Racecourse is an ill-conceived project

It quotes:

“The mass and scale of the entrance wing is such that it will significantly obliterate the view of the common from these points in Friar Street and in fact the view down the whole of Friar Street. It is an important visual link between the common, which has strong historical significance in terms of the development of Warwick, and the urban area itself.”

“concluding that the hotel is too large for this particular site”

“I am however still of the view that in the local context the harm created by the present design is more than “less than substantial” and therefore is not acceptable.”

“its scale and mass do not, I consider, adequately respond to section 80 of PPS 5.”

“I am still of the opinion that, at a local level, the entrance wing will still not fully address the eight points of section 80 of PPS 5 practice guide and will therefore have a detrimental effect on the character of the conservation area, in particular the linkage between the common and Friar Street.”

“however having taken into account other policies of PPS 5 and in particular the guidance given in section 80 of the practice guide that the current building is too large for the site and cannot adequately be adapted to the site.”

This report seems to support the views of the vast majority of objections that the site is unsuitable because it is simply too small and the building proposed far too large.

Where does this leave this ill conceived project? - Margaret Hamilton, Hampton Street, Warwick.