HT11 Churchgate and its surrounding area
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Representation ID: 629
Received: 22/11/2016
Respondent: Steven Worley
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Object to HT11: Additional retail unnecessary, traffic, impact on quality of life and parking, will be an eyesore if unsuccessful
I am concerned about plans for expanded retail development which I consider unnecessary for the needs of the town's residents. We do not need more coffee shops and restaurants. If succesful, this plan will have the effect of attracting additional car traffic with an adverse impact on the quality of life and available parking. If unsuccessful, the town will be left with the eyesore of closed retail units with to let signs.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Representation ID: 2685
Received: 30/11/2016
Respondent: Keep Hitchin Special
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Objection HT11& para. 13.135:
-requirements inadequate, undeliverable, unrealistic
-would materially affect historic character of Hitchin and 'brand'
-no indication of necessary conditions
-council has no officers adequately experienced in town centre redevelopment
-Brief should cover Paynes Park-integrated
-4,000m2 is arbitrary
-upper floors: better used for community facilities, cultural uses, education uses. Residential: need privacy/quietness
-Hitchin market: need investment/grant
-car parking:needs to be increased across town centre as a whole
-public realm&heritage:nationally recognised architects needed
-replacement buildings: inadequate,historic building line must be re-established to restore manage to Market Place
-briefs must open opportunities and be realistic, appropriate quality design
-NLP:inadequate projections
See attachment
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Representation ID: 6095
Received: 24/11/2016
Respondent: Hitchin Town Action Group (HTAG)
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Objection HT11:
-specific retail sites not subject to prior consultation, instead referring (ETC7) to the preparation of town centre strategies for reviewing retail floor-space required after 2021.
-draft proposals town centres map did not identify locations for additional floor-space
-scale of change proposed not required up to 2026,would be detrimental to the town centre
-total retail figure should be reduced and a different strategy for the town centre would be appropriate
-public opposition
-retail need not objectively assessed
See attachment