The Epsom Civic Society is a society with a slightly old-fashioned feel about it which exists to keep an eye on matters of heritage, development and planning in Epsom. Matters which, for a small, old town perched between London and its green belt, are likely to give rise to controversy. While we are members, I can't say I pay much attention, beyond thinking that they always seem to find something to object to in whatever proposal is being floated.
Two bits of background. First, East Street, which runs north east from town centre towards Ewell, contains rather a lot of middle size blocks, residential and commercial, mostly built in the last fifty years ago and mostly without much visual merit. Second, the uppers floors of a lot of commercial property in town centre, possibly let out as flats, are in a poor decorative condition and look pretty shabby from the road. Not much visual merit there either. So two chunks of townscape where we have not done terribly well.
So this morning, I was turning the pages of the Society's summer newsletter.
The first thing I find is that they were privileged to attend the unveiling of the statue noticed at reference 1. But, for me, something else without visual or much other merit.
Then turning to planning, I find they have objected to changes in the planning rules, something called PDR (Class MA), to be available from the 1st August next. Lots of estate agents turned up by Bing are eager to tell me all about it, with PDR meaning permitted development right. As far as I can make out, the intention of the government is to make it easier to repurpose commercial property in towns for residential use, which strikes me as an admirable intention, given that many town centres are now far too big for purpose, at a time when we need a lot more housing. Again as far as I can make out, the Society's objection is to the steady chipping away of a council's discretionary powers in these matters - powers, for example, to make sure that we get decent housing, rather than slums-in-waiting, luxury flats for city types or unsightly blocks. Discretionary powers which appear to have been exercised through something called Article 4 directions, as explained at reference 3.
Digging a bit deeper I get to the consultation document to which the Society objected. This is to be found at reference 4. While the resultant statutory instrument, published in short order after the end of the consultation period, is to be found at reference 5. Only fit for lawyers and planners.
So all terribly complicated and I suppose that without the efforts of the estate agents and of societies like this one, it would be hard to have a clue about what was going on. I suppose the days when you could trust councils to do a decent job without encumbering them with so many rules and regulations are long gone - if indeed the good old days ever existed - but it is a pity, given that conversion of commercial to residential seems like a good idea, that this society always seems to me to be saying no. It all too often smells of not-in-my-back-yard.
PS: in the snap of East Street above, the buildings on the right are still there, as are some of those on the left. The without-much-visual-merit redevelopment was mostly beyond the two cars middle left. The oddly roofed building next to the leftmost car is what used to be the 'Plough and Harrow', quite a decent public house in its day. Now some kind of foodery for young people.
Reference 1: https://epsomcivicsociety.org.uk/.
Reference 2: https://psmv4.blogspot.com/2021/06/casual-dining-in-epsom.html.
Reference 3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_4_direction.
Reference 4: Draft NPPF for consultation (publishing.service.gov.uk).
No comments:
Post a Comment