GH1 - Robsack A, Church Wood Drive

Ref GH1 Robsack A Churchwood Drive - proposed development of a 5 storey block of 32 apartments is totally out of keeping with other properties in the area (all other properties are 2 storey). Additionally the parking spaces proposed would nowhere near accommodate the number of families expected which would lead to dangerous overflow parking in the area.

Hastings Policy HC2 Community Facilities paragraph 3.12 says: The development should not impact upon the amenity of their neighbours. Two blocks of flats do not blend in with the already established neighbourhood. The design of the proposed buildings implies:
1. Light pollution from the need to keep walkways lit.
2. Closeness to already established properties constitutes invasion of privacy. There will also be traffic pollution from the extra vehicles.

Document states that dwellings on North East boundary of proposed site are bungalows when in fact they are five bedroom houses. If you are not aware of the status of these dwellings how can you give due consideration to the effect of the proposed development upon them. Matters of personal privacy are especially relevant.

Borough Ecologist have objected to the plans to destroy the meadow and woodland areas. All of the issues raised by him are pertinent today. The idea of a corridor around the new build is ludicrous when so much of the wildlife habitat would have been destroyed. The proposed corridor does not extend around the North East section of the area. The meadow (both plant and animal) will be destroyed. The two woodland areas will become isolated and eventually destroyed. The area should be left as meadowland and the two woodland areas (Robsack and Church Wood) managed in an appropriate manner for the benefit of wildlife woodland and human populace.

Hastings Policy HC2 Community Facilities paragraph 3.12 says: The development should not impact upon the amenity of their neighbours. Two blocks of flats do not blend in with the already established neighbourhood. The design of the proposed buildings implies:
1. Light pollution from the need to keep walkways lit.
2. Closeness to already established properties constitutes invasion of privacy. There will also be traffic pollution from the extra vehicles.

Document states that dwellings on North East boundary of proposed site are bungalows when in fact they are five bedroom houses. If you are not aware of the status of these dwellings how can you give due consideration to the effect of the proposed development upon them. Matters of personal privacy are especially relevant.

Borough Ecologist have objected to the plans to destroy the meadow and woodland areas. All of the issues raised by him are pertinent today. The idea of a corridor around the new build is ludicrous when so much of the wildlife habitat would have been destroyed. The proposed corridor does not extend around the North East section of the area. The meadow (both plant and animal) will be destroyed. The two woodland areas will become isolated and eventually destroyed. The area should be left as meadowland and the two woodland areas (Robsack and Church Wood) managed in an appropriate manner for the benefit of wildlife woodland and human populace.

Hastings Policy HC2 Community Facilities paragraph 3.12 says: The development should not impact upon the amenity of their neighbours. Two blocks of flats do not blend in with the already established neighbourhood. The design of the proposed buildings implies:
1. Light pollution from the need to keep walkways lit.
2. Closeness to already established properties constitutes invasion of privacy. There will also be traffic pollution from the extra vehicles.

Document states that dwellings on North East boundary of proposed site are bungalows when in fact they are five bedroom houses. If you are not aware of the status of these dwellings how can you give due consideration to the effect of the proposed development upon them. Matters of personal privacy are especially relevant.

Borough Ecologist have objected to the plans to destroy the meadow and woodland areas. All of the issues raised by him are pertinent today. The idea of a corridor around the new build is ludicrous when so much of the wildlife habitat would have been destroyed. The proposed corridor does not extend around the North East section of the area. The meadow (both plant and animal) will be destroyed. The two woodland areas will become isolated and eventually destroyed. The area should be left as meadowland and the two woodland areas (Robsack and Church Wood) managed in an appropriate manner for the benefit of wildlife woodland and human populace.

See attached

Name: Mr A Ingleton
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5512-5532

See attached.

Name: Maureen Jarvis
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5540-5549