LA098 - Land south of High Road, Leavenheath

Showing comments 1 to 9 of 9

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 16247

Received: 10/08/2019

Respondent: Mrs sheila phillips

Representation:

where is the entrance and exit to site? How many affordable properties, what type of properties?Object strongly if wanted to live on top of housing area would have moved to one.
Noise, dirt, dust and general inconvenience, lost view of trees and privacy. Drain and sewerage
is bad now do not need more houses.

Full text:

where is the entrance and exit to site? How many affordable properties, what type of properties?Object strongly if wanted to live on top of housing area would have moved to one.
Noise, dirt, dust and general inconvenience, lost view of trees and privacy. Drain and sewerage
is bad now do not need more houses.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 16457

Received: 05/09/2019

Respondent: Mr E Skinner

Representation:

Its proposed that some 40 dwellings are built between now and 2031 in Leavenheath, this is all very well but at present local schools are near capacity plus the same can be said for local doctors. Road safety and improving exits onto the High Road is a must. To build these dwellings there has to be the questions of drainage, how will it cope. This all has an overall impact on Leavenheath and all aspects for the future of Leavenheath will need to be fully debated and consulted before any new developments being one dwelling or more.

Full text:

Please see attached document

Attachments:

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 16472

Received: 10/09/2019

Respondent: Mr Kevin Colling

Representation:

No school, doctors, or dentist in Leavenheath, will put further strain and demand on neighbouring villages. Infrastructure already at capacity and issues are increased further by potential development at Harrow Street and Honey Tye. Local bus service reduced. Very little street lighting in Leavenheath, which is part of the character of the village and important to retain.
Various species of wildlife, bats and dormice, need to be protected as would hedgerows. Sewage is piped under the proposed site, essential drainage is not disturbed or damaged. Increased traffic on High Road and junction with A134 would create safety and noise issues. Building work would have a harmful effect on the village.

Full text:

Joint Local Plan - Preferred Options (Reg 18) - July 2019
Leavenheath High Road

I would like to make the following comments in regards to the proposed Leavenheath High Road development.

Infrastructure:
There is no school, doctors, or dentist in Leavenheath and the increase in population will put further strain and demand on the schools and doctors/dental practices in neighbouring villages. Schools are already at capacity and lengthy appointment delays are already a reality at the doctors and dental practises. Any additional local government funding that may be provided would not be available until some years after any development is complete.

Local bus services have already been reduced and this will result in mobility and transportation problems for the increased population.

These infrastructure issues are increased further by the potential development in Leavenheath at Harrow Street and Honey Tye.

Lighting:
There is very little street lighting in Leavenheath which is part of the character of the village. It would be important to retain this aspect particular for those residents whose properties would overlook any new development.

Wildlife & Hedgerows:
There are various species of wildlife, such as bats and dormice, which live in the proposed site and surrounding hedgerows. This wildlife would need to be protected as would the hedgerows under the Hedgerows Regulations.

Drainage:
A lot of the sewage from village properties is piped underground across the proposed site to the Honey Tye pumping station. It is essential that this drainage is not disturbed or damaged in any way.

Traffic:
There would be a significant increase in traffic on the High Road and also at the junction with the A134. This would create safety and noise issues for the village.

Building Work:
Any building work would have a harmful effect on the tranquillity of the village with significant noise and dirt being created. There would be the added problems of lorry traffic, disruption to the High Road traffic flow, plus parking issues caused by the building workers.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 16686

Received: 17/09/2019

Respondent: Boxford (Suffolk) Holdings

Agent: Orwell Project Management

Representation:

The landowner wishes for the site allocation to be larger than just half site (40 homes). This is on the grounds that there is a demand to provide a sheltered scheme to meet the needs of the elderly as well as a desire to provide local homes for the landowners workforce employed in the group as part of the housing allocation. A larger site is needed to allow the landowner and subsequent developer to achieve this within the number of homes provided as part of the affordable homes provision.

Full text:

We write from Orwell Project Management and are representing the landowners (Boxford Suffolk Holdings) in this matter in relation to site LA098 at land south of High Road Leavenheath. Currently this land is providing an income to Boxford (Suffolk) Farms as part of their horticultural business which will be forgone from the business to allow the land to be allocated for housing. The group have recognised a local need for sheltered/elderly accommodation in the community they serve and are keen, as part of the affordable housing provision, to provide such a facility for the benefit of Leavenheath and surrounding areas. This will work well with the existing facility with catering services provided by the Stoke by Nayland Hotel that form part of the group.
We therefore ask that you please reconsider the current proposed housing on only half of the site being put forward for allocation. In order to provide a modern, equipped sheltered facility capable of meeting the future needs of an ageing population that incorporates the latest dementia friendly design, necessary communal space and light and landscaping, the whole site is required to be allocated for this facility to be incorporated.. This makes the provision of such a facility viable under the S106 obligations with a larger site also generating the necessary profits from the development for this facility to be provided. Furthermore we feel that this facility can only be provided in lieu of the community shop outlined on the earlier submission. In addition to this, on the remainder of the affordable housing element, the group are also keen to provide homes for rent for their local workforce for the remaining affordable housing element. SBN and BSF are large employers locally and contributors to the local economy and the high local house prices has created issues with staff retention and recruitment and our keen to retain ownership of houses specifically for this purpose, which ideally they would want to build and complete in the next 3 years
Furthermore by allocating only half the land, this leaves our client with a smaller residue of land that becomes a less viable area to cultivate. We therefore strongly request that the proposed allocation is increased and wish for the whole site to be allocated as presented, which our master plans shows has the potential for 80 houses.
This number is necessary to return enough profit to build the facilities mentioned above and also to compensate for the change in use and the loss of associated profits. We are keen to explore the above with Babergh DC and discuss how the above housing and local housing initiatives can be delivered as soon as possible as part of the development.
Greg Dodds
Orwell Project Management
On behalf of Boxford Suffolk Holdings.

Sept 19

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17668

Received: 28/09/2019

Respondent: Mrs Gay Amott

Representation:

I think it is quite shortsighted to build so many houses in the hamlet. We have a diminishing bus service, so every house would have at least one car to get to work. We have no shops, no school, no doctors surgery. The hospitals in the area are already overwhelmed with all the building going on in Gt Horkesley and Mile End. Access would be onto the High Road and the A134 which is already very difficult at certain times of the day. People moved here to get away from suburbia now it’s coming to meet us.

Full text:

I think it is quite shortsighted to build so many houses in the hamlet. We have a diminishing bus service, so every house would have at least one car to get to work. We have no shops, no school, no doctors surgery. The hospitals in the area are already overwhelmed with all the building going on in Gt Horkesley and Mile End. Access would be onto the High Road and the A134 which is already very difficult at certain times of the day. People moved here to get away from suburbia now it’s coming to meet us.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 18008

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Martin

Representation:

I wish to register my objection to any housing development on this orchard. There are 16,000 trees there producing apples and oxygenating the air helping
to reduce the pollution from the nearby A134. This hamlet does not have any shops, schools,doctors dentists whatsoever. Another housing development would add even more to the already heavy traffic. Whilst I appreciate the government's policies, it is not in the best interests of anyone to keep building houses on any stretch of land without adding the necessary infer structure!

Full text:

Subject: Leavenheath, orchard land off High Road



I wish to register my objection to any housing development on this orchard.
There are 16,000 trees there producing apples and oxygenating the air helping
to reduce the pollution from the nearby A134. This hamlet does not have any
shops, schools,doctors dentists whatsoever. Another housing development would add
even more to the already heavy traffic. Whilst I appreciate the government's policies, it is not in
the best interests of anyone to keep building houses on any stretch of land without
adding the necessary infer structure!
Margaret Martin, Resident.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 18024

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Mr Peter Hore

Representation:

We have no facilities in Leavenheath. My understanding is this area is a Hamlet and a large development of 40 dwellings on part of the current usage as an apple orchard, is far too many.
There is a lovely line of oak trees on the roadside which for environmental reasons must be retained. Am very concerned with road safety particularly at the T junction at the A134. A mini roundabout might solve this problem
The current main drain which crosses the land is fairly regularly have to be cleared so another 40 dwellings is going to exacerbate the situation

Full text:

We have no facilities in Leavenheath. My understanding is this area is a Hamlet and a large development of 40 dwellings on part of the current usage as an apple orchard, is far too many.
There is a lovely line of oak trees on the roadside which for environmental reasons must be retained. Am very concerned with road safety particularly at the T junction at the A134. A mini roundabout might solve this problem
The current main drain which crosses the land is fairly regularly have to be cleared so another 40 dwellings is going to exacerbate the situation

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 18346

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Representation:

Public Right of Way on southern boundary of site should be retained and enhanced, to enable access to the countryside and active transport
It is recommended the IDP includes more detail on the requirements for the site: The site would benefit from a footway along the frontage, linking into footways on the Junction at Mapel Way. This site has no safe route to school. Home to school transport contributions will be required. Policy should include a requirement for a footway along the frontage of the site, which connects to the existing footway network.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19124

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary

Agent: Lawson Planning Partnership Ltd.

Representation:

Insert a new paragraph (below education provision) as follows:
V. Contributions, to the satisfaction of the LPA, towards police facilities provision.

Full text:

Please see attachments for full submission.

Attachments: