PROPOSED ELEVATION SOUTH WEST: MAJ ARCHITECTS
DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT
Application: WD/2018/1320/F
www.wealden.gov.uk
BREAKING: Demolition of Beach Tavern and construction of 8 apartments and associated car parking—Bay Life, 17 July 2018
Letter to residents
A letter is being sent to local residents by Wealden Council that explains “the above application has been received and the application details will be available online within the next couple of days, where the progress of the application can be tracked and representations made”.
UPDATE 19 July 2018: Documents and plans now available to view online at Wealden Council
Would you like to comment on the plan to demolish the Beach Tavern and construct 8 apartments with associated car parking? You can contact us here
Comment will appear here online on Bay Life and in our newspaper, The Pevensey Bay Journal, edition 20, coming soon.
First comment from local resident Andy Hyde who lives yards away from the proposal.
Andy Hyde
They have done little to scale back on the size of the development
They have addressed a few aspects regards to the refusal – the car parking is underground and has one exit which answers the safety factor to do with pedestrians.
They have adapted the design so that it’s more in keeping with the buildings around.
However, 8 flats is still an over development. We as neighbours to the site are not averse to seeing the site developed…what we are objecting to is the number of flats.
Most households – and here I include families/couples who buy flats – usually have two cars. Providing just one space per flat although normal with these sorts of development, there is usually road space for extra parking.
Parking has always been ‘an issue’ (substitute nightmare/hell if you wish) in Bay Terrace/Marine Terrace for the residents. It’s got worse with the development of the cornershop as three flats and the success of certain businesses in the light industrial units have had their knock on effect.
They have done little to scale back on the size of the development.
Having had 8 flats kicked out the first time surely they should have got the message and scaled this back to 5 or 6. I think they are hoping their changes mitigate the comments made about the design and car park. I’m afraid that this time objections will have to be extremely well crafted as I think they have answered a sufficient number of negative points to sway the planners. I hope I’m wrong. We will be objecting.
Ding ding…round 2!
