local planning guidelines that says they are insufficient. A development of 9 2-bed and 2 1-bed apartments should have at least 22 parking spaces. The proposed development only has 12 and 2 of these are for disabled drivers and hence should not normally be occupied. This means that there is less than 1 non-disabled parking space per flat! Parking in the area is already a significant issue; and the scale of this development will only aggravate this issue. The size and footprint of the development is also out of scale for the site. Yes, residents in the area would probably like to see the site redeveloped - but into something that is appropriate in scale and character for the area. LocalBH
  • Score: 0

5:00pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Villagecranberry says...

LocalBH wrote:
"The plans include 12 car parking spaces, which some residents feel is insufficient".

Please get your facts correct. It is not only local residents who feel that the number of parking spaces is insufficient, it is also local planning guidelines that says they are insufficient. A development of 9 2-bed and 2 1-bed apartments should have at least 22 parking spaces. The proposed development only has 12 and 2 of these are for disabled drivers and hence should not normally be occupied. This means that there is less than 1 non-disabled parking space per flat! Parking in the area is already a significant issue; and the scale of this development will only aggravate this issue. The size and footprint of the development is also out of scale for the site.
Yes, residents in the area would probably like to see the site redeveloped - but into something that is appropriate in scale and character for the area.
You are incorrect, if the development is near public transport which this is, parking does not have to be provided. Look at the massive block erected in Leyton Green Road and Capworth Street. Of course this is all wrong as a good percentage will have cars, maybe two or three cars each flat in some cases.
[quote][p][bold]LocalBH[/bold] wrote: "The plans include 12 car parking spaces, which some residents feel is insufficient". Please get your facts correct. It is not only local residents who feel that the number of parking spaces is insufficient, it is also local planning guidelines that says they are insufficient. A development of 9 2-bed and 2 1-bed apartments should have at least 22 parking spaces. The proposed development only has 12 and 2 of these are for disabled drivers and hence should not normally be occupied. This means that there is less than 1 non-disabled parking space per flat! Parking in the area is already a significant issue; and the scale of this development will only aggravate this issue. The size and footprint of the development is also out of scale for the site. Yes, residents in the area would probably like to see the site redeveloped - but into something that is appropriate in scale and character for the area.[/p][/quote]You are incorrect, if the development is near public transport which this is, parking does not have to be provided. Look at the massive block erected in Leyton Green Road and Capworth Street. Of course this is all wrong as a good percentage will have cars, maybe two or three cars each flat in some cases. Villagecranberry
  • Score: 1

5:22pm Wed 26 Feb 14

LocalBH says...

"You are incorrect, if the development is near public transport which this is, parking does not have to be provided. Look at the massive block erected in Leyton Green Road and Capworth Street. Of course this is all wrong as a good percentage will have cars, maybe two or three cars each flat in some cases".

This is not the case. According to the Essex Parking Standards a minimum level of parking is required unless the developer has demonstrated "that the level of parking provided is
appropriate and will not lead to problems of on street parking on the
adjacent highway network. This will usually be demonstrated through a
Transport Assessment (TA) or Transport Statement (TS)". The transport assessment provided for the development is nearly 3 years out of date and contains many flaws and inaccuracies (it can be seen on the EFDC planning website) and fails to show that there will not be additional problems with on-street parking in the area - which already is problematic due to commuter parking. I fully agree with you that most of the future residents of the block will have cars and probably more than 1 per flat - highlighting the fact that the development does not have sufficient parking space provided. This is exacerbated by the size and number of flats in the development. If the development was smaller in scale, then sufficient parking spaces could be provided, and it would probably gain a higher degree of community support. Unfortunately as with most developments these days, the drive is to overbuild and maximise profit. After all in most cases the developer does not usually live there and so does not have to deal with the consequences.
"You are incorrect, if the development is near public transport which this is, parking does not have to be provided. Look at the massive block erected in Leyton Green Road and Capworth Street. Of course this is all wrong as a good percentage will have cars, maybe two or three cars each flat in some cases". This is not the case. According to the Essex Parking Standards a minimum level of parking is required unless the developer has demonstrated "that the level of parking provided is appropriate and will not lead to problems of on street parking on the adjacent highway network. This will usually be demonstrated through a Transport Assessment (TA) or Transport Statement (TS)". The transport assessment provided for the development is nearly 3 years out of date and contains many flaws and inaccuracies (it can be seen on the EFDC planning website) and fails to show that there will not be additional problems with on-street parking in the area - which already is problematic due to commuter parking. I fully agree with you that most of the future residents of the block will have cars and probably more than 1 per flat - highlighting the fact that the development does not have sufficient parking space provided. This is exacerbated by the size and number of flats in the development. If the development was smaller in scale, then sufficient parking spaces could be provided, and it would probably gain a higher degree of community support. Unfortunately as with most developments these days, the drive is to overbuild and maximise profit. After all in most cases the developer does not usually live there and so does not have to deal with the consequences. LocalBH
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree