The consultation on plans that would allow 250 flats to be built on the Rainbow Industrial Estate at Raynes Park Station has been extended following criticism by opposition councillors.

Lib Dem lead councillor Iain Dysart spoke out against the draft planning brief for the Industrial Estate at the Council’s Cabinet meeting on 1 July. It had originally been planned that the Council’s Cabinet would adopt the planning brief, which would set the planning rules for the site.  But following criticism the consultation period has been extended to July 20. You can see full details of the planning brief and have your say here. [Update: for an outline of the consultation responses and the Council’s reaction, please click here].

At the meeting, Cllr Dysart said:

Thank you Chair for allowing me to speak. Firstly, I’m pleased that the decision is not being made tonight. Even though the process of preparing the Planning Brief has been long-winded, partly due to the public outcry over how its been handled: to publish on 20^th June, go to [the Borough Planning Advisory Committee] last week and then have Cabinet endorse the Planning Brief tonight, as originally envisaged, was neither realistic, transparent, nor adequately planned; indeed it seemed rushed. So I welcome the flexibility, which has been shown.

However, whilst the Council states that a local transport assessment has now been conducted, as residents have long sought, there is no infrastructure study planned. The aspiration of 200 to 250 residential units is maintained, which would impact on schools and public services. Workspace [the site’s owner] says it is not their responsibility, yet the subject cannot continue to be ignored. Imagine the appearance of a 6 storey block, unsightly and out of character with the surrounding area. Workspace believe that this housing is needed to secure the site’s long-term viability, yet where is the consideration of other possible uses, such as a car park? The latter might help future site residents, if some housing is allowed, as well as alleviate even to a limited extent the shortage of parking space around Raynes Park. The plans as proposed, whilst purporting to be of high, futuristic design standards would not present an attractive environment in which to live.

On employment-led regeneration, which the Planning Inspector said that any proposals should deliver, I have heard little, apart from the aspiration to retain the same amount of floorspace as currently exists. Where are the views of the business stakeholders? How are they being engaged? What of their long-term futures?

I recognise that officers have a job to do. I accept that they want views to be protected and enhanced, urban design solutions adopted and a wider solution found and delivered which suits a variety of needs.

I don’t accept that this has been achieved or would be the final outcome given experience to date.

I am sure many further representations will be landing in the in-tray of officers and the Cabinet Member over the next few days, and they will rightly be publicly accountable for what follows.