West Leigh Residents Association
Sent by email to the members of Southend Borough
Council’s Development Control Committee
Dear Councillor,
I am writing on behalf of West Leigh Residents’ Association to register our objections to this proposal and also to say that we are both surprised and dismayed that our town planners should be recommending it for approval.
This being such a serious threat to the area, we ask that you please find the time to note the contents of this letter.
Whilst
pleased that the Bell Hotel would be restored, we object to the application for
the following reasons:-
The site occupies a very prominent position in Leigh Old Town. The vista from Leigh Beach up to Leigh Church is one of the most important in the area and highlights the traditional and historic nature of the Conservation Area; this view is much valued by residents and visitors alike. The tall and massive blocks of flats that are proposed across the width of the site will be seriously detrimental to this aspect. This is particularly the case as there will be little remission from the very high and solid façade presented towards the beach (the small gaps between the blocks will only mitigate when glimpsed from a position directly in front of them).
When viewed from Leigh Hill and Leigh Park Road, the western block of flats will project very considerably to the west of the Bell Hotel resulting in a significant loss of view across the estuary; this projection will also detract from the appearance of the Hotel itself and from the architectural harmony of the road junction. This western block will also dominate and obscure the view from New Road looking east towards the estuary.
The view to the Grade II listed building (28 Leigh Hill) will also be seriously damaged as it will be enclosed and dominated by the blocks of flats.
Rather than reinforcing the historic context (report 8.4), this scheme will subvert it. Indeed, the view of historic Leigh seen from the beach area across the Conservation Area and up to Leigh Church will be completely obliterated.
2) The
blocks of flats will be out of keeping within the Leigh Conservation Area.
New
buildings within a conservation area must conserve the nature and quality of
the area and must be sympathetic in their design and form. The proposed blocks
of flats fulfil none of these requirements. The design comments made about
“overall morphology”, “contemporary twist” and “contextually appropriate” may
be clever jargon but should not obscure the fact that the blocks, instead of
enhancing the Conservation Area, will, by their inappropriate design, height
and bulk, detract from it. They will be far too big and dominating and they
will be detrimental to the street scene, townscape and the historical nature of
the surrounding area.
The blocks
will be considerably higher than the old buildings that were demolished some
years ago and, as the architect’s plans show, will even appear above the roofs
of existing buildings when viewed from Leigh Hill. As the land drops away
significantly towards the railway, alongside which these blocks are to be
located, their actual height will be considerable and will appear very
dominating to people on the beach and railway walkway. The pre-existing
buildings consisted of low cottages and one house built well towards the
eastern boundary of the site; to liken the proposed blocks to these is
misleading. More importantly, whereas the long demolished house occupied but a
small area to one side, the tall blocks of flats will occupy the whole width of
the very wide site.
4) The
flats will have a negative impact on the amenities of the neighbouring
dwellings.
This is admitted in the report but excused: little
notice is taken of the adverse impact the scheme will have on the amenities of
existing residents. The town planners seek to justify the over-shadowing as a
return to the situation prior to the demolition of the old buildings. A
comparison with the situation all those years ago is not only specious but
also, aren’t things meant to be getting better? This massive scheme is of a
completely different scale to the pre-existing situation and we are surprised
that this wasn’t emphasised in the report.
5) There
will be insufficient amenity space.
The
amenity areas being provided fall well short of standard requirements. To say,
as the planning report does, that this shortfall is mitigated by the proximity
of Leigh Beach is a weak justification. Is it seriously being suggested the
residents will walk up to Leigh Hill and back over the railway bridge whenever
they need a breath of air? This scheme represents a serious over-development of
the site.
The
parking provision is inadequate especially for the hotel and its staff. Any
hotel visitors will most probably be travelling by car. As the hotel provides
none of the facilities normally expected at a hotel, there is a high risk that
it will become a block of bedsits; this will cause yet more parking problems.
In an area of parking stress, the number of vehicles using the site will
exacerbate an already bad situation. The inadequate parking and unsatisfactory
provision for refuse collection and servicing means that the resulting traffic
congestion will pose significant dangers to other users of the public highway.
Vehicles will be parked on the street and may well have to reverse on to a busy
road. It should be noted that the Council’s Highways Department recommend
refusal.
7) The
levels of civic contributions are inadequate.
The money
that is being sought to compensate the community for the negative effects of
this scheme is clearly risible. How many teachers and educational facilities
can a one-off payment of £27,068.63 buy? What amenity facilities can be bought
for £36364.60? No compensation is being sought for the extra load on our
congested roads and for other aspects of the Borough’s infrastructure. We are
talking of a multi-million pound development here and the level of compensation
should be commensurate with that; it should not be counted in pennies.
The argument (8.24) that the affordable housing requirement can be ignored is very surprising. The current rules must be applied just as developers would if the rules worked in their favour! At least two affordable units, units that the Borough desperately needs, must be demanded.
This
proposal runs against the very constraints that the Council applied to
developments in the Leigh Conservation Area.
We ask you
in the strongest terms to reject this inappropriate and damaging scheme.
For West
Leigh Residents’ Association,
Eddie
Cornish, Chairman