Claydon with part Barham

Showing comments and forms 1 to 3 of 3


BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 16860

Received: 20/09/2019

Respondent: Barham Parish Council


Barham Parish Council objects to all three development areas proposed for our village. See attached for more details. The Parish Council has proposed an alternative development site.

Full text:

Please see attached consultation response



BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 17316

Received: 26/09/2019

Respondent: Bidwells LLP


Claydon is a highly sustainable location, being designated as a Core Village in the Ipswich Fringe. Consequently opportunities to accommodate residential development here should be maximised, and land to the south of the village, east of Old Ipswich Road, should be allocated for residential-led development, in addition to the sites to the north and east of the village. The site is entirely suitable for development, is available and viable, and therefore is deliverable .

Full text:

Introduction and Background

On behalf of our clients, the Cowell and Faccini families, we strongly recommend that additional land to the south of Claydon is allocated for residential-led redevelopment of approximately 250 dwellings. The site, an extension to site SS0123 to the east of Old Ipswich Road, was submitted to the Council in March 2019, but has not been formally considered in the preparation of the Joint Local Plan (JLP) Preferred Options document. In accordance with the advice contained on the Council’s website, we have resubmitted the New Site Submission Form for the site.

Justification for Proposed Allocation

The JLP Preferred Options document, at paragraph 08.01, advises that development needs to be accommodated in settlements where the need to travel can be reduced through good access to services and facilities, and where significant adverse impacts can be avoided or mitigated. At paragraph 08.04, the JLP Preferred Options document states that, “it is important that development is proportionate to the provision of services and facilities within those settlements, and as such the Ipswich Fringe, Market Towns/Urban Areas and Core Villages categories will take the largest levels of growth”. The resultant Housing Spatial Distribution set out in Policy SP04 advises that, within Mid Suffolk, the Ipswich Fringe is expected to deliver a total of 1,881 new homes in the period 2018-2036 (15% of the total housing requirement), the Market Towns and Urban Areas 2,139 (25%) and Core Villages a further 5,248 new homes (43%).

Claydon (with part Barham) is designated as a Core Village, and is also located within the Mid Suffolk Ipswich Fringe, being situated less than 3.5 miles north of the centre of Ipswich. As such, it is a highly sustainable location, and one of only two settlements in Mid Suffolk that benefit from both designations (the other being Bramford). The majority of settlements located in the Mid Suffolk Ipswich Fringe are small; other than Claydon and Bramford, only two settlements (Great Blakenham (28), and Whitton (190)) are planned to deliver any additional housing in the Plan period. Claydon benefits from excellent sustainable transport links to Ipswich, being located on Sustrans cycle route 51, and enjoying a frequent bus service. Consequently, opportunities for development in this location should be maximised.

In addition, Claydon and Great Blakenham are together recognised as a key strategic employment location, of significant importance to the District’s economy. Policy SP05 of the JLP Preferred Options document seeks to protect and support expansion of employment opportunities in this area. Housing is required to support the planned economic growth in and around Ipswich, and specifically within Claydon.
Consequently, opportunities for significant expansion of the village should be embraced, in line with paragraph 72 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which recognises that the supply of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as significant extensions to existing villages and towns, provided that they are well located and designed, and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities. Given that our client’s site is entirely suitable for residential development, and is available for development without delay, we strongly recommend that it is allocated for development, in addition to the sites identified to the north and east of Claydon.

The JLP Preferred Options document acknowledges in paragraph 06.07 that delivery is a key challenge, and that in recent years delivery rates have been below the adopted requirements and have not kept pace with local need. Allocating additional land in Claydon will reduce the pressure on other Core Villages and settlements lower down the settlement hierarchy, which are less sustainable and more heavily constrained.

The remainder of this Representation provides further detail on the deliverability of the site, in terms of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) definition.

Assessment of Deliverability

In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework’s (NPPF) definitions of ‘deliverable’ and ‘developable’, set out in the glossary, the site represents a suitable location for development now, is available immediately and is achievable with a realistic prospect of housing being delivered on the site within five years.


As previously described, Claydon (with part Barham) is identified in the JLP Preferred Options document as a Core Village, within the Ipswich Fringe, and as such it is one of the most sustainable locations within Mid Suffolk. The suitability of Claydon as a location for significant growth has already been demonstrated in the preceding section of this Representation, and is reflected in the quantum of allocations proposed in the JLP Preferred Options document, and consequently, the remainder of this section focusses on the suitability of the site itself.

The site is located to the south of the village, immediately adjacent to the existing settlement limit and existing residential development, and would infill the gap between the village and Hill View Business Park to the south. Development in this location would represent a logical and proportionate extension to the existing settlement, and unlike the proposed allocations to the north and east of the village, would have the significant advantage that traffic leaving the site would not need to travel through the village to access the A14.

The site benefits from an extensive frontage along Old Ipswich Road, meaning that provision of a safe access is entirely feasible. The site is also well connected to the existing network of Public Rights of Way in the surrounding area. A public footpath runs along the northern edge of the site, and connects through to Hazel Rise in the north-eastern corner of the site, providing easy access into the centre of the village and the services available.

In landscape terms, the site is located within the Rolling Estate Farmlands Landscape Character Area, where key objectives are to maintain separation between settlements and retain woodland plantations. A Landscape Character and Visual Appraisal has been prepared by Wynne-Williams Associates, which concludes that the site is considered to hold landscape value in terms of agricultural potential, scenic and recreational worth. However, the lack of designation or rare landscape features limits the site’s value to local. The northern part of the site is well contained by the local topography and mature vegetation, and development here would have minimal landscape impact. The southern part of the site is, potentially, more sensitive as it sits on the sloping side of the Gipping valley. However, it is significantly affected by visual intrusion from the A14 corridor, which has eroded the landscape character, and residential development would not represent a high magnitude of landscape change. Development in this location would not result in coalescence with Whitton; a significant undeveloped gap would remain between the two settlements. It is worth noting that the proposed allocation sites to the north and east of the village are located within the same Landscape Character Area and have been deemed suitable for development.

There are a number of heritage impacts within the vicinity of the site, including a cluster of Grade II Listed Buildings on Old Ipswich Road and Church Lane. In addition, Grade II* Mockbeggars Hall is located on the opposite side of the A14, and the Grade I Listed Church of St Peter. Claydon Hall, a Grade II Listed Building, is situated to the east of the site. An initial Heritage Assessment has been prepared by Bob Kindred Heritage Consultants and confirms that development of the site would have no material impact on the setting and heritage significance of the nearby designated heritage assets. It is worth noting that the proposed allocation sites are all within close proximity of the Grade I Listed Church of St Mary and St Peter, Barham, and development here has been deemed appropriate. Indeed, site LA002 lies immediately adjacent to the churchyard.

The site is located entirely within Flood Zone 1 and is therefore not exposed to flooding from overtopping of a Main River or other significantly sized watercourse. It is not of any known ecological value, and is currently in arable use.

As previously identified, Claydon already provides a wide range of services and facilities, and Ipswich is within easy reach via sustainable transport modes. The site is of sufficient size that it can provide additional infrastructure, such as a primary school and/or additional healthcare facilities, should this be considered necessary.

It is also worth noting that at paragraph 72, the NPPF advises that, when identifying suitable locations for development, Local Planning Authorities should consider the opportunities presented by existing or planned investment in infrastructure. Public Consultation on an Ipswich Northern Route closed earlier in September 2019, and two of the three route options presented entailed a junction to the south of Claydon. One of the key objectives of the Ipswich Northern Route is to facilitate the delivery of an additional 10,000 homes, and should the middle or inner route be selected, it would open up opportunities for development to the south of Claydon even further.

In light of the above, it is apparent that the site is eminently suitable for residential-led development of the scale envisaged, and there are no technical issues that would threaten its delivery. An initial Masterplan, prepared by Feilden + Mawson, is included with this Representation, to demonstrate how the site could be brought forward.


The site is currently in Probate, and the Executors will pass ownership of the site to the Cowell/Faccini family within the next 6 months. The site is not restricted by any leases or restrictive covenants and is readily available for development.


The SHELAA assessment of the smaller part of the site previously submitted (SS0123) recognises that the site is capable of housing delivery within 0-5 years, while there are no legal restrictions affecting development on the land. The site is not subject to any known abnormal costs that would affect viability.


Development of the site for residential purposes is considered viable, taking into consideration the various known policy requirements in relation to matters such as affordable housing provision and CIL contributions. Should it be required, further evidence on viability can be provided at the appropriate time in the planning process as necessary, in accordance with the NPPF and associated Planning Policy Guidance on Viability.


As demonstrated above, the site is suitable, available, achievable and viable, and is therefore deliverable and developable, in line with the NPPF. The site represents an appropriate and proportionate extension to Claydon, and its allocation in addition to sites LA001, LA002 and LA003 to the north and east of the village would ensure the delivery of an appropriate quantum of new housing in this highly sustainable location. In so doing, it would also reduce the pressure on other, less sustainable and less accessible locations, to deliver significant housing growth. It is worth noting that a national housebuilder has expressed interest in taking the site forward, which further demonstrates its deliverability.

Development in this location would represent sustainable development, as defined within the NPPF. Economically, it would support employment growth in and around Ipswich, including the key strategic employment location of Claydon and Great Blakenham, providing high quality and desirable homes within easy reach.

Socially, the scale of development envisaged is such that it will enable the creation of a strong, vibrant and healthy community, with easy access to existing and planned local services and facilities, as well as onsite provision of a primary school should this be necessary, and extensive Green Infrastructure. A wide mix of dwelling types, sizes and tenures will be provided to meet local needs, and CIL payments will ensure the provision of the necessary health and cultural facilities. The site is located in close proximity to established communities in Claydon, which should assist in achieving social integration between the existing and new residents.

Environmentally, the site is located close to a wide range of employment opportunities, and enjoys good access to a range of sustainable transport options providing easy access to the extensive array of facilities and services available within Ipswich. Residents will be able to meet their day-to-day needs easily and without the need to use their car, assisting in reducing pollution and minimising the contribution to climate change.

On this basis, the site should be taken forward as an additional allocation, and is capable of making a significant contribution to the planned growth within Mid Suffolk in the period to 2036.


BMSDC Joint Local Plan Preferred Options (interactive)

Representation ID: 18352

Received: 30/09/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council


Policy needs to allocate 3 hectares of land for educational use.

Full text:

Please see attachment for full submission.