Q5 (p13)

Showing comments 1 to 30 of 160

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2

Received: 22/08/2017

Respondent: Prof George Constantinides

Representation:

Protecting the rural environment

Full text:

Protecting the rural environment

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 103

Received: 20/09/2017

Respondent: Mrs Sara Knight

Representation:

The Sudbury Western Relief Road

Full text:

The Sudbury Western Relief Road

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 164

Received: 23/09/2017

Respondent: Mr D C Warren

Representation:

Local infrastructure improved to deal with local development already approved. Any development should not swamp the local area and should as far as possible blend in. Where possible industrial development should be kept away from residential areas.

Full text:

Local infrastructure improved to deal with local development already approved. Any development should not swamp the local area and should as far as possible blend in. Where possible industrial development should be kept away from residential areas.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 355

Received: 27/09/2017

Respondent: Mr Phil Harrison

Representation:

Employment within a sensible and sustainable commute.

Full text:

Employment within a sensible and sustainable commute.

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 518

Received: 06/11/2017

Respondent: Mr John Giddings

Representation:

RPC considers it essential that local views are adequately reflected in the decisions taken at District level.

Full text:

RPC considers it essential that local views are adequately reflected in the decisions taken at District level.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 597

Received: 11/10/2017

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Mockford

Representation:

The basic infrastructure should be improved before any further development is considered in the Drinkstone area. The key areas of concern regarding infrastructure are;
* Poor secondary road infrastructure
* The village does not have access to gas and therefore to continue to allow development a housing stock with oil (environmentally damaging) will not fulfil the requirements of the councils environmental strategy
* No local amenities

Full text:

I am a local resident of the village of Drinkstone in Mid Suffolk District Councils area. Whilst I understand that Drinkstone Parish Council are likely to respond to your consultation document direct, I would like personally to make the following comments / observations, regarding the above;

Whilst my wife and I have only been a residents in Drinkstone for 6 months, my wife and I were residents in Woolpit for over 23 Years and we personally do not want to see Drinkstone being ruined by ad-hoc housing developments, similar to those agreed for Woolpit.

Public transport, local amenities and the road infrastructure within Drinkstone are not suitably geared up for an increase in housing stock without significant investment in such matters. More importantly by the council focusing on housing stock numbers, etc. there is a severe risk of ruining the picturesque nature of our village, similar to what has happened and continues to happen in Woolpit.

My specific comments on your consultation document are;

Q1 What do you think the vision should be? and Q2 Do you agree with the identified objectives?
* The current statement does not give adequate clarity for me to properly assess what the impact will be on Drinkstone. Apart from the objective of building more houses, there is little in the vision statement that demonstrates any innovative thinking on key issues in proposed policy addressing the economy, environment and infrastructure. As a result there is a serious risk that the pressures of the need for more housing stock, will result in the council ignoring totally environmental, infrastructure and conservation matters to the detriment of the whole village.

Q3 Are there other objectives which should be added?
* Infrastructure upgrades should precede the granting of large scale planning permissions.
* For smaller housing developments there should be a more rigorous assessment of the cumulative impact on the existing infrastructure before permission is granted, and improvements should be made before any development begins where they are deemed necessary.

Q5 What is most important for your town or village?
The basic infrastructure should be improved before any further development is considered in the Drinkstone area. The key areas of concern regarding infrastructure are;
* Poor secondary road infrastructure
* The village does not have access to gas and therefore to continue to allow development a housing stock with oil (environmentally damaging) will not fulfil the requirements of the councils environmental strategy
* No local amenities

Q11 Do you agree with the proposed criteria approach to rank settlements? & Q12 Do you agree with proposed settlement hierarchy?
* There appears to be factual errors in the scoring. Our village (Drinkstone) is 8 miles from a town, not 3 and the main settlement is 2.5 miles from a core village, not 1.5.
* The hinterland village category is too large and should be broken down further to distinguish those villages scoring low on the hinterland scale.

Q15 If a new settlement was to be planned in the area, where should it be located?
* It is likely that a significant proportion of any new residents will want to commute to work, most likely out of the local area, so any new settlements should be located close to a major roads with ideally good and close access to the rail network.

Q 64 What do you consider the key infrastructure issues in your community?
* Inadequate public transport and road infrastructure, means that the infrastructure around and in Drinkstone will not be able to cope with any increase in road traffic. The village also currently does not have any local amenities and therefore this must be fully recognised by the council and taken into due consideration, prior to allowing any increase in housing stock in the village.

To conclude we need to be mindful of what has detrimentally happened and continues to happen to Woolpit and this should not be allowed to happen to Drinkstone. Drinkstone and its villagers have a strong sense of camaraderie and without the appropriate controls in place, which I do not see in the current consultation document, there is a high risk of Drinkstone becoming just another suburb of Bury St Edmunds and I for one, do not want to see this happen.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 788

Received: 16/10/2017

Respondent: Supporters Against Fressingfield Expansion (SAFE)

Representation:

Fressingfield has only 350 houses in the central area of the village. We need to be sure that further development is sustainable and proportionate to the community and its 58 Listed Buildings.

Full text:

See attachment

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 914

Received: 17/10/2017

Respondent: Mr David Brown

Representation:

Elmswell will require a relief road in the very near future, especially if the plans to increase freight traffic come to fruition.

Full text:

Elmswell will require a relief road in the very near future, especially if the plans to increase freight traffic come to fruition.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 930

Received: 18/10/2017

Respondent: Mr Roy Barker

Representation:

Small amount of housing growth and improved infrastructure.

Full text:

Small amount of housing growth and improved infrastructure.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1001

Received: 18/10/2017

Respondent: Great Ashfield PC (arthur peake)

Representation:

housing to attract younger people, services especially transport and broadband, some retail to reduce car journeys.

Full text:

housing to attract younger people, services especially transport and broadband, some retail to reduce car journeys.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1017

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Simon Bell

Representation:

The need to balance housing development with appropriate infrastructure development to support sustainable development goals.

Full text:

The need to balance housing development with appropriate infrastructure development to support sustainable development goals.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1221

Received: 20/10/2017

Respondent: Raydon Parish Council

Representation:

To maintain the current tranquil and sedate pace of life in Raydon.
There is a strong need to support the growth of the village in a manner which protects the nature of the village whilst allowing more people to benefit from the location and amenities. This will provide financial and people support to the facilities within the village eg village hall. It will also bring new blood to the village noting the age profile demographic. It will also make the infrastructure links such as bus service more viable if there are more users of the service.

Full text:

To maintain the current tranquil and sedate pace of life in Raydon.
There is a strong need to support the growth of the village in a manner which protects the nature of the village whilst allowing more people to benefit from the location and amenities. This will provide financial and people support to the facilities within the village eg village hall. It will also bring new blood to the village noting the age profile demographic. It will also make the infrastructure links such as bus service more viable if there are more users of the service.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1353

Received: 22/10/2017

Respondent: Ms Carole Skippen

Representation:

No light or fuel pollution, beautiful countryside and wildlife and clean air to breath.

Full text:

No light or fuel pollution, beautiful countryside and wildlife and clean air to breath.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1360

Received: 23/10/2017

Respondent: Haughley Parish Council

Representation:

Keeping the rural nature of Haughley Parish, protecting its heritage, managing the traffic, having high speed broadband throughout Haughley, Haughley Green and Haughley New Street

Full text:

Keeping the rural nature of Haughley Parish, protecting its heritage, managing the traffic, having high speed broadband throughout Haughley, Haughley Green and Haughley New Street

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1375

Received: 23/10/2017

Respondent: Mr Alf Hannan

Representation:

Keeping the rural nature of Haughley Parish and protecting its heritage. Traffic management and high speed broadband.

Full text:

Keeping the rural nature of Haughley Parish and protecting its heritage. Traffic management and high speed broadband.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1429

Received: 24/10/2017

Respondent: Mr William Eaton

Representation:

Palgrave must remain a village.
To preserve a green buffer zone, to assure separation from neighbouring villages, and prevent Stuston and Diss encroachment
To maintain the village's rural character, protect special green spaces and important
countryside views

The basic infrastructure should be improved before any further development is considered.
Size and scale of future development must be in keeping with this "secondary" village character;
Footpaths and green spaces should be preserved and improved.
Concerns about increased traffic, and inadequate parking on our minor roads.

Full text:

Palgrave must remain a village.
To preserve a green buffer zone, to assure separation from neighbouring villages, and prevent Stuston and Diss encroachment
To maintain the village's rural character, protect special green spaces and important
countryside views

The basic infrastructure should be improved before any further development is considered.
Size and scale of future development must be in keeping with this "secondary" village character;
Footpaths and green spaces should be preserved and improved.
Concerns about increased traffic, and inadequate parking on our minor roads.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1529

Received: 07/11/2017

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Schmitt

Representation:

Drinkstone does not have the infrastructure in place to justify its scoring as a hinterland village. The pressing needs are better broadband coverage - some parts of the village do not have a useable broadband facility. The sewage and drainage infrastructure is only just coping with the current number of houses and needs to be upgraded before permission is granted for any additional houses. There is a shortage of smaller properties in the village and a better mix of housing stock should be encouraged.

Full text:

Drinkstone does not have the infrastructure in place to justify its scoring as a hinterland village. The pressing needs are better broadband coverage - some parts of the village do not have a useable broadband facility. The sewage and drainage infrastructure is only just coping with the current number of houses and needs to be upgraded before permission is granted for any additional houses. There is a shortage of smaller properties in the village and a better mix of housing stock should be encouraged.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1637

Received: 26/10/2017

Respondent: Hoxne Parish Council

Representation:

To protect and enhance environmental assets.

Full text:

To protect and enhance environmental assets.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1899

Received: 29/10/2017

Respondent: Palgrave Parish Council

Representation:

Removing through traffic (rat running between the A143 and A1066 or avoiding the congested A1066 through Diss) from the centre of Palgrave, to improve the quality of life for and the safety of residents.

Full text:

Removing through traffic (rat running between the A143 and A1066 or avoiding the congested A1066 through Diss) from the centre of Palgrave, to improve the quality of life for and the safety of residents.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 1919

Received: 29/10/2017

Respondent: Mrs Tania Farrow

Representation:

To support the future of the village by providing employment opportunities whilst protecting the environment and the local heritage.

Full text:

To support the future of the village by providing employment opportunities whilst protecting the environment and the local heritage.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2012

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Drinkstone Parish Council

Representation:

Basic infrastructure should be improved - access to broadband and upgrades to the sewage system and road network
The scale of any development takes into account the lack of amenities and poor infrastructure in the village
Clarity on the amount of development permitted on windfall sites. The cumulative effect of piecemeal development should be a material consideration in assessing applications for new housing.
There should be a cap on the number of windfall developments in any community dependent on the amenities and infrastructure present.
In a village with no mains gas, developers should be required to build energy efficient houses,

Full text:

Basic infrastructure should be improved - access to broadband and upgrades to the sewage system and road network
The scale of any development takes into account the lack of amenities and poor infrastructure in the village
Clarity on the amount of development permitted on windfall sites. The cumulative effect of piecemeal development should be a material consideration in assessing applications for new housing.
There should be a cap on the number of windfall developments in any community dependent on the amenities and infrastructure present.
In a village with no mains gas, developers should be required to build energy efficient houses,

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2082

Received: 04/11/2017

Respondent: Great Finborough Parish Council

Representation:

Maintain identity and the means to support our infrastructure in a realistic fashion.

Full text:

Maintain identity and the means to support our infrastructure in a realistic fashion.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2123

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Capel St Mary Parish Council

Representation:

Any development must be supported by infrastructure improvements, not just added on to our boundary. All local services must be able to cope with any growth, and housing should reflect the needs of our community, especially older residents.

Full text:

Any development must be supported by infrastructure improvements, not just added on to our boundary. All local services must be able to cope with any growth, and housing should reflect the needs of our community, especially older residents.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2348

Received: 02/11/2017

Respondent: Fressingfield Parish Council

Representation:

Fressingfield is in the most northern part of the MSDC district & happens to be one of the most rural parts of the region creating very specific and significant problems. These include:
Village identity. To allow the village to grow gradually, sustainably and whilst retaining its character
Sustainable, appropriate housing development.
Appropriate housing.
Improving infrastructure
Education - sufficient capacity within our local schools
Health. Recognize the need to grow healthcare adequately in proportion with village growth.
Public transport
Highways. Better roads to accommodate increased traffic.
Employment. appropriate local business development is essential to village viability.
Environment.
Safety of residents

Full text:

Our village is Fressingfield in the most northern part of the MSDC district and happens to be one of the most rural parts of the region creating very specific and significant problems. These include:
Village identity. To allow the village to grow gradually, sustainably and whilst retaining its character
Sustainable, appropriate housing development.
Appropriate housing. The needs of an aging population and young first time buyers has to be addressed
Improving infrastructure - modern communications (better broadband), utilities.
Education - sufficient capacity within our local schools
Health. Recognize the need to grow healthcare adequately in proportion with village growth.
Public transport - improving the quality in the more rural areas and greater frequency.
Highways. Better roads to accommodate increased quantity of traffic.
Employment. Recognizing that appropriate local business development is essential to village viability.
Environment. Managing the area sensitively but robustly to maintain our heritage and landscape.
Safety of residents both from increased traffic together with increased policing.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2350

Received: 02/11/2017

Respondent: Chelmondiston PC

Representation:

Chelmondiston area: Most important is protecting the village as a rural settlement. Numbers of additional dwellings should be appropriate to a hinterland parish (i.e. sufficient to meet local needs). The Shotley Peninsula has carried more than its fair share of recent development and basic infrastructure should be improved prior to any further developments.

Full text:

Chelmondiston area: Most important is protecting the village as a rural settlement. Numbers of additional dwellings should be appropriate to a hinterland parish (i.e. sufficient to meet local needs). The Shotley Peninsula has carried more than its fair share of recent development and basic infrastructure should be improved prior to any further developments.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2412

Received: 01/11/2017

Respondent: Preston St Mary Parish Council

Representation:

Preston St Mary is a hamlet and as such has very limited potential for growth. SS0491: The Parish Council consider that any proposed planning application for this plot of land should not exceed 6 homes. The Parish Council would like to see at least one of the properties out of the six be for affordable housing so that there is potential for existing residents family members to move into the village, who may otherwise be excluded purely on the basis of cost of property. Some of the single storey properties may be considered desirable as properties for local residents to purchase and remain in the village, and sell their own properties which may become more challenging in terms of stairs etc as they grow older.

Full text:

See attachment

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2495

Received: 02/11/2017

Respondent: Lindsey Parish Council

Representation:

Lindsey Parish Council has an expressed aim of ensuring development in Lindsey provides for regeneration and sustainability for the village. It must be incremental and in character with existing.

Full text:

Lindsey Parish Council has an expressed aim of ensuring development in Lindsey provides for regeneration and sustainability for the village. It must be incremental and in character with existing.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2513

Received: 02/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Richard Mayes

Representation:

There local infrastructure, in particular road capacity, is already struggling to meet demand, there is no way it can cope with these proposals without significant improvement.

The above applies in normal conditions, as soon as the Orwell Bridge closes, which it does regularly all the lanes in the village come to an immediate standstill.

Full text:

Infrastructure.

There is already an infrastructure deficit in Copdock and Washbrook. There is only one route from the village into Ipswich, Swan Hill, and this is a small country lane that is already congested.

The A12 is constantly snarled up as a result of the inadequacies of the Copdock Mill junction leading to overflow traffic from the A12 to further congest Swan Hill in an effort to avoid the traffic at the junction.

Bear in mind that there is also consultation on further development in Sproughton that will also lead to more congestion as those developments will all lead to more traffic at the point of convergence, The Beagle roundabout.

Constable Country Surgery is already struggling to meet local demand, leading to unsatisfactory feedback from patients.

The school is already full.

There are no amenity shops in the village capable of servicing the proposed new housing developments.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2523

Received: 07/11/2017

Respondent: Mrs Michaela Chan

Representation:

To keep it a village, maintaining its individuality and identity and not develop it into yet another housing estate.

Full text:

To keep it a village, maintaining its individuality and identity and not develop it into yet another housing estate.

Comment

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 2551

Received: 03/11/2017

Respondent: Cockfield Parish Council

Representation:

Having regard to the character, spread of the built up area boundaries and settlements. Further, to consider the modest growth in development and employment, taking cognizance of the Cockfield local survey lodged with Babergh District Council.

Full text:

Having regard to the character, spread of the built up area boundaries and settlements. Further, to consider the modest growth in development and employment, taking cognizance of the Cockfield local survey lodged with Babergh District Council.