“ In response to Tim Webster.
From the tone of your comments it is obvious that you have taken this opportunity to use our legitimate concerns for our community into a platform to air your personal political views.
Interestingly, without realizing it, you are actually agreeing with all the objections we have raised.
a) Heavy traffic on the Barnet Road already, causing congestion at various times of the day.
b) Lack of schools in the area.
c) Poor public transport.
d) An already dense population in the Barnet Area.
e) G.P surgeries and Barnet Hospital, already very stretched.
f) Lack of parking spaces for hospital workers and visitors.
What I fail to understand is how you don’t think that 114 dwellings, with the probability of at least 300 new residents and up to 250 additional cars, will not have a serious impact on the above situation, especially as the proposed number of on site parking places is grossly under estimated. (With only 155 spaces planned)
Everyone agrees there is a shortage of housing in this country, but that shouldn’t mean we overbuild just anywhere on every piece of available land regardless of the impact on existing communities; and to ignore overcrowding when local amenities and infrastructure just will not cope.
Even if you have no regard for the current Arkley residents, imagine the frustration the new residents from this proposed site would experience every day as they try to force their way into the congested traffic on the Barnet Road through the one and only, narrow and dangerous exit/entrance point.
Whether it is to get to work or to drive the children to far away schools, when they find no school places available locally, the situation would be desperate, to say the least.
To provide housing is important, but more consideration should be given to where those houses are built. It is not necessary to spoil a village character and existing communities, when careful planning could satisfy everyone and create new communities.
Before you condemn “Grubby Landlords” for providing rented accommodation, just imagine where those people would live if such rented accommodation was not available.
The proposed site at Elmbank is an eyesore and is in much need of development, but the proposed scheme is far too large for the space. Linden Homes could create a more acceptable design, in keeping with the character of Arkley, but they want to cram the highest number of homes, on this small site, to maximize their profit. ( money is the name of the game) regardless of the havoc it will create in the local community.
So might I suggest that you think about all the relevant arguments we make before you criticise our motives. ”