Seaton Development

[Donkey Kong]

Two points;
1.  I don't see anything the matter with the small development where Hornseys is, why the outrage with regards it's architecture?  It's been built to a budget and isn't offensive.  What do people want / expect, do they want the council to stipulate in planning that only an architectural masterpiece can be erected and therefore price the development out of happening?
2.  In order to get a CPO you have to have a planned use for the building / land and that is why HBC cannot just go around CPOing anywhere they want to in town.  It is also why the Millhouse Masterplan being approved is a key aspect in being able to issue a CPO on the Odeon building.

[Stig of the Seaton Dump]

The building that houses the Horney restaurant is definitely one that doesn't appeal to a lot of people, all a question of personal taste.
Many think it looks like a featureless modern prison, me included.

Look at this for something more fitting with the seaside, lovely views and facilities for surfers even !

http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1966868

[Donkey Kong]

The building that houses the Horney restaurant is definitely one that doesn't appeal to a lot of people, all a question of personal taste.

I doubt that it "appeals" to many people, it doesn't "appeal" to me.  But my point was that I don't find it offensive or worthy of the abuse that it gets on here from people with nothing better to do who appear to be under the sad misapprehension that every new building should have to "appeal" to them.

[Stig of the Seaton Dump]

Nothing wrong with being opinionated.

For example, the redevelopment of the CO-OP building was a magnificent job, stopped us losing one of the best buildings in our town.
The Mail print room building must be one of the ugliest buildings in Hartlepool, a slab of featureless bricks and criminal that it is so close to The Wesley.

Doesn't having strong feelings and finding buildings offensive show that people care, even if they accept that they can't change the world ?

It would be interesting to hear opinions on what was the last aesthetically pleasing 'new build' building to be built in Hartlepool.

[brassed off monkey]

I was commenting on the aesthetic appearance of the building at the old baths site, the 6` railings & gates don`t help, if i didn`t give a flying f**k about the town i would probably be sitting at home reading old copies of the Beano, as it it Hartlepool has lots going for it, it`s just that we don`t make the most of the town.

As for new buildings, i quite like the new 6th form, it has kept the facade of the old Brinkburn Grammar School as an interior feature & looks to be reasonably well built, jury is out on the new College though for me, it is like so many other modern buildings so has no real appeal.

[Donkey Kong]

I was commenting on the aesthetic appearance of the building at the old baths site, the 6` railings & gates don`t help...

I would say that the railings DO help in keeping the buildings secure which surely is a prerequisite for most or all busineses? 

Although the railings are not secure enough to keep people out they do form a visual barrier by which the police or anybody else can see if there is somebody hanging around in there who shouldn't be when the gates are locked and the busineses are closed.

At least they haven't erected 3m high electified pallisade fencing in order to keep the buildings secure, then you'd all have had something potentially reasonable to whine about.

[steveL]

The council did underspend last year mostly through actively trying to cut costs because it knows it has to find £20m of savings over the next 5 years and is facing a deficit this year and every year for the forseeable future. £4m of savings was quite an achievement actually, but as soon as it was announced it started burning a hole in the pockets of the Labour lot who have already raided it to fund some of their pet projects.

[GXDN]

I don't think the building at Seaton is offensive though I wouldn't say it was a brilliant example of architecture either. It's just another example of the cheap, short-lived structures we build these days. I do object to the security fencing though which ruins the whole site for me. It's sad but if we cann't put up such buildings without turning them into Fort Knox, perhaps we shouldn't bother. It says so much about the crime levels in town which we are constantly being told are falling through the floor - if that's really true then why do we need such over-the-top security fencing?

[The Great Dictator]

The bungalow effect was to silence the critics and their view of the sea, Another party of whom i know wanted to develop the site into
apartments on 2 floors, i saw the plans and they were very classy but no said the planners and jealous Seaton moaners. So there you have it, a
low level retail unit, exactly what you asked for.

[Stig of the Seaton Dump]

The bungalow effect was to silence the critics and their view of the sea, Another party of whom i know wanted to develop the site into
apartments on 2 floors, i saw the plans and they were very classy but no said the planners and jealous Seaton moaners. So there you have it, a
low level retail unit, exactly what you asked for.

I am not aware of anybody asking for a prison block.
Look at the link to the Ocean Cafe at Scarborough that I posted. The ground level has shutters over the hatches and the outside seating has a small wall around it with no gate.
I visited Hornsey's once and felt I should be wearing an orange boilersuit, it always feels like us and them walking past it, so I never pop in for a drink on my daily walk.

P.S. I an a long in the tooth Seatonian and I would have loved to have lived that bit closer to the sea had some properties been built there.
We all moan, just about different things.

[Inspector Knacker]

The building that houses the Horney restaurant is definitely one that doesn't appeal to a lot of people, all a question of personal taste.

I doubt that it "appeals" to many people, it doesn't "appeal" to me.  But my point was that I don't find it offensive or worthy of the abuse that it gets on here from people with nothing better to do who appear to be under the sad misapprehension that every new building should have to "appeal" to them.

If it 'doesn't appeal', logically it can't be very good, so basically it's unimaginative and bland. When it comes to criticising a building I don't differentiate between old and new, I prefer to choose between good and bad .... it's not very good, it's age is irrelevant so kindly stop assuming that criticism of a poor modern building is not by implication criticism of every modern building.

[The Great Dictator]

It went through the planning system and after much consultation with the knowledge of the 3 Seaton councillors was legally passed.

[Stig of the Seaton Dump]

2 of the 3 councillors never reply to anything in my experience, so I think it is fair to say that what ever happens is only their personal agenda.

[brassed off monkey]

It went through the planning system and after much consultation with the knowledge of the 3 Seaton councillors was legally passed.

So, a bit like the massive "Dumps" at either end of Seaton then.

[Donkey Kong]

The building that houses the Horney restaurant is definitely one that doesn't appeal to a lot of people, all a question of personal taste.

I doubt that it "appeals" to many people, it doesn't "appeal" to me.  But my point was that I don't find it offensive or worthy of the abuse that it gets on here from people with nothing better to do who appear to be under the sad misapprehension that every new building should have to "appeal" to them.

If it 'doesn't appeal', logically it can't be very good, so basically it's unimaginative and bland. When it comes to criticising a building I don't differentiate between old and new, I prefer to choose between good and bad .... it's not very good, it's age is irrelevant so kindly stop assuming that criticism of a poor modern building is not by implication criticism of every modern building.

So do you think that shop or restaurant units should be built to a high architectural design quality regardless of the cost of construction in order that you can judge it's merits?   I suppose that's one way to stop anything being built or developed. 

I thought that you were against the do nothing approach?  Will you apply the same logic if IOR get the football ground and are allowed to build a new stand?  Will it have to be architecturally inspiring?  Will the proposed new leisure centre have to be breathtakingly stunning visually?  Or are you selective in your judgements?