| Topic: | Chiswick Curve or Chiswick Curse? | |
| Posted by: | Andrew OSullivan | |
| Date/Time: | 06/01/16 15:48:00 |
| I’ve had a quick look through the documents and found lots of interesting stuff. The first point is that the developers are calling this building the Chiswick Curve which doesn’t suggest much thought has gone into it because opponents are inevitably going to start calling it the Chiswick Curse. The reports that are included are obviously relentlessly favourable and give the impression that this huge building will go up with relatively little fuss and be nothing but a boon to the local community. I don’t have the expertise to pick holes in the arguments made but some of them do seem a bit of a stretch to me. However, on balance, if the claims made are broadly true, the much needed extra housing that this building will provide seem to outweigh most of the negatives. If you are minded to object and are looking for reasons it looked very much like the issue of air quality was the weakest link. Readings for NOx around Chiswick Roundabout have been rising up to the latest figures in 2014 and they look very much like breaching mandatory EU levels. The projections for extra vehicle journeys in the report look very conservative to me and they are clinging to the hope that there will be a general fall in pollution levels due to lower emissions from cars even though this is something that has been expected for many years now and has not happened in London. As Adam Beamish assures us the developers didn’t try to deliberately suppress the Environmental Impact Study but perhaps they should have done so. |