LA013 - Land north of the A1071, Sproughton

Showing comments 1 to 18 of 18

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 16505

Received: 12/09/2019

Respondent: Mr Clive Harris

Representation:

This would add to global warming. It would change the climate in the wrong direction. For Policy Area LA013, the intention is to take farming land currently used for growing cereal crops and assign it for housing. Whilst the crops absorb Carbon Dioxide from the atmosphere, the housing would release Carbon Dioxide to the atmosphere. The plan offers no evidence why mitigation or adaption is favoured over the alternative of avoidance or prevention.

Full text:

This would add to global warming. It would change the climate in the wrong direction. For Policy Area LA013, the intention is to take farming land currently used for growing cereal crops and assign it for housing. Whilst the crops absorb Carbon Dioxide from the atmosphere, the housing would release Carbon Dioxide to the atmosphere. The plan offers no evidence why mitigation or adaption is favoured over the alternative of avoidance or prevention.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 16717

Received: 18/09/2019

Respondent: Christina Galvin

Representation:

Looking at typical morning rush hour traffic on GoogleMaps the surrounding area already has longest RED sections in Ipswich (Copdock roundabout, Hadleigh/Swan Hill roundabout etc) which can only get worse with this & other developments planned in Capel/Washbrook etc. Through Sproughton is the quickest exit from here to A14 west (as Copdock roundabout so bad) & with the parked cars this can become gridlocked -through a small village!

This was also part of a 'green corridor' map from the centre of Ipswich out - this cannot be healthy for the people & environment of Ipswich to remove this feature.

Full text:

Looking at typical morning rush hour traffic on GoogleMaps the surrounding area already has longest RED sections in Ipswich (Copdock roundabout, Hadleigh/Swan Hill roundabout etc) which can only get worse with this & other developments planned in Capel/Washbrook etc. Through Sproughton is the quickest exit from here to A14 west (as Copdock roundabout so bad) & with the parked cars this can become gridlocked -through a small village!

This was also part of a 'green corridor' map from the centre of Ipswich out - this cannot be healthy for the people & environment of Ipswich to remove this feature.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17086

Received: 24/09/2019

Respondent: Suffolk Preservation Society

Representation:

SPS objects to this allocation due to the impact on the listed Red House Farm and Springvale and the registered part and garden (Chantry Park) - significance of these important heritage assets will be harmed through development within their countryside setting

SPS objects to the term ‘close setting of heritage assets’ which is not helpful in protecting the significance of heritage assets which may have extensive settings contributing to their significance. ‘Close setting’ should be replaced with ‘setting’ as the extent of an asset's setting and contribution it makes to its significance should be assessed for each proposal.

Full text:

SPS objects to this allocation due to the impact on the listed properties (Red House Farm and Springvale) and the registered part and garden (Chantry Park). The significance of these important heritage assets will be harmed through this major development within their countryside setting on the edge of Ipswich.

SPS objects to the use of the term ‘close setting of heritage assets’ within the policies accompanying the site allocations. It is unclear what the term ‘close setting’ refers to but it is not helpful in protecting the significance of heritage assets which may have extensive settings which contribute to the significance of the asset. The term is not compliant with the NPPF para 194 or Historic England Guidance Note The Setting of Heritage Assets Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (Second Edition). ‘Close setting’ should be replaced with ‘setting’ as the extent of an asset's setting and the contribution it makes to the significance of a heritage asset should be assessed for each proposal.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17151

Received: 25/09/2019

Respondent: Neil & Claire Fuller

Representation:

Object for the adverse impacts these developments will have on these currently undeveloped locations but also because they will significantly contribute to the traffic-related impacts on Sproughton residents of B1113 and adjoining roads and impacts on Sproughton residents of B1113 and adjoining roads and impacts on environmental assets either at a site level or, collectively at a landscape level. Overall, this represents a negative impact on the local community of Sproughton contrary to the overarching objectives set out in the Issues & Options consultation for Healthy Communities & Infrastructure and Environment, and contrary to this consultation's promoted assertion that these Housing allocations are in the right place.

Full text:

Please see attached for full submission.

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17547

Received: 25/09/2019

Respondent: Mr Nick Ridley

Representation:

With LA014 these two developments will add some 1600 houses or 20% of the whole Babergh housing target. Not necessarily expected that LA013 would cross the western side of Hadleigh Road, thus eliminating most of what is known as Chantry Vale-a green lung between Ipswich and the surrounding villages. Believe Wolsey Grange 2 was originally suggested for 800 houses, which would have kept it to the eastern side only of Hadleigh Road. Should be for 800 houses only to the north of the A1071 and east of Hadleigh Road. 1300 houses represents the maximum the parish and traffic infrastructure can assimilate. Adding Copdock and Washbrook and Capel I believe this part of the District is taking a very full eight of the housing target for the whole District and Ipswich Fringe.

Full text:

See attachment for submission.

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17566

Received: 27/09/2019

Respondent: Dr and Mrs D Brennand

Agent: Ben Elvin Planning Consultancy Limited

Representation:

The proposed allocation gives rise to significant harm to a valued landscape, causes unjustified and unnecessary harm to heritage assets, would give rise to drainage and flooding issues and is undeliverable.

Full text:

Please see attachments for full submission.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17573

Received: 27/09/2019

Respondent: Pinewood Parish Council

Representation:

Met with Taylor Wimpey who have assured us that they have no plans to build more than the 750 homes for which they will shortly be placing a planning application. Doubts were expressed by them that it would actually be possible to build 1,100 on the site.

Full text:

Pinewood Parish Council Response to JLP Consultation September 2019
Pinewood Parish Council wishes to object to being labelled “a market town and urban area” as stated on Page 232 of the Joint Local Plan consultation document.
The Parish of Pinewood is made up of the former Brookwood and Pinebrook estates and the more recently built Thorington Park estate. It would be more accurately described as being a suburban settlement, part of the Ipswich Fringe area, as are the neighbouring villages which also form part of Babergh.
We have been led to believe that Babergh District Council has a points system for determining the classification of settlements and that certain amenities attract a given number of points. This may seem to be a reasonable idea in theory but in practice has resulted in our parish being given a classification that does not bear any resemblance to what it is really like.
Pinewood is indeed a pleasant place to live with many features to recommend it, but it does not conform to the image of what many people would recognise as a market town in the way that a town such as Hadleigh does.
We therefore ask that that more thought be given to formulating a more suitable and realistic classification for Pinewood.

Though the Taylor Wimpey developments are strictly speaking in the Parish of Sproughton, this parish and its infrastructure will nevertheless be affected by them. We therefore seek clarification of the increased number of dwellings proposed for Taylor Wimpey Wolsey Grange Phase 2 development site. The JLP document contains the following figures:
Page 250 LA014 Taylor Wimpey Phase One: permission for 475 dwellings.
LA013 Taylor Wimpey Phase Two: proposed 1,100 dwellings.
In our conversations with representatives from Taylor Wimpey this number of dwellings has never been quoted, in fact when we recently met with them they appeared to be as surprised as we were at this new increased figure. We were assured that they have no plans to build more than the 750 homes for which they will shortly be placing a planning application with Babergh District Council. In fact doubts were expressed by them that it would actually be possible to build 1,100 houses on this site.
The document states that figures quoted in the tables showing proposals for building homes in the district are ’minimum figures’. This causes us some concern as we have already pointed out that the figures in the table quoted are already greater than we or the developers were aware of.
We therefore ask that the correct figures for this site are included as part of the JLP.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 18274

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Representation:

Add: An archaeological assessment and measures for managing impacts on archaeological remains are provided.
A flood risk assessment should be carried out to identify suitable mitigation and a deliverable strategy for the disposal of surface water. Where possible development should avoid proportions of the site with predicted or historic flooding.
Rights of Way within the site and within the vicinity of the site should be retained and enhanced to enable access to the countryside and active transport.
Policy should require a transport assessment to determine existing and projected capacity and any mitigation required The policy and IDP should require cycle links as well as pedestrian links.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments:

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 18549

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Historic England

Representation:

Site lies immediately to the north-east of the Grade II listed Springvale, and the south-west of the Grade II listed Red House, and Barn circa 20 metres south east of Red House, and immediately abuts the Grade II Registered Park and Garden known as Chantry Park. Considered that development of this site has the potential to impact upon the setting of these designated heritage assets. Any development will therefore need to be sensitively designed with appropriate landscaping. We would suggest that built development is restricted in the land immediately to the south-west of Grade II Red House and Barn, with the land being used for public open space to retain a sense of openness and connection between the house and the wider agricultural landscape beyond. In addition we would recommend that the boundary with Chantry Park is sensitively designed with appropriate landscaping.
We therefore welcome criterion IV of the policy which references the setting of the heritage assets, but suggest that this criterion is amended to make reference to preserving and enhancing the settings of the Red House, and Barn, and Chantry Park.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 18833

Received: 29/09/2019

Respondent: Mr Peter Powell

Representation:

The new JLP proposal to remove the Special Landscape Designation from this area removes an objective policy that protected this historic farmland scene.Wildlife and Biodiversity connect ability (greenways) is also a significant issue to ensure the Ancient tree lined wildlife area of Chantry Park remains substantially connected to the Gipping Valley Corridor to ensure a positive wildlife future for Chantry Park.


.

Full text:

Please see attachment

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19003

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Sproughton Working Group

Representation:

The new JLP proposal to remove the Special Landscape Designation from this area removes an objective policy that protected this historic farmland scene.

It is unclear why the policy does not provide for the impact of this site on the designated Habitat sites in the HRA report.

This site will impact ecologically on the protected Orwell sites due to its location and the primary recommendation by NE and NPPF is to try and avoid impacts can be done by creating a country park in the Chantry Vale which is also a recommendation in the BDC Green Infrastructure Framework since 2012.

Wildlife and Biodiversity connect ability (greenways) is also a significant issue to ensure the Ancient tree lined wildlife area of Chantry Park remains substantially connected to the Gipping Valley Corridor to ensure a positive wildlife future for Chantry Park.

Full text:

Please see attached consultation response

Attachments:

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19059

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Building Partnerships Ltd

Agent: La Ronde Wright Limited

Representation:

Building Partnerships Limited supports the proposed mixed use allocations LA014 and
LA013. I
The entire Site SS1185 is well situated as a sustainable extension to the settlement.
Detailed assessments have been prepared in support of the site’s development and are
available upon request.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments:

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19083

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Ipswich Borough Council

Representation:

LA013 and LA014 together represent a substantial new residential allocation on the western edge of Ipswich, for 1,100 and 475 dwellings respectively and 4ha of employment land. LA013 is subject to a planning application (DC/19/02571) for 800 dwellings which is pending. IBC have provided comments on the application. IBC are unclear why the number of dwellings proposed differs between the application and site sheet. Given the proximity of the site to the IBC boundary Chantry Park, and the nature and scale of the development it is considered that the impact on Ipswich should be assessed and appropriate mitigation identified within the site sheet, and secured as part of any planning permission that might be granted.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19096

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Sproughton Parish Council

Representation:

The new JLP proposal to remove the Special Landscape Designation from this area removes an objective policy that protected this historic farmland scene.

It is unclear why the policy does not provide for the impact of this site on the designated Habitat sites in the HRA report.

Full text:

Please see attached consultation response

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19127

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary

Agent: Lawson Planning Partnership Ltd.

Representation:

Insert a new paragraph (below healthcare provision) as follows:
X. Contributions, to the satisfaction of the LPA, towards police facilities provision.
Provision of Additional Household Waste Recycling to become paragraph XI.
Improving local pedestrian links to become paragraph XII.
Junction improvements on the A1071 to become paragraph XIII.
Full assessment of increased discharge on the watercourse, and relevant mitigation measures to become paragraph XIV.

Full text:

Please see attachments for full submission.

Attachments:

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19608

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Boyer Planning

Representation:

It is welcomed that Land North and South of the A1071 have been identified as emerging allocations, noted as LA013 and LA014 respectively. Both allocations lie entirely within Taylor Wimpey's land ownership, this significantly de-risks the site. The area shown on emerging allocation LA013 does not include the full extent of land within Taylor Wimpey’s land ownership and the area of land that has been, and continues to be, promoted. To confirm, Taylor Wimpey are promoting the land which lies entirely within their ownership, as identified on the accompanying Site Location Plan. This area of land is being promoted for approximately 800 dwellings.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.

Attachments:

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19785

Received: 27/09/2019

Respondent: Dr and Mrs D Brennand

Agent: Ben Elvin Planning Consultancy Limited

Representation:

The proposed allocation gives rise to significant harm to a valued landscape, causes unjustified and unnecessary harm to heritage assets, would give rise to drainage and flooding issues and is undeliverable.

Full text:

Please see attachments for full submission.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 19868

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Mrs Rhona Jermyn

Representation:

The new JLP proposal to remove the Special Landscape Designation from this area removes an objective policy that protected this historic farmland scene.

It is unclear why the policy does not provide for the impact of this site on the designated Habitat sites in the HRA report.

This site will impact ecologically on the protected Orwell sites due to its location and the primary recommendation by NE and NPPF is to try and avoid impacts can be done by creating a country park in the Chantry Vale which is also a recommendation in the BDC Green Infrastructure Framework since 2012.

Wildlife and Biodiversity connect ability (greenways) is also a significant issue to ensure the Ancient tree lined wildlife area of Chantry Park remains substantially connected to the Gipping Valley Corridor to ensure a positive wildlife future for Chantry Park.

Full text:

Please see attached document

Attachments: