Policy LRA2 - Harrow Lane Playing Fields

Showing comments and forms 1 to 6 of 6

Object

Development Management Plan Revised Proposed Submission Version March 2014

Representation ID: 5880

Received: 16/04/2014

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Playing fields should be protected especially with development at Holmhurst St Mary. Inadequate consideration given to traffic, services and impact on existing residents.

Full text:

LRA2 - Playing fields should be protected especially with development at Holmhurst St Mary. Inadequate consideration given to traffic, services and impact on existing residents.

LRA3 - Area unsuitable for residential use. No consideration given to traffic levels, services required or impact on existing residents.

Object

Development Management Plan Revised Proposed Submission Version March 2014

Representation ID: 5902

Received: 19/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

I am objecting to building on the Harrow Lane Recreation Ground as it is against Government policy to take away playing fields from schools & communities. Building on land behind Baldslow Post Office will add to traffic congestion on The Ridge at a dangerous junction.

Full text:

I am objecting to building on the Harrow Lane Recreation Ground as it is against Government policy to take away playing fields from schools & communities. Building on land behind Baldslow Post Office will add to traffic congestion on The Ridge at a dangerous junction.

Object

Development Management Plan Revised Proposed Submission Version March 2014

Representation ID: 5944

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Recreational spaces should be of variable sizes, not all small. This is a large space used by people. However, because football fields are no longer maintained people leave not using it as much for football. If the site was promoted & managed as previously its usage would increase. This site should remain protected as it was in the 2004 Plan. The provision for open space is unfathomable, hard/impossible to find in this Plan. What makes a town a nice place to live is plenty of varied open space. The 140 units is really cramming them in over a recreation ground.

Full text:

See attached -
Name: R Price
Submission dated 22.04.14 covering Reps 5941-5964 inclusive

Object

Development Management Plan Revised Proposed Submission Version March 2014

Representation ID: 5962

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The net capacity of 165 is far too large for the site. The development will ruin a local wildlife site. The open space alongside the historic Grade11 listed buildings give context & unique value to them. Cramming housing into LRA1, 2 & 3 will not provide any benefits such as adding to the green infrastructure network or add to any ecological or recreational value as stated in para.6.19. This inclusion is an example of overbuilding destroying open spaces ruining the character of Hastings. Space is the most under-rated architectural merit. Mitigation measures rarely work & are never monitored.

Full text:

See attached -
Name: R Price
Submission dated 22.04.14 covering Reps 5941-5964 inclusive

Object

Development Management Plan Revised Proposed Submission Version March 2014

Representation ID: 5993

Received: 18/04/2014

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to development of an existing natural site. I currently use the area regularly for dog walking and my children use it for recreation. Development would be detrimental to the local people who use it for dog walking, there is little enough green space to use as it is in a highly developed area. Irresponsible dog owners are rife enough as it is and taking away areas where people can walk their doges without increasing mess on the streets is not a good idea. Children need open space to play in near to their home to keep healthy and active.

Full text:

I am writing to raise my concerns with the proposed developments at two natural sites in Hastings namely Harrow Lane playing fields and the land on Ridge West. I currently use both of these areas regularly for dog walking and also for my children as recreational areas. Development on either of these sites would be detrimental to the local people as they are used for dog walking by many people and there is little enough green space to use as it is in a highly developed area. The proposal to create business space at Ridge West is a waste of time as there are many other available facilities that are currently sitting unused and creating more space is not the answer. Using up the available space first would reduce the need for extra buildings and also regenerate the existing area.

There is very little green space that is accessible for people that live in this area and to build upon what there is would be a grave problem leaving people walking their dogs around the streets and increasing the amount of dog mess left in public footpaths and this will create more of a problem for the general public. Irresponsible dog owners are rife enough as it is and taking away areas where people can walk their dogs without increasing mess on the streets is not a good idea. Taking away places of recreation for children is also a massive mistake as children need open space to play in and an area near to home is necessary to keep our children healthy and active.

Object

Development Management Plan Revised Proposed Submission Version March 2014

Representation ID: 5998

Received: 22/04/2014

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Should not be put forward as a site allocation until:
Who says it is surplus to requirements for use for sports and recreation? Hastings has a little over half the required amount of open space. See 100 Sports & Recreation and 101b Open Space Local Plan 2004. Highway Report on access & traffic onto The Ridge etc. Services may not be achievable.
Greenfield site.

Full text:

See attached -
Name: A Ingleton
Submission dated 22.04.14 covering Reps 5994-6032 & 6034-6040 inclusive