<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Clapham Junction Action Group</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cjag.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cjag.org</link>
	<description>Community group in the borough of Wandsworth, London</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 22:56:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peabody: opposition, action and leaflets by Chantal Walters</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2012/05/03/peabody-opposition-action-and-leaflets/#comment-1473</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chantal Walters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 22:56:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3930#comment-1473</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am very upset indeed that once again our views Wandsworth Council disregards its residents&#039; views on inapropriately high rise buildings in the area.  The redevelopment of the Peabody Estate is clearly opening the backdoor to set a precedent of high rise buildings so that in future the project of redevelopment for the railway station complex may be approved.

Half of the housing is going to be private, which means that the redevelopment is first and foremost for financial gain, not to improve the lives of residents.  The whole principle of a Housing Association is being undermined with this project.

The increased population is clearly inapropriate to the already impossibly narrow and congested roads that border the estate.  Nothing about this projects improves the life of residents, on the contrary. The area is at full capacity transport wise, trafficwise, and schoolwise.

Although the estate cannot be called aesthetically pleasing it is airy and there is sufficient light and space for residents to walk around and for children to play.  Although there will be green areas within each building area, the open space is reduced. One of the buildings will only have access to the open space from within the building complex which means that it will be out of bounds for children and people in general to walk around and enjoy.

The present green area of the estate,  a sizeable common square with its beautiful trees will be destroyed. Those trees ought to be protected.  I thought the plan was to plant trees for the Queen&#039;s Jubilee - not to destroy them.  That beautiful little square is home to numeous birds, squirrels and couple of ducks that return year upon year.  The other open spaces of the estate are available to all residents and are accessed via large inviting archways.

The buildings that exist at present are already higher than the houses on Eckstein Road and Comyn road. The only reason they don&#039;t overshadow the residences is because they are retired from the street.  New plans are for the houses to be built right onto the street, thus casting more shade on houses across the road.

The present plans are not aesthetically pleasing either. The proposed buildings tower in an unsightly manner over the surrounding neighbourhood, clashing in style, darkening the street, and adding to the &#039;impersonalisation&#039; of the neighbourhood.

I am totally opposed to the project in its present form and would like Wandsworth Council to reject planning permission.

Thank you and best regards,

Chantal Walters]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am very upset indeed that once again our views Wandsworth Council disregards its residents&#8217; views on inapropriately high rise buildings in the area.  The redevelopment of the Peabody Estate is clearly opening the backdoor to set a precedent of high rise buildings so that in future the project of redevelopment for the railway station complex may be approved.</p>
<p>Half of the housing is going to be private, which means that the redevelopment is first and foremost for financial gain, not to improve the lives of residents.  The whole principle of a Housing Association is being undermined with this project.</p>
<p>The increased population is clearly inapropriate to the already impossibly narrow and congested roads that border the estate.  Nothing about this projects improves the life of residents, on the contrary. The area is at full capacity transport wise, trafficwise, and schoolwise.</p>
<p>Although the estate cannot be called aesthetically pleasing it is airy and there is sufficient light and space for residents to walk around and for children to play.  Although there will be green areas within each building area, the open space is reduced. One of the buildings will only have access to the open space from within the building complex which means that it will be out of bounds for children and people in general to walk around and enjoy.</p>
<p>The present green area of the estate,  a sizeable common square with its beautiful trees will be destroyed. Those trees ought to be protected.  I thought the plan was to plant trees for the Queen&#8217;s Jubilee &#8211; not to destroy them.  That beautiful little square is home to numeous birds, squirrels and couple of ducks that return year upon year.  The other open spaces of the estate are available to all residents and are accessed via large inviting archways.</p>
<p>The buildings that exist at present are already higher than the houses on Eckstein Road and Comyn road. The only reason they don&#8217;t overshadow the residences is because they are retired from the street.  New plans are for the houses to be built right onto the street, thus casting more shade on houses across the road.</p>
<p>The present plans are not aesthetically pleasing either. The proposed buildings tower in an unsightly manner over the surrounding neighbourhood, clashing in style, darkening the street, and adding to the &#8216;impersonalisation&#8217; of the neighbourhood.</p>
<p>I am totally opposed to the project in its present form and would like Wandsworth Council to reject planning permission.</p>
<p>Thank you and best regards,</p>
<p>Chantal Walters</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Meeting on trees by James Robert-Poulain</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2012/01/21/meeting-on-trees/#comment-1463</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James Robert-Poulain]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 12:03:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3890#comment-1463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes I agree the developers of the Peabody are too eager to destroy the green aspects of the site..we have had several trees destroyed in Comyn Road and none has bee replaced in over 2 years. Think the Council should allow residents to plant trees where they are missing and should provide a list of acceptable specimens.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes I agree the developers of the Peabody are too eager to destroy the green aspects of the site..we have had several trees destroyed in Comyn Road and none has bee replaced in over 2 years. Think the Council should allow residents to plant trees where they are missing and should provide a list of acceptable specimens.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Forthbridge School site : and what now? by Cyril Richert</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/07/30/forthbridge-school-site-and-what-now/#comment-1450</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cyril Richert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 11:39:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3642#comment-1450</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Council has sent a leaflet on the possibility of setting up a new primary Free school in the Shaftesbury estate if there is some interest. We might know more in the near future...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Council has sent a leaflet on the possibility of setting up a new primary Free school in the Shaftesbury estate if there is some interest. We might know more in the near future&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Forthbridge School site : and what now? by anon for now.</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/07/30/forthbridge-school-site-and-what-now/#comment-1444</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[anon for now.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2012 11:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3642#comment-1444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I would be interested in understanding this further. I am a resident on the Northside but would prefer direct contact with Ian Hamilton to discuss this further. Any contact details?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would be interested in understanding this further. I am a resident on the Northside but would prefer direct contact with Ian Hamilton to discuss this further. Any contact details?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peabody redevelopment: the proposal by Cyril Richert</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/11/08/peabody-redevelopment-the-proposal/#comment-1368</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cyril Richert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2011 11:59:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3729#comment-1368</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It was mentioned in our article as a concern raised by some residents: http://cjag.org/2011/11/14/why-we-ask-for-amendments-on-the-peabody-proposal/

Unfortunately I must confess I completely forgot to ask at the exhibition. I will do it next time I have the occasion. In the meantime, if anyone has any information, please share.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was mentioned in our article as a concern raised by some residents: <a href="http://cjag.org/2011/11/14/why-we-ask-for-amendments-on-the-peabody-proposal/" rel="nofollow">http://cjag.org/2011/11/14/why-we-ask-for-amendments-on-the-peabody-proposal/</a></p>
<p>Unfortunately I must confess I completely forgot to ask at the exhibition. I will do it next time I have the occasion. In the meantime, if anyone has any information, please share.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peabody redevelopment: the proposal by D Clevett</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/11/08/peabody-redevelopment-the-proposal/#comment-1363</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[D Clevett]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:15:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3729#comment-1363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cant see on the plans what will happen to the two lovely lodge cottages on the estate.  Another part of the Junctions history will be lost I expect.  


.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cant see on the plans what will happen to the two lovely lodge cottages on the estate.  Another part of the Junctions history will be lost I expect.  </p>
<p>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peabody redevelopment: the proposal by Rob Jack</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/11/08/peabody-redevelopment-the-proposal/#comment-1352</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rob Jack]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 16:05:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3729#comment-1352</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is better than it was, but any thing over 5 storeys is too much. Also 
where would the children go to school? Honeywell won&#039;t take any more intake. (They opted out of L.E.A. control &amp; therefore control their own admissions policy.) Belleville is full to the rafters. I Know, my children went / go there. If Belleville were to expand they would need to compulsorily purchase properties down the hill. Possibly not a popular move.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is better than it was, but any thing over 5 storeys is too much. Also<br />
where would the children go to school? Honeywell won&#8217;t take any more intake. (They opted out of L.E.A. control &amp; therefore control their own admissions policy.) Belleville is full to the rafters. I Know, my children went / go there. If Belleville were to expand they would need to compulsorily purchase properties down the hill. Possibly not a popular move.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peabody redevelopment: our response to the consultation by Julia Matcham</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/11/30/peabody-redevelopment-our-response-to-the-consultation/#comment-1345</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Julia Matcham]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 17:28:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3843#comment-1345</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you Cyril...a lot of work and well put.
I have sent &#039;my concern&#039; to the Peabody trust as indicated.
I am afraid these planning matters sneak past most people because they are not well enough informed. I am not sure what the situation is now re Section 106 which I know has been changed, but presumably the Council get a payment pro rata to size of the building? I think it is now slightly less like a bribe from the developer.
However any such payment cannot fail to be a disincentive for the Council to do what local people want: to keep buildings to a domestic height appropriate for our area.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Cyril&#8230;a lot of work and well put.<br />
I have sent &#8216;my concern&#8217; to the Peabody trust as indicated.<br />
I am afraid these planning matters sneak past most people because they are not well enough informed. I am not sure what the situation is now re Section 106 which I know has been changed, but presumably the Council get a payment pro rata to size of the building? I think it is now slightly less like a bribe from the developer.<br />
However any such payment cannot fail to be a disincentive for the Council to do what local people want: to keep buildings to a domestic height appropriate for our area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peabody redevelopment: our response to the consultation by Anthony Hackin</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/11/30/peabody-redevelopment-our-response-to-the-consultation/#comment-1344</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anthony Hackin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Dec 2011 22:06:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3843#comment-1344</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ok thanks for the info.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok thanks for the info.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Peabody redevelopment: our response to the consultation by Cyril Richert</title>
		<link>http://cjag.org/2011/11/30/peabody-redevelopment-our-response-to-the-consultation/#comment-1343</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cyril Richert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Dec 2011 21:59:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cjag.org/?p=3843#comment-1343</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is important that you send you concern to the Peabody Trust (email/address above) and you can copy your ward councilors and of course CJAG.
Updates will be posted on this website as soon as we know more. There is currently no date for a meeting and I doubt anything will happen before January 2012.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is important that you send you concern to the Peabody Trust (email/address above) and you can copy your ward councilors and of course CJAG.<br />
Updates will be posted on this website as soon as we know more. There is currently no date for a meeting and I doubt anything will happen before January 2012.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

