• < Previous Event
• Next Event >

Comment by Joan Hall on February 20, 2011 at 0:44

I attended the event on 9 Feb and the turnout could have been much better.  Hopefully those who have concerns about this initiative will come and have their say.  

Some more food for thought, Chelsea Academy cost £38 million. Our academy will cost £18 million but, it will be of the same quality as Chelsea Academy.  Hmnnn,  Let me think now...do I believe that....duh NO!

 

How, in this time of severe price increases is this even remotely possible?

The council must think we're all too ignorant and won't notice that yet again the North of the borough are getting shafted with a sub-standard building.  

 

Whether you're for or against the proposal, don't we owe it to ourselves to get the best deal?  The council are perhaps banking on our apathy and lack of interest.  Are they right?

 

I hope not, I'm a great believer in people power and there's strength in numbers.  We are fast running out of time to have a say and we only have ourselves to blame for what we eventually get.  

Comment by Julian Pycraft on February 23, 2011 at 1:10

Dear Community

 

I endorse Joan Hall

 

I attended  the consultation tonight

 

I spoke to the planning and educational officers who seem to be sympathetic and empathetic to the needs of this community

 

It is absolutely critical that all of us continue to voice our views: on this website, emails, letters and phone calls to the officers, councillors and the press.

 

The issues seem to be:

 

1. The proposed road through the middle of the site,

 

2.Cut price half price cheap school built at £1,000 psm rather £1,800 psm (Chelsea Academy)

 

3. The uncertainty of the future of the Leisure Centre.

 

4. Loss of open space

 

5. Building of more social and/or marketing housing resulting in further loss of amenity space.

 

6. Security

 

7. Lack of shops, cafes and amenities

 

8. Poor infrastrucure

 

9. Non partisan trustworthy community leaders who will represent all of our interests

 

10. Persuading RBKC to invest its wealth in this community

 

It is up to us to make our voices heard - and we have 2 weeks to do it!

 

Best wishes

 

Julian Pycraft

Comment by Julian Pycraft on February 23, 2011 at 9:19

TO: Peter Bradbury Project Manager Kensington Academy

 
Good to meet you last night.
 
I would be grateful if you would send me the designs, specifications, layouts, pictures and costs for the The Chelsea Academy and the proposed Kensington Academy.
 
Please  highlight simply the main differences.
 
I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible
 
Best wishes
 
Julian Pycraft

Comment by Julian Pycraft on March 8, 2011 at 11:42

Chelsea Estate Management Ltd

152 Fulham Road

London SW10 9PR

jpycraft@gmail.com

 

RBKC Planning Policy

Room GO8/1

 The Town Hall

Hornton Street

London W8 7NX                                                          8th March 2011

planningpolicy@rbkc.gov.uk

Dear Sir

 Kensington Academy and Leisure Centre Draft Planning Brief Representations.

I am a local Kensington and Chelsea businessman and a stakeholder in the Notting Barns Ward.

There is very strong local community support for this initiative to create the Kensington Academy, to match for the north of the Royal Borough what has been achieved in the south by the Chelsea Academy.

To deliver that, a commitment by RBKC to provide comparable funding support is essential, demonstrating the principle of “fairness” for the whole community, in line with the “Localism” Agenda.

Equally important to the long-term success of the Kensington Academy and to its acceptance and continued support by the wider community is the need to minimise the loss of open space, the amenity value of which is at an absolute premium in this very densely developed part of the Royal Borough, which is devoid of the large open spaces found to the south.

For both financial and amenity reasons therefore, it is entirely wrong to burden this vital new community resource with any expectation of also providing new housing. There is no planning policy requirement for it and it should be deleted entirely from the Planning Brief.

What must also be deleted is any proposed new road cutting through the middle of the site. This would seriously damage the ability to create an integrated and cohesive community quarter for the neighbourhood, with the new Academy at its heart.

To achieve that cohesion: 1) the future of the Leisure Centre must also be assured;2) the personal security of people and of property must be demonstrably secured; 3) greatly improved public transport accessibility must be provided; and 4) non-partisan trustworthy community leaders must be appointed and supported, to represent all our interests.

The sustainability of the community quarter also requires provision of supporting shops, cafes and other associated amenities, to attract and retain people, so as to make the most of this opportunity to increase greatly the vitality and viability of this area of the Royal Borough for future generations.

Yours faithfully

 

Julian Pycraft

Add a Comment