Debenhams

Planning application 21/01772/FUL    Debenhams, 37-45 High Street Staines

Staines Town Society objects to the demolition of the existing Debenhams building.  Its anchor position in the High Street and its graceful curve down Thames Street have been a leading part of Staines town centre for sixty years, defining the central urban area without dominating and spoiling the riverside.  We are not convinced by the developer’s argument that it could not be converted into housing.

Staines Town Society objects to the proposed replacement building, which is far too big and totally unsuited to the neighbourhood, contrary to Policy EN1.  High-rise flats are unsuitable anywhere in this modest riverside town, but this site, so central and so near the river, is probably the worst possible site for them, and the most destructive of our image of our town.  The brutal and unimaginative design will degrade the whole townscape.

The Planning Statement admits in para 5.60 that the height of the development would have an adverse effect on the Conservation Area and on views through the town.  The claim that the adverse effects are not serious is purely subjective.  To those of us who will have to live with the development every day, the adverse effects are substantial.  The accompanying photographs in part 3 of the Design & Access statement show the devastating effect of these towers looming over the town centre, the riverside, and the Conservation Area.  The heavy horizontals of the design, especially the red tower, are very oppressive.  The views along the High Street and Clarence Street, and up Thames Street, are simply monstrous.

Some attempt has been made (DAS section 2.6) to copy features of the window detailing etc of the existing Debenhams building and others in the High Street.  This will be gratifying to any architect in the street carrying powerful binoculars.

We are already burdened with the Majestic development at 318 dwellings per hectare, with the Centrica site rising at 429 dph, and consent given for 320 dph on the Renshaw site and 306 at Bridge Street car park (Bellway scheme).  But para 5.35 of the Planning Statement gives the density of the Debenhams development as 804 dph, a new dimension of awfulness never envisaged by the planners who innocently stated in the 2009 Local Plan that densities in the town centre should be 75 dph or above.

The proposed flats are just above the legal minimum size, as usual.  The octagonal design means that many of them have very awkwardly shaped rooms.  The offer of only 10% affordable housing is inadequate and contrary to Policy HO3, and they are only affordable in the sense of being privately rented at 80% of market rent.

The open space at podium level satisfies SBC requirements for private amenity space, but is not very green, consisting largely of a paved area with tables and chairs.  We don’t see the point of having bumps in the lawn – are they to discourage residents from sitting on it?  The children’s play space is totally inadequate and it is clear from 5.67 of the Planning Statement that children are not wanted in this quiet area.  It seems they are expected to cross a very busy road to play in the Memorial Gardens or a claimed ‘river walk and green space behind Staines Baptist Church’.

The wind microclimate report makes it clear that the open space on the podium will be very windy, so much so that screens and other features will be needed to give some shelter.

There is no public amenity space at all, as the development is closed to the public.  The view at street level is of shops in the High Street and round the corner, but the Thames Street frontage of cycle store and various entrances is rather dull.  From the plans the cycle storage is all in stacks which are only usable by large strong people, so will not serve the purpose of encouraging others to cycle.

151 car spaces are provided for 226 flats. The developers’ claims that car use is reducing, there will be sufficient parking, and traffic in Thames Street will not increase substantially, seem very unlikely.  The provision of a car club is sensible.

We are not convinced by the flooding and drainage report.  Groundwater levels are only about 2.5 m below the surface, and parts of the town centre suffer regular problems with drainage.

The application seems to lack any information on the strength and nature of the ground surface and the risk of subsidence under the weight of this enormous building.  We remember that the Elmsleigh centre stands on some kind of concrete deck, and also that the Town Hall suffered cracks in its basement because it stands partly on a gravel island and partly on softer material.  The river has changed course many times in its history, and the geology of its surroundings is complex.  Further investigation is needed on whether the ground structure can support this gargantuan building.

The lack of concern for climate considerations is disappointing, with no mention of solar panels on roofs, heat pumps, rainfall collection or other actions to increase sustainability.

Mention of the new enlarged health centre planned for Staines, and some discussion of how the CIL contributions from this and other sites will be used to fund schools and other infrastructure, would have helped to allay public concern.