Phil Evans - Re-development Proposals

11 Petworth Drive
Burgess Hill
West Sussex
RH15 8JT
22 March 2006

Burgess Hill Town Centre Re-development Proposals

As a resident in Burgess Hill since 1968, I offer the following observations on the proposed Town centre re-development:-

Anticipated Benefits – It is not clear to me what the aims of the re-development are, nor what the perceived benefits will be.

New Station Building – The proposal to construct a new station building at platform level on the west side will be highly inconvenient for those travelling to Brighton, particularly those living east of the railway. In my view the logical location for a new station building is just west of the existing on the area of scrub behind the brick wall. This would be at a slightly lower level serving a footbridge with fewer steps to both platforms and with access to back-of-platform ramps (or the existing east-side road) to provide disabled access to the present platform-level gateways. This would be convenient for passengers travelling in either direction and accessing from either side of the railway. It would face straight down Church Road allowing (with improved footpaths) easy pedestrian access to the town centre.

Station Access Road – An improved roadway could be provided from a roundabout on Station Road to serve the new station building, the platform level access, and the station car park. It could if desired ramp down across the top of the car park south of Wolstonbury Way (which could become a cul-de-sac) and lead straight into Queens Crescent and thence to a roundabout junction with Station Road.

Transport Interchange – Bus stops on both sides of the new Station Access Road (extended Queens Crescent) would provide all that is needed for all bus services to call at the railway station.

Pedestrian Route into Town Centre from Station – As well as the direct route from the new station building at the corner of the Station Access Road (the extended Queens Crescent) and Station Road, an alternative route could follow from Queens Crescent straight across Station Road and into the Market Place via the former indoor market area (now part of Wilkinsons).

Church Road – Further consideration should be given to pedestrianising the top part of Church Road. A new road would run from Mill Road behind the north-side properties to cross the existing Cyprus Road and link directly into Crescent Way with a short length of Cyprus Road reduced to a pedestrian-friendly service access. This proposal would entail the relocation of Hole’s cycle shop and the China Garden restaurant. Service access might need to be improved to the south-side properties but this appears readily practicable. Town Centre bus stops would be relocated to the new road / Crescent Way adjacent to the junction with Cyprus Road.

Car Parks – The proposals for multi-storey car parks are entirely inappropriate for a supermarket area, where trolley access on the flat is essential. We currently have over 1100 off-street public car parking spaces, a significant proportion of which are easily accessible for such trolleys. The available information gives no indication as to the numbers of available spaces in the new development – the only certain aspect is that they will be less convenient to users.

The Martletts – This, the first pedestrianised shopping area in Burgess Hill, could be dramatically improved by removal of the gloomy canopies and provision of a high-level glazed roof similar to the Market Place. There is scope for improving the appearance further with infill shops replacing the old public toilets, which would be replaced elsewhere (but at ground level, unlike those in the Market Place.

Small Shops – We have a good selection of smaller shops but, in my view, there is too high a proportion of Estate Agents and Charity shops.

Large Shops – It has to be recognised that in a ‘country’ area major retail outlets are unlikely to see any benefit in providing any shop within 10 miles of the nearest similar shop. Thus Burgess Hill and Haywards Heath are in direct competition for any ‘big-name’ outlets, with Brighton, Uckfield, East Grinstead, and Crawley all probably being sufficiently distant.

Restaurants / Cafes / Bars – Recent years have seen the development of an excellent selection of restaurants, cafes and bars. There is probably insufficient demand to support significantly more.

Town Gateway & Town Visibility – An architect’s fantasy, if ever there was one! As a stranger to any town, the main visible items I would normally seek are the signs to town-centre car parks and public toilets. We should accept that the edge-of-town sign-posting is intended to direct through traffic away from London Road and either along the A 2300 or around the by-pass. Most people driving along London Road will be either local, or heading for the town centre or the Tesco supermarket, so I see no benefit in any special treatment in that area.

Queen Elizabeth Avenue – Is there really anything wrong with this?

Station Road (Lower) – Would it not be sensible to link this to the Civic Way roundabout, making access to Oakmeeds School easier and safer?

Conclusion - In my view, there is scope to improve the town centre in a gentle and considerate manner, with some limited larger-scale development, but with no need for wholesale demolition of mostly modern property or removal of the existing car parks.

Post-script – With all the proposed increase in residential accommodation in the area, where are water supplies to be sourced?

Phil Evans