Number of entries: 6 Number of pages: 1
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Andy Dumas From: Braybrooke and Castle E-mail: Contact |
As a neighbour and your Independent Candidate for County Council, I have filed my objections to the application and encourage Councillor Daniel to do the same as a private resident.
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: patricia stephenson From: St. Leonards on Sea E-mail: Contact |
This has to be one of the most shocking planning decisions ever - a concrete eyesore totally dominating surrounding properties and obliterating the wonderful views. Shame on Hastings council - another nail in the coffin for Hastings.Robsack Meadow is another appalling development that HBC has approved - five storey flats in the middle of protected semi natural ancient woodland. You couldn't make it up could you! 
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Richard Oaten From: 10 Lower Park Road E-mail: Contact |
Good website. We've been writing in sending our objections and were very disappointed by the lqck of any significant changes in the resubmitted drawings. Clealry its awful for many of the reasons you say, but it is also very much supported by the planners. For the Committee to be able to vote against it they will need strong reasons. They need to be reasonably confident that it won't get refused and then simply passed at appeal. As you know, emotions count for nothing and the views of the community are not a reason for refusal. There may be an angle with parking, but I suspect they are already over-providing (according to the Highways requirements 25-50% reduction allowed etc) so even if the ones lost on the main road are greater than they claim, the loss could well be made up for on-site. They need clear planning policies that the development is against and this must be the ones to do with scale, constrained site etc. I also think the lack of amenity space isn't a potential reason for refusal (so many of the flats have balconies and this will count as amenity space)I think where the building ends at its highest point is the weakest element of the design and the end elevation showing the relationship with Lower Park Road I think is horrific and that I think could be used to show non-compliance with Policy. Also, the council planning page shwoing details of the site, comments received etc, refers to a photomontage looking up Braybrooke Road which has never been put on the website. I think we should demand this is made available as I do think this is the weakest part of the scheme. Kind regards Richard
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Colin Bewes From: Right next to Hollingsworths E-mail: Contact |
It's all very well going on about the density and the parking, but this is sadly as much down to the government (if you like to call it that) aggressively encouraging high densities and limited car use in town and city centres. If the developers were allowed to go for 15-20 really nice town houses with plenty of parking it would be thrown out because the density and parking provision simply don't match with the diktats from central government. Given that there is nothing I can do about those two issues, everything else has been done professionally, and the recent concessions now make the roof-line match the Victorian terrace on the east side. I therefore SUPPORT the application and look forward to it being passed, subject to all the usual conditions. Admin reply: There just aren't the obscene profits to be made by building Town Houses with adequate parking and that's what it's all about. It's no good blaming Central Government, guidelines are just that, guidelines otherwise there would be no need for planning boards.
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Nik Roberts From: Hastings, Wykeham Road E-mail: Contact |
These developers have no intension of building, it’s all about GREED. It would be interesting to know how much was paid for the land in the first place and how much it is worth now with planning consent for a garage. I presume that the accepted planning consent for the apartments cannot be renewed now that a consent has been given for garage and workshops? 
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Jeremy Linden From: 110 Braybrooke Rd E-mail: Contact |
Very comprehensive site history. Most of the objections cover the same issues. Could the potential of a low rise commercial development be added - permission was granted for a car showroom?
|
Powered by PHP guestbook 1.6 from PHPJunkyard - Free PHP scripts