Please do read this!

I think this affects just about everyone in SHD, Lyndhurst and Amberstone.


SHD, Lynd and Amb are clearly connected in various degrees of interdependence.

Many years ago a residents association (RA) was formed by people in the road largely to do this, trying to keep the road surface good enough for convenient daily use, but not so good that it becomes too much of a busy “rat run”.


Obviously building and maintaining a road surface is an expensive business, needing expertise and commitment. The annually elected RA committee have done this job over many years, on a voluntary basis. The cost of maintaining this road surface averages a number of hundreds of pounds for repairs each year and every ten years or so a larger sum – last time £25,000 – for complete resurfacing.

Each year the RA votes an annual subscription for its members along the unadopted SHD, to cover these costs, currently £70 pa, which most households pay. Even this would not have been enough to achieve the present state of the road surface without a bequest some twenty years ago by an appreciative and generous resident, Reggie Wilson. The Borough Council and County Council pay nothing towards maintaining the road surface, though all the residents are liable for rates. So it’s a bit of a struggle and balancing act, and a continual concern as to whether we can maintain the road in a reasonable state.




For many years we asked surrounding homeowners who use the road frequently if they would contribute £5 per year, and were grateful for these payments. As you maybe are aware, a year and a half ago, the RA decided to ask for an increase in the donation from residents in Lynd and Amb on the basis that they need to use the unadopted road surface in varying degrees to access the main roads. In retrospect the decision to request an increase in the donation from £5 to towards the £70 was made without adequate consultation and came as quite a shock to some residents. The result was that some in Lynd and Amb paid the full subscription of £70, some less, others nothing. Again the RA was very appreciative of the subscriptions paid, and apologised for the upset that the unexpected request had caused.

Since then, a canvas has been sent round to residents in Lynd and talks held with some in Amb. From the responses most people felt that a request for a donation of up to £35 pa would be more appropriate for these two roads. The choice is of course still entirely up to the individual household. As for the RA, we will go on trying to maintain the road at its present standard as long as the funds last, meanwhile, we will be very grateful for any contributions residents in our three roads make. Our accounts are audited and open to inspection at every AGM.


For those living in St Helens Down: your 2012 annual subscription of £70 (voted for at the AGM) is now due. It is payable to the St Helens Down Residents Association for maintaining the road and public liability insurance against claims arising from the road. Please use the payment slip that comes with this newsletter, failing which to our treasurer, Peter Cooper, at 41 SHD.

To: Peter Cooper, Hon. Treasurer of SHDRA, 41 St Helens Down, Hastings TN34 2BG



St Helens Down annual road maintenance subscription for 2012*





Surname: ______________________ House no. _______ Road ________________


(SHD, Lynd, Amb)
Email address


(for communications from the Residents Association, newsletters, etc): _____________________



Cash: £____________ or cheque: £ ____________ Date: ____________¬_

* Requested £70 (full subscription for SHD) and £35 or another sum at their discretion for households in Lyndhurst Avenue and Amberstone Close, and any households entirely dependent on state benefits. Cheques please to be made out to St Helens Down Residents Association. We will issue receipts will only for cash, unless specifically asked. We would be really grateful if you could pay by 31st March. Thank you very much.



And if you haven’t replied already to Sarah Lillington about the street or garden party to her email or through her letter box, please do so here:



The idea of holding a community event for everyone living in St Helen’s Down/ Lyndhurst Avenue and Amberstone Close was discussed and a street or garden party was suggested, to take place on either a Saturday or Sunday afternoon for a few hours at the end of June. If we have enough people, Sarah Lillington, our Neighbourhood Watch coordinator, will contact everyone with more details.


□ Yes I would like to attend □ Yes I would like to help □ No I don’t want to attend

St Helens Down/Lyndhurst/Amberstone Area

Residents Newsletter – Feb 2012



A very warm welcome to our new residents to be, Bill and Nick, on their building site at nos. 16 and 18 SHD and the French family, Xavier and Val with their mother and children, at no.29! If you know of any other new arrivals in our three roads, please do tell me so that we can welcome them and give them any local information and help they may need.



Bill’s and Nick’s work in progress on the bend in lower SHD may actually reduce the causes of concern expressed at the last AGM before Christmas about dangers on that bend. They and their architect are aware of these concerns, also of our concern that the road surface and verge there not be damaged by their build.



There was a meeting of the roads committee on 7 February, including representatives from St Helens Down (SHD), Lyndhurst Avenue (Lynd) and Amberstone Close (Amb). (Should we change the name of the residents association to reflect all three roads?) The main question was whether we want to be just a group of people arranging road maintenance, particularly of the unadopted part of SHD, or whether we should do something to try to achieve more of a sense of community in our three connected roads. We realise that many people live busy lives, have all sorts of commitments, including family, work, hobbies etc. and that the wish and energy for anything more, centred on the immediate neighbourhood might be difficult, or not even wanted.



The idea of holding a community event for everyone living in SHD/Lynd and Amb was supported and a street or garden party was suggested, to take place on either a Saturday or Sunday afternoon for a few hours, perhaps on Saturday June 23rd. If we have enough people, Sarah Lillington, our Neighbourhood Watch coordinator, will contact everyone with more details. So please e-mail or drop your answer to the following questions about a possible afternoon street or garden party to Sarah Lillington on shd.nhw@gmail.com, or to her at no. 4 SHD:



□ Yes I would like to attend □ Yes I would like to help □ No I don’t want to attend



Also, anyone wanting to join the Neighbourhood Watch mailing list can also e-mail Sarah at the same e-mail address. It really is a good way of being alerted to the fortunately rare crimew in our roads. And if anyone’s not getting NW mail from Sarah, there could be a problem with accessing their e-address, so please e-mail her to tell her.



A reminder, too, that we do have an online blog under St Helens Down Residents Association, if you’d like to start using it.



A big thank you, again, to all the residents who sang or donated to the annual road carol singing. As a result of the evening, £285 has been shared between our local St Michael's Hospice and the Good Shepherd Hospice in our twin town of Hastings Sierra Leone.



St Barnabas Church has a film night on the second Friday of every month, at 7.30pm, which a number of us have been enjoying. The next film is “August Rush” on March 10th.



Finally, on a question which affects us all of keeping the unadopted part of St Helens Down in reasonable shape for daily use, please read over the page.



With best, neighbourly wishes,



Stewart Anderson - for the Residents Association (no. 43 SHD, Tel 428791)

















¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬

Coming soon "SHDRA Social Event?"

Watch this space or better still make some suggestions by posting a "comment" .

Objection re. Planning Application Number HS/FA/11/00602 at 1 St Helens Down

Objection re.
Planning Application

 Number HS/FA/11/00602
at 1 St Helens Down

Thank you for your notification of

9 August regarding this Application.

The St Helens Down Residents Association represents a large number

of subscribing households and residents in

St Helens Down, Lyndhurst Avenue and Amberstone Close.

We object strongly to this proposal for reasons of drainage,

road infrastructure and amenity, and ask you to reject the time
extension request on the basis of changes in material circumstances

since the original approval of application HS/FA/08/00360 for this site.

Changes in Material Circumstances

Since the original application for this build, the Planning Inspectorate

has rejected an application, only two houses away, at 5 St Helens Down, for a very
 similar front garden development for reasons that apply to

no. 1. We quote verbatim the Inspectorate’s reasons and, as residents in the area,
 add further specific ones of our own. The Planning Inspectorate’s ruling, the
Government’s reclassification of garden land in June 2010, and the growth in
 evidence  of climate change induced flooding risks we consider all material
 changes in circumstances since the original - we consider erroneous - approval of
the preceding application for this site.

As, of course, with all human endeavours, planning decisions, too,
can sometimes be wrong, and be seen to be so more easily with hindsight.

We submit that planning permission for this site was granted
initially for only three years,and that the opportunity for a
time extension is precisely a
right opportunity, with the material changes in circumstances and
hindsight, to rectify an error.

The Planning Inspectorate’s Ruling

The Planning Inspectorate wrote in July 2009:

Case Number:

HS/FA/09/00165

Application Type:

Full Planning Permission

                                                                                                                                                2

Registration Date:

13/05/2009

Location:

5 St Helens Down, Hastings, TN34 2BG

Ward:

BAIRD

Proposal:

Proposed erection of a two bedroom chalet bungalow with
parking area served by existing access at land to the front of 5 St Helens Down.

Case Officer:

E Collins

Case Officer Tel:

not available

Status:

Decided

Agent:

Mr Polito
CLM Planning Ltd
Appledore
Barley Grattens
Netherfield
Battle
TN33 9QG
Email:e.cos@clmplanning.co.uk

Applicant:

Mrs Searle
5 St Helens Down
Hastings
East Sussex
TN34 2BG

Decision Level:

DELEGATED

Council's Decision:

REFUSED PERMISSION

Decision Date:

07/07/2009

                                                                                                                                                3

Conditions or Reasons:

• Having regard to the narrow width of the site the proposed dwelling would, result in a visually cramped form of development, compounded by the resultant loss of side boundary screening to the western boundary and the lack of space for replacement planting. Furthermore, the approval of this development would make it difficult for the local Planning Authority to resist similar future proposals which would be likely to result, and which would lead to a significant detrimental and material change of the established visually spacious and sylvan character on the northern side of St Helens Down. The proposal is thereby contrary to Policy DG1 (b) and (c) of the Hastings Local Plan 2004 which states: POLICY DG1 - Development Form In determining planning applications, the Council will have regard to the following considerations: The full and efficient use of land; Sympathy with the appearance and character of the area and suitability in scale, massing, design, appearance, materials, layout and siting, both in itself and in relation to nearby buildings (including parts of buildings), spaces and views; Respect for site levels and characteristics, potential for development and inclusion of good quality hard and soft landscaping, including the retention of trees or other features of importance; Adequate space for private and public use (including children's playspace) and visual amenity; Suitable layout and design features to ensure personal and general safety and security; Protection of living conditions of existing and future occupants from, for example, noise, dominance and loss of outlook, light and privacy; Sufficient information to ensure full assessment of the likely effects of the proposal; and Safety and convenience on the public highway.

Drainage

On 26/7/07 Southern Water wrote to the Residents Association, regarding
no.1, St Helens Down: “Following initial investigations, there is currently inadequate
capacity in the local network to provide foul and surface water sewage disposal to
service the proposed development. The proposed development would
increase flows to the public sewerage system, and existing properties and land
may be subject to a greater risk of flooding as a result. The public sewer
is a combined system, receiving both foul and surface water flows,
and no flows greater than currently received can be accommodated in this system.”

                                                                                                                                  4

On 28/08/2008 WS Atkins wrote to the Hastings Borough Planning Officer that
if the developer were to remove enough “existing surface water entering the
sewer from the existing property at 1 St Helens Down,
additional foul flows could be accommodated, i.e. no net increase in flow.”
They elaborate on this with considerations as to the possibility of the
developer requesting additional off-site
sewers, or improvements to existing sewers, and lay down demanding conditions
a developer would have to meet for this in consultation with the Local
Planning Authority and themselves.
We respectfully suggest that the plan required by the water board, if indeed
it is feasible, be provided before any further approval is given, thus protecting
any future prospective purchaser of the site from a misconception.

The Residents Association probably has more current knowledge and experience
than anyone as to the effects of surface water outflow, including that from the natural
spring at No. 1, on the road surface in front of and downhill from this property.
On the matter of the spring, we want assurance that any build, were it allowed,
would not increase this cause of damage. We do not see how no net outflow of
combined surface and foul water is likely to be achieved with the current
application for an additional house at No.1. The hard residential footprint would
displace more surface water onto the road, and greater occupancy of the site
 produce more foul water outflow. We would certainly expect to be consulted
on any proposal which could result in damage to the road surface, which we maintain
at very great expense to our own benefit but also to that of the wider public
and the town, and of course be compensated should such damage occur
if only through creation of an additional offsite sewer or increased net outflow.
We would of course also hold those enacting or allowing the proposal at
No. 1 responsible for the consequences of any “greater risk of flooding”
against which Southern Water and WS Atkins have warned,
and in particular to households lower down the road.

Since the letters from Southern Water and from WS Atkins, planning permission
 has been granted at no. 74, which after careful consideration we did not oppose,
 likewise at no. 23, and earlier at no. 242 Elphinstone Road, the latter with a
 frontage onto St Helens Down. We now have this application. All have the
 potential for extra water discharge into the road. In the case of no 74, which has
been built, conditions were not set to our knowledge by the Local
Authority to prevent the discharge of additional water into the road. 
While we appreciate the extra surface and foul water from each new house
is relative, the accumulative effect is highly threatening for us in a
road which already has a history of properties flooding at great
cost to their residents. There has been growing evidence since the earlier
approval for this site of climate change now increasing this risk.
In view of all the above ask what notice
 has been taken of Southern Water’s and Atkins’ warnings.

Road Infrastructure

St Helens Down is an unadopted road, which the residents have over many years
 maintained with great effort and expense.
While cited in this respect as a model for the town, the road’s substructure
does not meet national standards and is highly vulnerable to
overloading and annual frosts. Expert evidence can be produced to this effect. Policy
TR10 states that applications will not be granted when additional traffic is generated
 onto an inadequately metalled highway.
And the substructure of ours is of course particularly vulnerable
to adverse climate change.

                                                                                                                                  5

Again, there is the cumulative effect on the road surface of a series of individual
additional front garden infill dwellings being permitted onto this stretch of road,
 very much against the direction of the Inspectorate’s ruling. With the granting of an
application at No 242 Elphinstone Road, with its ill-sited access onto a narrow
 part of the road, frequently used by spill-over parking from Pilot Field matches and
 events, traffic there has been further impeded and the danger to pedestrians
on the busy corner at Elphinstone Road increased, as we predicted.
It will ill stand yet another access and added traffic on that stretch.

Significantly, the applicant paid his road maintenance subscription to us the first
 year he was here and wanted our support, but, despite reminders, has not paid since.

Amenity

We face seeing one of the most attractive roads in Hastings being made much
 less attractive by successive front garden grabs, bringing the building line ever
closer to the road, although we were told by the Planner over 242 this breach of a
building line would not be used as a precedent. The current application does
 precisely that. The character of a road such as St Helens Down
ought to be a source of pride to a town, instead it seems threatened -
we think unintentionally - by a kind of creeping
 planning blight, facilitated by individual planning decisions where
borough planners have previously shown understanding and sensitivity for their
 context. Even within the history of this current application, there is creeping planning
 blight. Initially permission was granted for a replacement garage.
 A condition was placed that its ‘studio attic’ should not be used for habitation.
 Now we are faced with a fully residential “two bed chalet bungalow” with its own
additional access. It is wrongly located and possibly out of scale, though we do not
have the expertise to judge this in professional planning or architectural terms.
As you know, the Government reclassified garden land in June 2010 and
 removed it from the definition of previously developed land.
We know each application still has to be assessed on its individual merits and refused
 only where material changes in circumstances have occurred.
We would urge that the Planning Inspectorate’s ruling on the amenity
 of this road and the Government’s reclassification
of garden land, both since the original application, are just such
new material circumstances.

Footnote

In a reply to our MP at the time of the original application, the then Housing Minister,
 Caroline Flint, wrote to him regarding our concerns about this site:
 "Through PPS3 local planning authorities have got stronger powers to tackle
 inappropriate development - for instance on garden land." and "Local planning
 authorities also need to consider a satisfactory way of managing flood risk in new
 development, as you mention. They should ensure that there are appropriate
 surface water drainage arrangements in place and this should be considered
 as a material planning consideration in determining proposals for housing
 development. The location of

 

                                                                                                                                  6

buildings in an area with inadequate surface water drainage arrangements
 should be avoided wherever possible". This speaks for itself.

Petition

A separate petition and a previous one of 115 petitioners attested at the time
of the original application the strength of residents’ feeling about this assault
 on an environment we have worked hard and long to sustain.

Dr S G F Anderson

Chairman

.

POTHOLES, AND MORE

Potholes
You will probably have seen - and felt - the potholes in the Borough's part of St Helens Down up by Pilot Road! The Residents Association has approached our ward councillor, Mike Turner, about this, who in turn has twice protested to ESCC - who are now responsible - and had them over for a viewing. We regard the situation as dangerous. The struggle will no doubt continue. In fact, I see some have been filled.

Deterioration of Road Surface
This actually shows how quickly a road deteriorates if it is not maintained properly, with Pine
Avenue an even greater illustration. Our unadopted part of St Helens Down has held up well since last being resurfaced, despite a couple of heavy winters, but last summer we had to spend over £2000 again on patching. We will need to patch again this year, to avoid further damage and probably every year thereafter until a resurfacing again becomes pretty essential.

The Subject That Dares Not Speak its Name
You will probably sense what I am heading towards: our annual request for your subscription towards our collective responsibility to maintain the road as a public thoroughfare. Several years ago virtually every household on the unadopted part of the road paid, though it did mean the elected road committee of volunteers having to send several reminders and then visit door to door - something we would have preferred not to have to do. ln recent years payment record has been pretty good, but last year only 77% of households paid, which made me feel like
resigning as chairman, especially as I have reason to think those households not paying include ones well able to, and ones who have never come to AGMs to express dissent.

What Will Happen if You Don't Pay
All residents benefit from having a half-way decent road to their houses and to their work, shopping, etc. Apart from the convenience and comfort, it increases the value of their property. At the last Residents Association AGM it was agreed to raise the unchanged (for years) annual subscription (to cover road repairs and public liability insurance) from £60 to £70 and to ask residents of Lyndhurst Avenue, as unavoidably regular users of this road, also to contribute the same amount. lt was agreed to ask residents in Amberstone Close to contribute what they consider appropriate given their individual different use levels of the adopted part of the road. The subscription level, by the way, is very reasonable compared
with the £200 to £500 I have heard of from some other residents associations also responsible for their unadopted roads. In our case our subscription level is needed if we are to have any chance of affording the roughly ten year resurfacing, which last time cost us £25000, on the basis of competitive quotes. We traditionally accept a lower payment from any households entirely dependent on social benefits. All households on the unadopted part of St Helens Down were presumably informed by their solicitors, on buying their property, of this collective
legal responsibility. To my mind, residents, at least on the unadopted stretch, who do not pay, quite apart from unfairly causing their representatives extra work, are freewheeling on those of us who do. lf the number refusing to pay continues, it is likely to lead to us being able to afford only patching in future years and no further resurfacing, with the consequences suggested at the top of the page.



The Good News


Having said all this, we thank the following households on the unadopted part of St Helens Down which paid their subscription last year: numbers 2,2A,3,4,6,7,8,10,12,13,15,17,23,24,25,25A,27,28,30,31,32,33,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,

45,46,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,56,58,62,66,68,70,74.

If you did not pay, please would you add last year's subscription (of £60) to the £70 for this year. If you think you did pay, but are not on this list, our apologies, and please let us know.



Garden Party?

There have been suggestions for a residents garden party from all three roads or some residents opening their gardens on a given day. Probably too late for this year. But next? If you have views on this or other issues affecting our roads, you can ring me on 428791 or reach our website on: http://sthelensdownresidents.blogspot.com/



Lyndhurst Avenue, Amberstone Close and Upper St Helens Down - Contacts

Brian and Margaret Buck have done great work over many years in Lyndhurst Avenue as our contact people there and John McCallion has kindly done the same in Amberstone in recent years. We thank them all wholeheartedly. Likewise Don Barron, who did the same with his wife Doreen, in upper St Helens Down.



Meanwhile our good wishes to all residents in our three roads for the rest of the summer,



Stewart Anderson

Chairman, St Helens Down Residents Association





Please print the slip below, complete and return to..

Peter Cooper, Hon. Treasurer SHDRA, 41 St Helens Down, Hastings TN34 2BG



ST HELENS DOWN RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION

Subscription for 2011 (£70 per house)



Surname:_______________________________________________



House no. _______ St Helens Down/Amberstone Close/Lyndhurst Avenue





Cash: £____________ Cheque: £ ____________





Date: ____________



Cheques to be made out to St Helens Down Residents Association.

Receipts will be issued only for cash. Thank you.