Please write an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Hackney Marshes (REF 2014/2582)
[Declare that you wish to object to the plans and introduce how you use the marshes/ will be affected by these proposals]
Please cut & paste the following points (if you have time, please put in your own words):
East Marsh car park.
This represents an unacceptable and unjustified loss of green space.
Other public parking facilities exist in the immediate area recently built on former green space and use of these should be explored before losing more. A 1300 space multi-storey car park is 5 mins walk away, also situated on Hackney Marshes. 100m to the south surplus parking exists at the Eton Manor Hackney and Tennis Centre and also at the Velodrome.
The concrete block paved surface is visually obtrusive and unsympathetic to the landscape. No lower-impact alternatives have been considered. The proposed North Marsh car park uses cellular reinforced grass and gravel.
There are good transport connections locally and no justification for encouraging additional unnecessary car use.
Environmental impacts from encouragement of car access onto the common include air pollution, risk of illegal vehicle access and fly tipping.
A car park in this location cannot be said to be essential for recreational use of the land and so does not conform to Metropolitan Open Land policy.
North Marsh pavilion
Its size and prominent location will obstruct the openness of the distant views across Hackney Marsh, one of its unique features, particularly from the heavily used access points at the north east corner and Cow Bridge.
The elongated design and pale colour will make it highly visible from most points on the marsh and attempts to disguise it with vegetation will not mitigate its impact on the sense of openness.
The reasons given for choosing to place it out on open green space rather than on or near the current building footprint are not credible, since permission was granted in 2008 for a building larger than the current proposal yet located on the existing changing rooms footprint.
Its provision of the essential core facilities, ie. team changing rooms at 270 m2, is inferior to both the consented 2008 plan (331 m2) and the existing building ( 413 m2) while being larger and more obtrusive (87m long vs 49m). This suggests a very inefficient design with large areas given to non-essential uses and cannot justify its impact on MOL.
The unacceptable impact on MOL appears to be driven largely by its claimed function as a cricket pavilion yet it does not confirm to ECB guidelines which require a clear view of the pitch from the changing rooms.
The large social space and bar is not an essential facility supporting recreational use of the land yet appears to be a significant factor in the placement of the building.
It is undesirable and unnecessary to have a general drop off area adjacent to the building – visitors without mobility problems can be dropped off in Millfields Road and have a short walk over the bridge to the changing rooms.
Vehicle access will be over a steeply humped bridge with poor visibility and across a footpath where vehicles come into conflict with pedestrians, dogs, runners and cyclists who should be able to use the Common without risk from traffic.