CLB5 - Former Convent of Holy Child Jesus, Magdalen Road
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5389
Received: 13/04/2013
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Any new development/ building within these grounds would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding area for the following reasons:
The increased number of residents in the most densely populated area and the second most deprived area, ( ref: paragraph 6.252 )
THe lack of local facilities, ie: schools.
The impact and problems caused by increased traffic and parking.
The site are the major elements of the conservation area ( Local Plan 2004 ).
The grounds make up a significant green space and historical contribution.
Any new development/ building within these grounds would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding area for the following reasons:
The increased number of residents in the most densely populated area and the second most deprived area, ( ref: paragraph 6.252 )
THe lack of local facilities, ie: schools.
The impact and problems caused by increased traffic and parking.
The site are the major elements of the conservation area ( Local Plan 2004 ).
The grounds make up a significant green space and historical contribution.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5429
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The convent grounds are an asset, not a building plot to be used to make a quick buck. It is a beautiful open space with unique heritage assets. Stop destroying what assets we have left in this area. We want to attract visitors and business in the long term.
The convent grounds are an asset, not a building plot to be used to make a quick buck. It is a beautiful open space with unique heritage assets. Stop destroying what assets we have left in this area. We want to attract visitors and business in the long term.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5453
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Convent grounds both North and South should be designated as Private Open Space on the policies map. This is because the convent and its grounds are major elements of the conservation area (Local Plan 2004). The open space is highly valued in this already densely populated area. This plan is shortsighted as it will deprive future generations of a green resource in the heart of a built up area. This allocation/ identification in the plan will go against the English Heritage guidance on Enabling Development.
The Convent grounds both North and South should be designated as Private Open Space on the policies map. This is because the convent and its grounds are major elements of the conservation area (Local Plan 2004). The open space is highly valued in this already densely populated area. This plan is shortsighted as it will deprive future generations of a green resource in the heart of a built up area. This allocation/ identification in the plan will go against the English Heritage guidance on Enabling Development.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5454
Received: 12/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Under the proposal policy:
1) Major development that is not Enabling Development could take place
2) The Italianate East wing of the college could be demolished.
Under the proposal policy:
1) Major development that is not Enabling Development could take place
2) The Italianate East wing of the college could be demolished.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5455
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Council has indicated that a significant part of the case for designating this site for residential development is to "enable" the restoration of the convent buildings. However, commercially based conversion of the existing buildings, perhaps with marginal infill or extensions, would be quite sufficient to meet any need for "enabling" development. The Council has simply not demonstrated the need on grounds of "enabling" development for extensive new building across this important green space.
The Council has indicated that a significant part of the case for designating this site for residential development is to "enable" the restoration of the convent buildings. However, commercially based conversion of the existing buildings, perhaps with marginal infill or extensions, would be quite sufficient to meet any need for "enabling" development. The Council has simply not demonstrated the need on grounds of "enabling" development for extensive new building across this important green space.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5487
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The convent and its grounds should be protected from inappropriate development as they are precious assets in terms of both local and national heritage and public amenity. The should be designated as PRIVATE OPEN SPACE and not identified/ allocated. 1) They are MAJOR elements of the Conservation areas (Local Plan 2004) 2) These grounds make an important contributuon to the townscape of this historic area. 3) This open space is ESPECIALLY PRECIOUS as it lies in the ward of Central St Leonards, the most densely poulated ward in East Sussex where most residents live in flats or HMOs the majority of which still have NO gardens. This proposal would mean an increase of 1000+ extra residents without any IMPACT ASSESSMENT having been carried out. 4) Inappropriate development of a unique and lovely place would diminish the potential of these precious assets. It also negates our bid to be a City of Culture! 5) This allocation would be contrary to the English Heritage guidance on Enabling Developmnents.
The convent and its grounds should be protected from inappropriate development as they are precious assets in terms of both local and national heritage and public amenity. The should be designated as PRIVATE OPEN SPACE and not identified/ allocated. 1) They are MAJOR elements of the Conservation areas (Local Plan 2004) 2) These grounds make an important contributuon to the townscape of this historic area. 3) This open space is ESPECIALLY PRECIOUS as it lies in the ward of Central St Leonards, the most densely poulated ward in East Sussex where most residents live in flats or HMOs the majority of which still have NO gardens. This proposal would mean an increase of 1000+ extra residents without any IMPACT ASSESSMENT having been carried out. 4) Inappropriate development of a unique and lovely place would diminish the potential of these precious assets. It also negates our bid to be a City of Culture! 5) This allocation would be contrary to the English Heritage guidance on Enabling Developmnents.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5489
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Re site ref CLB5 you are allowing a major development that is not an enabling development to take place. This is against your own policies. You are allowing the italianate wing to be demolished - this is a major part of the conservation area and should be treated as such. You are considering change of use on the whole site - this is not appropriate, it was deemed so by you in 1979 and should remain as such. This is contrary to the English Heritage guidance on Enabling Development and should not be allowed.
Re site ref CLB5 you are allowing a major development that is not an enabling development to take place. This is against your own policies. You are allowing the italianate wing to be demolished - this is a major part of the conservation area and should be treated as such. You are considering change of use on the whole site - this is not appropriate, it was deemed so by you in 1979 and should remain as such. This is contrary to the English Heritage guidance on Enabling Development and should not be allowed.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5492
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The convent and its grounds should be protected from inappropriate development as they are precious assets in terms of both local and national heritage and public amenity. They should be designated as PRIVATE OPEN SPACE and not identified/ allocated. How can we legitimately sanction a culture bid for Hastings and Bexhill for the title of UK Capital of Culture when we are planning to destroy a beautiful historic building in the middle of over-populated Central St Leonards. 1) They are MAJOR elements of the Conservation areas (Local Plan 2004) 2) These grounds make an important contribution to the townscape of this historic area. 3) Inappropriate development of this unique place would diminish the possibility of tourism and its attractiveness to future residents.
The convent and its grounds should be protected from inappropriate development as they are precious assets in terms of both local and national heritage and public amenity. They should be designated as PRIVATE OPEN SPACE and not identified/ allocated. How can we legitimately sanction a culture bid for Hastings and Bexhill for the title of UK Capital of Culture when we are planning to destroy a beautiful historic building in the middle of over-populated Central St Leonards. 1) They are MAJOR elements of the Conservation areas (Local Plan 2004) 2) These grounds make an important contribution to the townscape of this historic area. 3) Inappropriate development of this unique place would diminish the possibility of tourism and its attractiveness to future residents.
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5516
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The original application in June 2010 was for the conversion of 32 dwellings in the original building, the demolition of its statement early 20th Century building and development of 165 new dwellings c/o59 houses, 106 flats. 3,4and 7 storeys high. (64% flats). The density for 2.5 hectares is 66dph. See AI letter 12.06.10. There were several alterations to the number of dwellings, much correspondence but the application did not come before the planning committee. We have asked for the application to be withdrawn but this has not happened.
See attached
Name: Mr A Ingleton
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5512-5532
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5534
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The site should not be designated away from Private Open Space & should not be divided between private open space and the rest, so as to build on the playing fields. That would mean an abuse of HN6.
The site is at the heart of the Magdalen Rd Conservation area & deserves more sympathetic treatment. So too does the Oval and the view from the Museum. These proposals do damage by impinging on policies E4, EN1, EN2, EN3,EN4 & EN5. Policy breaches NPPFpara65.
See attached.
Name: Mr B McGinley
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5533-5539
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5545
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Why is identified use called enabling development? when English Heritage have not been formally notified that it is one, complete with viability appraisal, so they can have an independent assessment of the validity of the figures. Over 3 years have gone by and still no notification? Under site ref.CLB5 major development that is not enabling development could take place, also the Italianate East Wing could be demolished.
See attached.
Name: Maureen Jarvis
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5540-5549
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5547
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
This should not be called identified use - as that would be contrary to English Heritage guidance on enabling development.
See attached.
Name: Maureen Jarvis
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5540-5549
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5550
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Site specific provision should not be made for enabling development. See 2.2.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 in 'Enabling development and the conservation of significant places (EH 2008)' also, as enabling development is an option of 'last resort', to specify enabling devleopment as an identified use cannot be legally sound.
See attached.
Name: Teresa Jarvis
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5550-5554
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5553
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Although CLB5 should not be included (identified/allocated) in the Local Plan, but the grounds north and south designated as private open space. Paragraphs regarding the Convent and its grounds should be included in the text of 'our vision for Central St Leonards and Bohemia due to their national importance and poor state of repair.
See attached.
Name: Teresa Jarvis
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5550-5554
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5554
Received: 15/04/2013
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Although Policy CLB5 should not be allocated/identified in the Local Plan as it would not be legally sound. To be consistent with the NPPF, paragraphs regarding the Convent and its grounds should be included in the text of 'our vision for Central St Leonards and Bohemia' due to their national importance and poor state of repair.
See attached.
Name: Teresa Jarvis
Submission received 15.04.13 covering Reps: 5550-5554
Object
Hastings Development Management Plan Proposed Submission Version
Representation ID: 5597
Received: 11/04/2013
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
I am concerned that the Link Road is said to be good and it will bring regeneration to Bexhill and Hastings area. Building market housing creates debt and despair.
It is true to say if one bought a house in the 70s you could sell it at whatever price you can imagine, but why should young people have to compete with that?
You will find the enclosed paper, housing affordable for all, I invite the Council to give this document serious consideration.
Every site that is mentioned as possible housing sites should come under the plan I present to you.
See attached.
Name: Heathwatch/Link via Mr L Keeley
Submission received 11.04.13 covering Reps:5988-5598