Policy HN6 - Former Convent of Holy Child Jesus, Magdalen Road

Object

Representation ID: 5771

Received: 20/04/2014

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The convent school and its grounds are the major elements of he conservation area (local plan 2004)

The whole of the convent grounds make an important contribution to the townscape of this historic area. The open space lies in a densely populated and deprived part of the borough, with many hmo's and garden-less flats.

Potential accommodation needs to be in harmony with the existing buildings in both design and materials used.

Object

Representation ID: 5887

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

It is conservation area & should be treated as such. No extensive building on green areas.

Object

Representation ID: 5888

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Unsound - as part of the Local Plan 2004 the Convent & its grounds are major parts of the conservation area, and this should be upheld. No to flats on the convents north field, next to the nun's graveyard.

Object

Representation ID: 5890

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? No

Because in the case of the Convent, we are in a conservation area, & this amount of development on a football field - it needs to be designated as private open space. A squanderance of precious assets of heritage led regeneration.

Object

Representation ID: 5898

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Its being built in a conservation area and will bring too much traffic into the area.

Object

Representation ID: 5899

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The Convent is a conservation area and should not be demolished or any of the grounds be built on. It is an important open space.

Object

Representation ID: 5906

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

No details of maximum number of dwellings. Not enabling development in reality - this site's future has been mishandled over years. Not the most appropriate strategy (see above). Development not sustainable under proposed treatment.

Object

Representation ID: 5915

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

HN6 is not in accordance with national guidance on enabling development. There is a current application for enabling development on this site, but English Heritage have not been notified that HS/FA/10/00207 is an application for enabling development and HBC Planning have refused requests to finally notify English Heritage of this.

Object

Representation ID: 5916

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Policy HN6 - Former Convent of Holy Child Jesus is not in accordance with the national guidance on enabling development.

Object

Representation ID: 5921

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Whole plot should be conserved. Hastings bypass currently under construction will open development in more than necessary areas.

Object

Representation ID: 5923

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? No

This is a Conservation Area. We need to keep our green spaces for the next generation.

Object

Representation ID: 5929

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Policy is not in accordance with the national guidance on enabling development.

Object

Representation ID: 5933

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

HN6 is not in accordance with national guidance on enabling development. There is a current application for enabling development on this site, but English Heritage have not been notified that HS/FA/10/00207 is an application for enabling development and HBC Planning have refused all requests to notify English Heritage of this.

Object

Representation ID: 5941

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Policy HN6 is not in accordance with national guidance on enabling development. The two paragraphs offer a 'last resort' which I believe will be the first resort as there is no definition of it. It will offer no benefit to the community to build tower blocks around the historic buildings. The buildings are not in a bad state, the only danger is arson which often seems to be used. Arson is an accepted part of UK planning, use of enabling here has the potential to cause damage contrary to the aims of the established planning policy.

Object

Representation ID: 5960

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Not in accordance with national guidance on enabling development. It should be replaced with a policy that is.

Object

Representation ID: 5996

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Another huge overdevelopment on a sensitive site. This emerges on pages 32 and 33 and does not appear a site under the site allocations?

This proposal (June 2010) is not enabling development. The owner and developer are responsible for the restoration and maintenance of their buildings.

Object

Representation ID: 9609

Received: 15/04/2014

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

We have carried out sewerage and water supply network capacity checks and there is insufficient sewerage capacity, in the immediate vicinity, available to serve an additional 32 dwellings on this site.

This isn't a constraint to development provided connection is made to nearest point with adequate capacity. New and/or improved infrastructure may also be required before additional flows from this site could be accommodated.

We are unable to support policy HN6 as sound because:
It fails to reflect our evidence provided to earlier consultations
Deliverability could be compromised by lack of infrastructure provision, and is inconsistent with para.177 of NPPF.