Letters of objection to the Council -
re: 2nd planning application - the Telephone House site, Church Road / York Road, Tunbridge Wells

Why is time and money spent refusing an application, with every good reason given why it should not be allowed, only to go over it all again. Surely, everything has been considered, everything. Doesn't 'No' mean 'No'. You cannot alter the fact that the density of 43 flats on that area is wrong.
Barbara Clarke

You have rules and regulations and dictate to attend to. These are not easy for us to understand or follow. We however live on York Road. We chose to do so and paid the relevant premiums on our houses because of how unusual it is to find such a road in the centre of town. We know we cannot expect things to remain unaltered and we all fully endorse a development of Telephone House. We just cannot endorse a development of such size and scale that it will alter the road out of all recognition.
Heather Jones

As the owner of one of the oldest listed buildings in York Road, I still feel the developer could be more sensitive and less obviously profit orientated. There has to be a balance in such an area. I hope the Council would not encourage a developer who would disregard conservation.
Patricia Lobo

The proposed density of 43 flats on 0.307 hectare is excessive.
Maria Lambert

The suggested height of the proposed development: The existing north facing facades within York Road at present have no sunlight during the day. This proposal would effectively remove all sunlight from the south facing facade except in high summer.
If the developers argument is that the proposed buildings are comparable "to other similar relationships in the road and surrounding area", are they therefore advocating we should allow the same mistakes to occur simply because they already exist?
High-density inner city/town housing is a mistake we all live with and this proposal is poor urban design compounding a problem not solving it.
Peter Connell

As a resident of one of the listed buildings in York Road, I am extremely concerned that the construction lorries using York Road will cause structural damage to the foundations.
Paul Huxley

This hideous building was erected under a post war Government indemnity of planning control. We are provided now with an opportunity to replace it with a structure which would enhance the amenity of this prominent conservation area of our town.
Nigel Watts

A sole access/exit for vehicular arrangements through York Road is unacceptable.
Margaret Bailey

The trees along York Road: I am not satisfied with an artist's impression of 8 metre high established trees which have miraculously sprouted from a few saplings planted after building work was completed. The original trees must stay.
Kevin Wilkinson

The authors of the new application seek to interpret the refusal letter to their needs: The planning statement (6.27 Accessing arrangements) dedicates a specially upsetting paragraph to the access/exit -traffic:
"The previous application had similarly sought to serve the development from York Road, and this had not been raised as reason for refusal. We are satisfied therefore that the proposed accessing and parking arrangements should be acceptable to the borough engineer in terms of traffic generation and highway safety."
Daniel Bech

Services would naturally need to be upgraded to cope with increased demand and to maintain satisfactory standard.
Writing as residents of York Road for more than a quarter of a century, we trust our views and concerns will be afforded serious consideration.
Violet W. Ellis & Albert J. Ellis

In colour the design looks even worse, in other words, banal and ugly. The affordable housing with the brick design looks particularly poor. There is not one exposed brick in view in any York Road building.
Annemarie Topliss

. . . the previous planning application for 42 (!) flats (January 2000) was turned down by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council on significant grounds including density, layout, traffic generation, contrary to conservation area protection. With the developers of this new application seeking planning permission for 43 (!) flats - an extremely high density development - . . .
Fiona A. K. Calvert

The council should insure that during the demolition and building time the amenities in the conservation area should not deteriorate and damage the residents’ quality of life.
Robert Soden

. . . the provision of trees ... a condition made I believe by the Planning Office. Although quite large saplings at the time of planting they have taken quite 20 years to achieve this present size, and are still not fully mature.
Pamela Kipping

It would seem logical for the Planning Office to refuse an application of such high density (equivalent to 140 units/ hectare) and three times the recommendations made in RPG9 and PPG3.
A development of lower density allows for a more appropriate design and a more manageable construction site in this conservation area. As Crest Homes and Southgate Developments do not seem prepared to decrease the density of their plans, they should be refused under policies EN1 (1,2,3) and EN5.
Peter Morse

York Road is a purely residential area. Heavy traffic has to be directed through Church Road during the demolition and construction period.
Jenny Hinds

I think the future appearance of the town centre and a reduction in the severe parking and traffic problems would be better served if the council together with the local residents and the Civic Society were able to decide for example that a sheltered housing development with a Decimus Burton type of architecture would be more suitable.
Peter Scott

. . . one resident who actually used to work in Telephone House about 5 years ago stated that there were only about 20 people at that time and the site has actually been closed and no traffic using it for at least the past year.
The developers also place great emphasis on the location of the site, point 5.10 PPG3 (Housing) 'particularly where public transport can be promoted and where less dependence upon the car can be encouraged' also 5.33 Local Plan 'The site's proximity to the town centre will enable residents to maximise use of the town's facilities without the need to use their cars. The proposal's ability to reduce dependence upon the car helping to reduce pollution and improve air quality in the area'.
Why are they then providing 42 car parking spaces? The pollution and air quality in York Road will be worsened by the addition of 42 extra cars as the site is currently empty as mentioned above.
Emma Cox

A new application has been submitted by the same developer which appears to be very little different from that previously filed. A slightly lower roof-line and ONE MORE unit does not in any way alter my original concern and objections . . .
I hope that the Planning Committee of the Council will continue to refuse permission for this particular development bearing in mind that the reasons for their refusal in the first instance have not changed.
Patricia Walsh

The trees in York Road should be protected and not destroyed for the sake of 'improving' aesthetics to the sterile appearance of the proposed new buildings.
Samantha Weston

This site is eminently suitable for good quality, warden controlled retirement flats -in the centre of town; within easy walking distance of shops, services bus stops and trains; it would virtually prelude more than one car per flat.
Margaret Naylor

I would want the council to consider carefully their responsibilities to represent residents and in line with the regional and government policy guidance RPG9 and PPG3 refuse any development of extreme high density . . .
Nicky Harmer

As the building has always been under used and in latter years unoccupied the traffic generated from it has not been a problem in York Road. To impose this level of traffic upon a residential street is unacceptable in the long term, aside from the devastation that the construction traffic will cause.
Roger D. Attaway

We feel that many of the grounds for the Council's refusal of an earlier application by the same developers are equally valid in relation to this new application:
significant adverse impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area by virtue of its scale, massing, form, spatial characteristics and impact on trees,
adverse impact on the setting of listed buildings in York Road and Church Road,
unsatisfactory relationship with existing buildings.
Samuel C. McDowell

If this application is approved, it will mean yet another lost opportunity to preserve and enhance what is still left or our lovely town.
Any development such as this one under consideration would reflect badly on the priorities of our councillors.
Margaret van den Bergh

Whilst I would be delighted to see a residential development to telephone house, I see very few improvements to this second application. Ultimately it still does not respect the " privacy and amenities of the surrounding residents " and as such cannot reflect the aims and objectives of policy EN1. If it is allowed to go ahead in its present form it will be yet another triumph of profit over amenities. 43 units in 0.76 acres is excessive at best. I do not understand why the scale and resultant volume of human and vehicular traffic of the development has not been the focus of the councils concerns. It is very obvious to those who live there.
Heather Jones

It makes sense for the applicant to consult with the Local Planning Authority about what is allowed and what is not. However, to mention these consultations frequently creates the impression the applicant is doing something he should not, knowing full well that his excessive number of units is what he is trying to make feasible. However, this casts both parties in dubious light in view of the plans submitted, which do not reflect the four points on which the first planning application was refused.
And what is the applicant negotiating with the Local Planning Authority?
I hope the applicant is using the Local Planning Authority, and the Local Planning Authority is not being manipulated.
Annemarie Topliss

I would not oppose the removal of the existing building, nor the development of the site into an amenity that all can enjoy. However, I would question the need to replace it with such a large number of dwellings, particularly when access would be from a street that was not designed for vehicle ownership, let alone motor vehicular access.
Charles Gladwin

The groups of trees on the site are a feature of York Road. They have to be integrated into any planning consent.
Gareth Harman

Among other possible problems (pollution, loss of amenities, noise, safety), the 43 flats would generate too much traffic and too many parking related problems.
Millie Darroch

Flats are too close, especially in the Mews area - leaving no room for trees or gardens, blocking light and view of church building.
Katherine Quinnell

more residents' letters

The re-development of the Telephone House, York Road / Church Road, Tunbridge Wells

For more information on the Telephone House Debacle