No one is taking responsibility for this major management plan for 100 Avenue Road

Thursday, 2nd November 2017

Extract from a letter to Camden Council leader Georgia Gould

• WE are writing because no one in Camden Council is taking responsibility for the 100 Avenue Road Construction Management Plan (CMP), in the sincere hope you will.

Developers Essential Living (EL) have not answered the most important question in Camden’s pro-forma CMP: “the approximate frequency and times of day when (vehicles) will need access to the site, for each phase of construction (and) average daily number of vehicles during each major phase of the work”.

EL have failed to supply Appendix G which is related to traffic flow. Something was said at the recent CMP consultation meeting about there being an approximate average of 26 HGVs per day. Yet the original CMP figures give an approximate average of 60 to 80 per day during demolition. This huge discrepancy needs clarifying.

Clearly traffic flow is crucial to the CMP. How many HVGs using which routes, when, and what the maximum may be at any given period is of major concern to the public. How can the public comment on information that’s missing?

Surely EL’s CMP consultation must be reset once this vital information has been provided, in writing…? Otherwise it will have been a meaningless consultation. Furthermore, how can there be a public consultation without notifying the public? Camden’s own CMP pro-forma states that this is expected.

Local groups…such as The Swiss Cottage Community Centre, Save Swiss Cottage, SSC Action Group, CRASH, CHRA and most local residents were not informed. The CMP consultation meeting was only well attended because a few residents and councillors took the trouble to publicise it.

Residents fear that their comments will be ignored by EL and they want to know who to send them to in Camden. Surely there needs be a named person… to take overall responsibility.

How and where are the consultation results going to be published? CMPs are usually dealt with in planning conditions. This one has been relegated to section 106 obligations, which has no direct forum for public scrutiny.

We urge you to bring this CMP consultation into the public realm and to call for the process to restart once… information on traffic flow has been provided.

PETER SYMONDS Chair CRASH; KATHARINE BLIGH SSAG; ELAINE CHAMBERS Chair Winchester Road RA; LINDA WILLIAMS Chair Netherhall Neighbourhood Association; FRANCOISE FINDLAY Chair Elsworthy RA; EDIE RAFF Chair Cresta House RA; JANINE SACHS Chair SSC

Related Articles