Babergh & Mid Suffolk Profile & Context

Showing comments 1 to 16 of 16

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 917

Received: 17/10/2017

Respondent: Mr David Brown

Representation:

I attended to consultation (if that is what it was) at the Blackbourne in Elmswell. With regard to the importance of the Local Plan, the material available to study and the display were wholly inadequate. There were also insufficient personnel from the District Councils. There should have been larger more detailed plans showing the likely extent of the development, not just the land that had been made available by landowners. These matters will have a significant effect on the lives of local people, and should be dealt with in a more competent, sympathetic and professional manner.

Full text:

I attended to consultation (if that is what it was) at the Blackbourne in Elmswell. With regard to the importance of the Local Plan, the material available to study and the display were wholly inadequate. There were also insufficient personnel from the District Councils. There should have been larger more detailed plans showing the likely extent of the development, not just the land that had been made available by landowners. These matters will have a significant effect on the lives of local people, and should be dealt with in a more competent, sympathetic and professional manner.

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2818

Received: 04/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Andrew Coxhead

Representation:

A local plan is needed to shape future development

Full text:

A local plan is needed to shape future development

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 3101

Received: 05/11/2017

Respondent: Iain Pocock

Representation:

It should be noted that the current infrastructure links also present a constraint - in particular the A12/A!4 intersection is anticipated to reach capacity in the next few years and there are currently no plans of funding to address this. Planning therefore needs to consider how to achieve some dispersion if population to both enable access to urban areas, without unduly creating specific pressure points at key communication routs

Full text:

It should be noted that the current infrastructure links also present a constraint - in particular the A12/A!4 intersection is anticipated to reach capacity in the next few years and there are currently no plans of funding to address this. Planning therefore needs to consider how to achieve some dispersion if population to both enable access to urban areas, without unduly creating specific pressure points at key communication routs

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 3375

Received: 06/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Adrian James

Representation:

A local plan is needed to restrict future development to places where it will not be detrimental to the existing population.

Full text:

A local plan is needed to restrict future development to places where it will not be detrimental to the existing population.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 3731

Received: 06/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Jeremy Doncaster

Representation:

Sproughton Village is a well-known short cut to avoid the A12/A14 Copdock intersection, any future development will need drastic improvements to the road infrastructure supporting the village and surrounding area to avoid total traffic congestion. This needs to be but in place first to support schools, medical centre and environmental friendly transport, including walkways and cycle paths. Planning needs to be encouraged to appeal in appearance and enhance the village character offering with open spaces also affordable housing to local residents.

Full text:

Sproughton Village is a well-known short cut to avoid the A12/A14 Copdock intersection, any future development will need drastic improvements to the road infrastructure supporting the village and surrounding area to avoid total traffic congestion. This needs to be but in place first to support schools, medical centre and environmental friendly transport, including walkways and cycle paths. Planning needs to be encouraged to appeal in appearance and enhance the village character offering with open spaces also affordable housing to local residents.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 5684

Received: 08/11/2017

Respondent: Ms Helen Davies

Representation:

Looking to work together to achieve economies of scale and increase effectivenenss is a reasonable objective. However the views of those living within each district should be taken into account. The referendum clearly stated that people did not want to merge - yet a merger seems to be happening ignoring the previous result without holding another referendum to establish if people now have a different view

Full text:

Looking to work together to achieve economies of scale and increase effectivenenss is a reasonable objective. However the views of those living within each district should be taken into account. The referendum clearly stated that people did not want to merge - yet a merger seems to be happening ignoring the previous result without holding another referendum to establish if people now have a different view

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 6595

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Peter Powell

Representation:

The JLP only talks about growth, I am struggling to find policies that actually promote growth, just a build it and they will come attitude. And do we need growth anyway? Surely Growth is only needed at the natural rate of community Growth and that appears to be grossly overstated due to out of date data.
In relation to the District Sproughton bears the brunt of traffic from East Babergh commuting to Ipswich but no real strategy exists to deal with any increase from growth.

Full text:

The JLP only talks about growth, I am struggling to find policies that actually promote growth, just a build it and they will come attitude. And do we need growth anyway? Surely Growth is only needed at the natural rate of community Growth and that appears to be grossly overstated due to out of date data.
In relation to the District Sproughton bears the brunt of traffic from East Babergh commuting to Ipswich but no real strategy exists to deal with any increase from growth.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 7793

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Dr Ian Russell

Representation:

Better road infrastructure in the Sudbury area will provide better access to Babergh from the west, support economic growth, and preserve environmental assets and landscape.

Full text:

1. Road infrastructue

Better road infrastructure in the Sudbury area will provide better access to Babergh from the west, support economic growth, and preserve environmental assets and landscape.

2. Babergh

Quote: Babergh has lesser access with a small proportion of its area served directly by the east A12 and north by the A14 and no main line railway stations.

Comment: Sudbury is at the crossroads in the centre of an area in Essex and Suffolk with a population of 300,000 or more. Much east-west traffic has to detour and cross Ballingdon Bridge. Diversion of the A131 to the south of Sudbury to link with A1071 to Hadleigh will remove this constraint. A new Great Cornard rail station near the the river crossing would improve access to the main line.

3. Economic growth in the Sudbury

Summary: The Local Plan looks to growth in creative industries, science and technology, advanced engineering and manufacturing, business an professional services, leisure and tourism.

Summary: Vision for Prosperity depends on attracting good businesses to the Sudbury area.

Comment: Reviving the town centre is a critical factor. Take the traffic away from Market Hill to draw in people and investment.

4. Environment and Landscape

Comment: Sudbury is at the centre of the Stour Valley. It must conserve this landscape and environment. A road from Bulmer to Great Cornard with no development allowed is far preferable to the Sudbury western relief road and with its proposed development of a township the size of great Cornard in the same area. Urban sprawl would split the valley in two.

Note
The attachment sets out the need for an alternative to the Sudbury Western Relief Road. To support the case it proposes an update to the 1970s plan for a bridge at Great Cornard and adoption of Mouchel 2002 proposal to make the centre of Sudbury a pedestrian area. It recommends that planners and highway engineers outline a Sudbury Area Roads Plan as a matter of urgency.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 7845

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Essex County Council

Representation:

ECC thanks Babergh and Mid Suffolk DCs (BMS) for consulting ECC on their Joint Local Plan. Key issues for ECC are to inform and shape future spatial development strategies and policies delivered by adjoining LPAs to Essex, which could:
a. influence/affect provision of services/infrastructure for which ECC responsible;
b. identify impacts/opportunities for economic growth/development throughout Essex;
c. use best endeavours to assist cross-boundary matters under DtC, including engagement/co-operation with other organisations for relevant issues.
ECC will contribute cooperatively to this consultation and will continue to work with BMS through DtC, on the on-going preparation of the new Joint Local Plan.

Full text:

Essex County Council thanks Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils for consulting Essex County Council (ECC) on the preparation of their Joint Local Plan. The key issues for ECC are to inform and shape future spatial development strategies and policies delivered by adjoining Local Planning Authorities to Essex, which could:
a. influence and affect the provision of services and infrastructure for which ECC is responsible;
b. identify impacts and opportunities for the economic growth and development throughout Essex; and
c. use best endeavours to assist cross-boundary matters under the duty to cooperate, including engagement and co-operation with other organisations for which those issues may have relevance.

ECC will contribute cooperatively to this consultation and will continue to work with Babergh and Mid Suffolk council's, through the Duty to Co-operate process, on the on-going preparation of the new Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan.

ECC aims to ensure that local policies and related strategies provide the greatest benefit to deliver a buoyant economy for the existing and future population that lives, works, visits and invests in Essex. As a result ECC is keen to understand, inform, support and help refine the formulation of the development strategy and policies delivered by the relevant Local Planning Authorities, including those that adjoin the county of Essex. Involvement is necessary and beneficial because of ECC's roles as:

a. a key partner within Greater Essex promoting economic development, regeneration, infrastructure delivery and new development throughout the county;
b. the strategic highway and transport authority, including responsibility for the delivery of the Essex Local Transport Plan; Local Education Authority; Minerals and Waste Planning Authority; Lead Local Flood Authority; and lead advisors on public health and adult social care in relation to the securing the right housing mix which takes account of the housing needs of older people.

A response to relevant consultation questions is provided below. Where a question has not been answered, there is no ECC response at this stage.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 9490

Received: 14/11/2017

Respondent: Cllr John Hinton

Representation:

As the ONS (Page 9 of the document does not include the latest ONS figures), has identified Suffolk and particularly Babergh and Ipswich as areas with very low population growth:- where does the OAN obtain its growth figures from as they are some 300% bigger than the more recent and Nationally recognised ONS figures?

Full text:

See full scanned representation attachment

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 9491

Received: 14/11/2017

Respondent: Cllr John Hinton

Representation:

Suffolk Strategic Planning an Infrastructure Framework is not yet updated so should we not wait and see how this influences location of employment and housing growth? Also should it not include reference to and consideration of the Highways England Route Based Strategies as they influence commuting and economic movement in our trunk road system?

Full text:

See full scanned representation attachment

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 10229

Received: 09/11/2017

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Boyer Planning

Representation:

We agree with the Council's Key Social Issues, particularly, their recognition of the Districts' growing population.

Full text:

See attachment for full rep

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 11746

Received: 07/11/2017

Respondent: Councillor Frank Lawrenson

Representation:

The information contained misses some key points:
* Levels of unemployment are very low
* No reference is made to The Suffolk Growth Strategy
* The need for employment section should be strengthened to reflect the differing requirements in different areas (this has been achieved in the Suffolk Growth Strategy).
More information on this can also be found in the Growth Consultancy report commissioned by Babergh/Mid Suffolk in 2014. There is a strong emphasis on micro-business. These represent 90% of all businesses in Suffolk. This emphasises the need for further improvement in areas like Broadband.

Full text:

See attachment

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 12557

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Fressingfield Housing Working Group

Representation:

Local Housing Needs Survey should be undertaken by MSDC in every parish, to capture local intelligence - this would inform planning ahead of Neighbourhood Development Plans

Full text:

see attached for full rep

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 12798

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Great Waldingfield Parish Council

Representation:

Strengths:
Tourism and interesting places to visit
Strong local communities
Diverse and small industrial base
Rural district with couple of market town centres
What questions should we ask for the vision to be consulted on, e.g.???
Farming income % of S Suffolk

Weaknesses/threats:
Brexit causes fall in London house prices so less demand for commuting houses
Infrastructure poor- inadequate (and to support growth ) both road and rail
What Brownfield / grade 4 land available to prevent loss of good farming land?

Neighbours in Manningtree & Colchester not recognised, nor London weighting impact on our residential development.

Geographically a long way from big industrial areas - what knock on effect of Felixstowe that will reduce this business?

Full text:

See attachment

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 13133

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Barker Mrs Aitken

Agent: Savills

Representation:

We support the Council for seeking to plan for an appropriate timescale, making allowance for Examination, in accordance with the requirements set out in paragraph 157 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Full text:

see attached for full rep