Menu
Hastings & St. Leonards on-line community newspaper
west-hill-road-main2

View across the West Hill Road site down to Bexhill Road.

Headaches for planners due to documents missing from West Hill Road case file

The sudden emergence of development activity on a long neglected site at the Bo-Peep end of West Hill Road in July caused an outcry, not only about the razing of what had become a rich wildlife habitat but also about the legality of the proposed development 28 years after planning permission was originally granted. After viewing the case file, Chris Lewcock, chairman of Hastings Urban Design Group, found plenty of questions raising their heads, including whether the planning permission is valid. Nick Terdre reports.

Outline planning permission for the site at 123-125 West Hill Road in St Leonards, previously the location of the Malmesbury children’s home, was granted in 1988, followed by detailed permission in 1989 for a project involving 117 flats. In 2006 the council issued a certificate of lawful development attesting that development had commenced in 1990 and that the planning permission therefore still stood. The site is listed in the 2015 local plan as suitable, subject to various conditions, for a possible 117 housing units.

In effect, however, only token work had taken place and until earlier this year the only development to be noted on the virtually undisturbed land behind the security fence was that of a fertile wildlife habitat.

In the meantime a new developer has taken charge – this is Atlas Partners, which made its presence felt in July when it moved in without notice and cleared the site. However, the identity of the owner appears not to be known.

Questions were immediately raised about the validity of the planning permission after such a long period and, not least, about the brutal clearance, which appears to have occurred without regard to wildlife legislation. Rather late in the day, Atlas has now appointed an ecologist.

The site is an important one, standing at the entrance to the town in a very prominent position on the cliff-top where West Hill Road rises above the Bo Peep public house and Grosvenor Gardens, Chris Lewcock tells HOT. It could become a modern and stylish visual jewel or it could be an over-dominant eyesore.

The development has implications for those who live below the cliff and traffic implications for the residents of West Hill Road, he says. It could make a contribution to meeting affordable housing needs in the borough, though the permission granted in 1989 contained no requirement for such provision. There are also wildlife and archaeological interests on the site which need to be protected, although in the case of the wildlife it seems to be too late.

After Atlas had announced its arrival, Mr Lewcock’s immediate reaction was to contact the council asking for all the drawings and documents which had originally been approved to be posted on the planning website so that local residents could see what was proposed. Although it agreed to do so, the council has so far posted only one additional document.

Mr Lewcock also arranged to have a look at the case files, where he found major gaps in the documentation. In particular there were complete sets of neither the elevation drawings nor the landscaping drawings, meaning that the council does not have a proper idea what the scheme is supposed to look like. Nor was there any evidence in the file that a final version of proposals to keep the cliff above the neighbouring houses stable had been signed off, clearly a worry for the occupants of these houses.

“It is deeply unsatisfactory that the council has no means of knowing whether or not the developer is working in accordance with the various approvals – and making sure that they are,” Mr Lewcock says. This is a problem of the council’s own making, and leaves it in the invidious position where it may have to ask the developer for copies of the relevant drawings. The developer would be under no obligation to provide them, Mr Lewcock says.

Location of the site at the west end of West Hill Road, close to its junction with Bexhill Road/Grosvenor Crescent. OS extract from Location Plan document.

Location of the site at the west end of West Hill Road, close to its junction with Bexhill Road/Grosvenor Crescent. The cliff can be seen running along the south side. (OS extract from Location Plan document.)

What the files did contain, however, were the plans showing the boundaries of the application site, the so-called red-line site. Unfortunately there were different versions of the red-line site – and on one of them the proposed works appear to step significantly beyond this line. “Although this seems a rather technical point, if the red-line site is wrong and it is unclear what the original application site was, this alone might be sufficient to invalidate the original approval,” he says.

The fact that planning permission was granted so long ago is itself the source of potential problems. “Since 1989 the building regulations have tightened up considerably, for example with respect to matters such as insulation and access for disabled people, and it seems unlikely that the proposal would now comply with modern standards,” Mr Lewcock says.

“The changes needed to comply with up-to-date building regulations may well mean that an entirely new planning application would have to be made. It is very important that the council planners don’t just wave through such changes as ‘minor amendments’ and that they insist on a new planning application.”

Mr Lewcock brought these various points to the council’s attention in late September but, beyond acknowledging his letter, the council has so far failed to respond.

New documents concerning various aspects of the development, including proposals for stabilising the cliff, are being considered by the planning department – they can be found under HS/DS/89/00804. However, by the time of publication HOT had received no reply to questions it sent to the department.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

View of the site from Bexhill Road, showing the BoPeep Pub on the right. Standing at least six storeys high, the housing development will be a dominant feature on this approach into St Leonards.

If you’re enjoying HOT and would like us to continue providing fair and balanced reporting on local matters please consider making a donation. Click here to open our PayPal donation link. Thank you for your continued support!

Posted 16:58 Wednesday, Nov 2, 2016 In: Home Ground

7 Comments

  1. Ms. doubtfire

    According to Zelly what is happening in this town is but a microcosm of what is happening worldwide. That may be the case but we should make every effort to halt this situation by forcing our council to be accountable because until that happens nothing will change in Hastings.

    This council has ruled the roost for far too long to the detriment of our quality of life and our prized open spaces and wildlife and loss of prized historic buildings.

    They are nothing less than bullies and dictators who appear to take great delight trampling over us. Not good.

    What has happened on the West Hill Road site is a prime example of how this council operates. They favour the developer every time. Time will tell if they can get away with this one.

    Comment by Ms. doubtfire — Wednesday, Nov 9, 2016 @ 09:35

  2. Zelly Restorick

    It seems to me that there is no follow-up, there are no consequences. Lies about the EU affected the vote, but no-one is being prosecuted. Rocklands. Combe Haven Valley and the BHLR. The list of planning permissions – and an inability to be heard. Etc etc etc. One knows one is being made a fool of, being ignored and over-ridden, that the laws can be shape-shifted for the end-goal, if one has enough money and the connections.
    The world is not heading in a good direction.
    What’s happening locally is a microcosm of what is happening on the global stage.
    Let us be in no doubt about how little we are cherished and cared for by the decision makers; the present day simply echoes mankind’s sado-masochistic history.

    Comment by Zelly Restorick — Wednesday, Nov 9, 2016 @ 08:21

  3. Richard Heritage

    here we go another site with a load of issues problems and already an ecology disaster. How is these controversial sites keep popping up. This one reminds me of three other sites the council handed out CLU’s based upon decades old planning permissions. Like this one they all got the nod from the Planning Department based upon “probabilities.”
    look at this CLU. Issued on the basis that a power cable installed on the edge of the site for site offices quantifies the planning permission had been started.
    On the ecology side of it. Well what a dreadful situation that could have well been avoided.

    Now the public have raised issue with the council and councillors, including the Wildlife Officer for Sussex Police; all have battened down the hatches and refuse to reply to any ones emails. I feel a resonation here if Rocklands

    Comment by Richard Heritage — Tuesday, Nov 8, 2016 @ 16:54

  4. Ms. doubtfire

    No doubt Mr. Ken Davis is being heavily sarcastic with his comments because what has happened on the West Hill Road site is a serious violation of the Wildlife & Countryside Act and merits prosection.

    To clear a site which is recorded as a habitat to protected wildlife and flora without approved mitigation procedures in place, is a criminal act. And it was very clear from the ecology reports in 2004 that this site was listed as a special site abundant with wildlife and important flora. A large variety of nesting birds were also recorded and yet the trees and hedgerows on the site were felled during the nesting season. Another violation of the Wildlife & Countryside Act. This report goes on to state that the survey of this site has identified that “the proposed development site itself is of BOROUGH IMPORTANCE”.

    This site is also highlighted in the Local Plan as an important site and records that an ECOP (Ecological Constraints and Opportunities Plan) must make specific reference to the presence of the Local Wildlife site.

    Whilst the council may consider this nigh on 30 year old application remains ‘live’ – there is a legal obligation on any developer to follow government legislation on the Wildlife and Countryside legislation: the official wording declares:

    “the grant of a certificate of lawful use applies only to the lawfulness of development carried out or proposed in accordance with Planning Legislation: IT DOES NOT REMOVE the need to comply PROPERLY with any other legal requirements such as consent required under the Building Regulations,the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 or the Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act 1990”.

    The council planners must be fully aware that an application of such an age will not comply with current planning legislation and therefore will have to be re submitted to the planning department.

    How shocking to know that the devastation of this site could have been halted before it was totally cleared had this council taken prompt action. This has to be one of the most serious breaches of Wildlife legislation recorded in this Borough.

    Comment by Ms. doubtfire — Friday, Nov 4, 2016 @ 08:36

  5. ken davis

    The clear lesson here is not to submit proper applications but to make sure the site is cleared of all vegetation and wildlife prior to any application. On the other hand if you do receive an approval you can ignore any conditions!

    Comment by ken davis — Thursday, Nov 3, 2016 @ 19:07

  6. Ms. doubtfire

    To add to this disgraceful affair, there was a further planning application presented in 2004 (subsequently discarded) but along with this application a detailed ecology survey was presented. This declared that this site was habitat to an abundance of slow worms, lizards and important flora…and a large variety of birds who used the site for nesting.
    But when approached the principal planning officer declared that it was of no relevance.
    The point here is that it was well known that this site was a valuable site with important wildife and flora. There is a document within the Local Plan which highlights this and states that it would be necessary to commission an ECOP survey before any works commence on the site.
    All this was highlighted to the principal planning officer but once again she said it was irrelevant as the planning permission was given in 1989 and remained ACTIVE. You really could not make this one up…

    Little wonder that residents have no faith in our planners. How could they?

    Comment by Ms. doubtfire — Thursday, Nov 3, 2016 @ 08:42

  7. Ms. doubtfire

    The most serious and worrying aspect of this issue is the fact that, despite the council being aware of the clearing of the site in early July, no action was taken to halt this illegal procedure until residents expressed their concerns to the council in August about the works taking place by which time the entire site had been razed to the ground along with all the protected wildlife, important flora and of course, the felling of trees during the nesting season.
    There is an obligation on all developers to follow PROPERLY the Wildlife and Countryside Legistlation and to ignore this act is an illegal act and the perpeptrators of this violation are liable to prosecution.
    The council was fully aware of the caveats produced in the Local Plan about this important site – but their principal officer repeated her mantra over and over that as the planning permission had been granted in 1989 there was nothing the council could do to stop them.
    This clearly was, and remains a totally invalid statement.

    How shameful that this council along with their ecologist officer failed to take immediate action to halt these works…and one has to wonder why the police wildlife officer appointed to this case has made no attempt to speak out on this violation.
    At some point the council along with the wildlife police officer wrote to the developers asking them to cease all works until a comprehensive ecology report had been commissioned….how shocking that this report was only commissioned and actioned AFTER this site had been totally cleared.
    Both the developer and Hastings Borough Council must be held to account here.
    The developer is endeavouring to play down the seriousness of his actions here by stating an ecology report has been commissioned – far too late – the site has already been devastated and if an ecology report had been commissioned there would have been the necessary mitigation procedures put in place – THERE HAVE BEEN NO MITIGATION PROCEDURES PUT IN PLACE.

    Comment by Ms. doubtfire — Thursday, Nov 3, 2016 @ 08:32

Also in: Home Ground

«
»
More HOT Stuff
  • SUPPORT HOT

    HOT is run by volunteers but has overheads for hosting and web development. Support HOT!

    ADVERTISING

    Advertise your business or your event on HOT for as little as £20 per month
    Find out more…

    DONATING

    If you like HOT and want to keep it sustainable, please Donate via PayPal, it’s easy!

    VOLUNTEERING

    Do you want to write, proofread, edit listings or help sell advertising? then contact us

    SUBSCRIBE

    Get our regular digest emails

  • Subscribe to HOT