Ugly indeed Audrey, though that is perhaps not as important as the effect of the sheer scale, with the displacement of all character, history, local enterprise and waterways industry.We do need to make an outcry against this sort of thing – Sarah and Shelagh on the other High St thread have spoken of despondency, while Frankie and others bemoan Barrett's seeming power to over-ride local and national planning. But there is no inevitability to the juggernaut progress of developers; they CAN be persuaded to give communities schemes more in line with their wishes, so long as the planning laws are sufficiently clear, the planning authority is firm enough to enforce those, and so long as the community backs up the planning authority with sufficient vigour.Under the Albany House topic, Frankie says: “My gripe is that the local communities waste so much time, effort and money on consultations and meetings trying to shape their vision for the community, and often the valid points of issue they raise are overlooked and overturned in favour of bigger financial gains for the developers.” Agreed, when this happens it is grounds for a gripe - but it doesn't have to be so, and I don't believe that the community's time, effort and money invested in shaping a vision for Brentford's High Street was/is a waste.I think we all need reminding just how much success has been achieved by our Council and community over the past few years in this field. It's a trumpet that doesn't get blown enough, perhaps because the success is owed largely to unanimity between political parties – which doesn't make for good 'copy' or excite debate.Remember that 'everyone' thought campaigning against St George's Kew Bridge monstrosity was a waste of time – especially with the Mayor's enthusiastic backing for the scheme. That was an awkward one, because our Planning Department also, had recommended approval! Still, the extent of local involvement by amenity groups proved to be a powerful force to re-inforce the Council decision, and our views were upheld so comprehensively by the Secretary of State, that the entire approach by St George was turned around.Still more perhaps, the huge over-development proposed for Commerce Road was seen by many as having unstoppable momentum – again, with the Mayor's wholehearted support. Yet again, however, local community groups worked hard alongside the Council, and while it may have taken over a year at vast expense, the outcome was a triumph for us, and a scathing indictment of the British Waterways partnership.Barratt's Albany House scheme might seem small beer by comparison, but both Council and local amenity groups will be defending the Council's decision on that also, in the months to come. Our track record is encouraging!So far as South of the High Street is concerned, the monumental body of work compiled as a result of the co-ordinated local efforts, has placed this area in an almost unique position. The High Street Visioning Project, in tandem with the Council consultations over the past few years, has laid rock-solid foundations for the local development framework policies – and those will simply HAVE to be taken into account. Ballymore, British Waterways, and others, can wriggle as much as they like trying to dilute the effect, but the BAAP will still be a force to be reckoned with when trying for planning consent. We've all contributed to that; it could never be said that it was a waste of time – recent history proves otherwise.So no despondency please! Whether for or against, wave that flag, post that comment!
Nigel Moore ● 6343d