Great Cornard

Showing comments 1 to 7 of 7

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17038

Received: 24/09/2019

Respondent: Great Cornard Parish Council

Representation:

Great Cornard Cemetry has approximately 10-15 years of grave space remaining, and in 2016 the Parish Council expressed an interest in acquiring some of the land for cemetery expansion. The Council requests that the District Council formally acknowledges the need to identify a suitable site for a new cemetery in Great Cornard in the JLP and asks that the need to extend the current cemetery is considered when determining both the LA039 and LA042 site allocations.

Full text:

Please see attachments for full submission.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17532

Received: 26/09/2019

Respondent: Mr Anthony Suckling

Agent: Percival & Company

Representation:

The Joint Local Plan Consultation Document published in August 2017, identified a site to the south of Davidson Close, Great Cornard as a site being suitable for residential development (SS0220 120 to 150 units). Bearing in mind the location of the site in relationship to the existing built environment, we are surprised that it has not been included within the current preferred options document. We must therefore request that this site be revisited with a view to inclusion within the planned housing allocation proposals.

Full text:

The Joint Local Plan Consultation Document published in August 2017, identified a site to the south of Davidson Close, Great Cornard as a site being suitable for residential development (SS0220 120 to 150 units). Bearing in mind the location of the site in relationship to the existing built environment, we are surprised that it has not been included within the current preferred options document. We must therefore request that this site be revisited with a view to inclusion within the planned housing allocation proposals.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17706

Received: 29/09/2019

Respondent: Sudbury Area Green Belt Group

Representation:

SS0220: We list the important features on this delightful site. This development would be the worst kind of sprawl into natural landscape and important accessible natural greenspace. Building in the northern half, or not set well back from Prospect Hill, would be pure barbarism, and the worst sprawl into countryside. The Site Assessment is hopelessly superficial and a lure to developers. Regarding traffic, it breaches the Landscape Guidance 2015: “2.15.1 “To conserve the character of rural/green lanes …….. etc".

Full text:

Site reference: SS0220 Site location: Land south of Davidson Close (HEDGEROWS estate):
We strongly advise retaining parts of this site in their present condition. We object to the upbeat statements in the SHELAA Assessment and object that it identifies the “constraints that would require further investigation” only as: Highways, Heritage - potential impact, Contaminated land, and Flood. As this site we believe presents one of the best assets in the Sudbury area, adjacent to the main urban area and where people live, a landscape assessment will certainly be needed. Building in the northern half, or not set well back from Prospect Hill, would be pure barbarism. We believe this is a key site in Gainsborough territory, and has features that are key to the Rolling Valley Farmlands and Ancient Rolling Farmlands landscape types where it sits. The natural stream (the only one remaining in the Sudbury area), green lane known as Crabs Hill, small fields, combination of steep slopes and valley, and natural grassland, are an enchanting and scarce survival. Prospect Hill, Sheepshead Hill,Blackbrook Lane and Wells Hall Road cannot take any increase in traffic. Here we must quote of 2.15.1 of the Joint Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Council Landscape Guidance 2015: “2.15.1 “To conserve the character of rural/green lanes …….. Any proposal that would adversely affect the physical appearance of a rural lane, or give rise to an unacceptable increase in the amount of traffic using them or an unacceptable level of associated activity, noise or disturbance arising as a result of the development would be inappropriate”.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17920

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Kathy & Ray Barry

Representation:

In the SA Report - The plan suggests the old SHELAA site SS020 is included within the proposal but on an alternative basis as site ALT14, I am at a loss to establish this from the published documents. Inclusion of this site is absolutely bonkers.

Access to proposed sites is the potential difference between sustainable well being for existing residents or a living hell as a result of traffic congestion and the consequent environment impact.

Any potential access to this will require a number of existing properties to be demolished to gain access on a sustainable basis. Any works would also require changing the Black Brook and taking land from the allotment gardens and possibly front gardens of some existing properties.

Full text:

Please see attached consultation response

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19264

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Lady Hart of Chilton

Representation:

JLP states that a new primary school and preschool is planned for and funded by Chilton Woods development and that Ormiston Academy will require expansion. The IDP states that one or both of the primary schools of Wells Hall and Pot Kiln could be expanded resulting from committed growth and JLP growth. This statement therefore conflicts with what is stated in the above entry for Great Cornard about the Chilton Woods primary school. This confusion should be explained.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19549

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Hunstowe Land

Agent: Boyer Planning

Representation:

Land at Davidson Close, Great Cornard (SS0220) should be allocated within the plan. Full submission contains site location plan, landscape statement, landscape strategy plan and access appraisal.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19707

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Mr Jeremy Mee

Representation:

I have to admit that I am now losing the will to view anymore plans or reports but understand from a friend that the proposed development (which I previously objected to) is included on a reserve plan presumably if other developments do not come to fruition. If this is the case then please also register my 'objection' to this proposal on the basis of 1 - Flood Risk. 2 - Vehicular Access. 3 - Pressure on Infrastructure and Services. 4 - Pollution.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments: