SS0536 - Land to the east of Norwich Road,

Showing comments and forms 1 to 9 of 9

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 4331

Received: 07/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Matthew Bush

Representation:

The description on SHEELA, relates to the land south of Mendlesham industrial estate. The map on the interactive consultation is wrong and is from another part of Mid Suffolk.
I object to the allocation as employment land, as this land is greenfield agricultural land. It is adjacent to an existing unused part of the industrial estate, that I believe has been advertised for let for 36 months. This supports the earlier submission that there is sufficient employment land at this site to accommodate future growth, without expansion that would negatively impact the amenity and rural nature of the area.

Full text:

The description on SHEELA, relates to the land south of Mendlesham industrial estate. The map on the interactive consultation is wrong and is from another part of Mid Suffolk.
I object to the allocation as employment land, as this land is greenfield agricultural land. It is adjacent to an existing unused part of the industrial estate, that I believe has been advertised for let for 36 months. This supports the earlier submission that there is sufficient employment land at this site to accommodate future growth, without expansion that would negatively impact the amenity and rural nature of the area.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 8055

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Sam Surl

Representation:

I object to the piecemeal industrialisation of the Suffolk landscape, especially when sufficient land has already been allocated - in more suitable areas - across Suffolk for such industrial development. Brownfield sites and sites with existing infrastructure should always be developed in preference to high quality agricultural land.

Full text:

I object to the piecemeal industrialisation of the Suffolk landscape, especially when sufficient land has already been allocated - in more suitable areas - across Suffolk for such industrial development. Brownfield sites and sites with existing infrastructure should always be developed in preference to high quality agricultural land.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 8239

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mrs Kirsten Bowden

Representation:

This is a rural location and the landscape character and quality of the setting would be significantly detrimentally affected. This is a rural setting of open plateau landscape with an infrastructure of roads which struggles to cope with its existing load. Industrial development here would be out of character and out of scale in this rural setting with far reaching visual impacts. On this basis I strongly object.

Full text:

This is a rural location and the landscape character and quality of the setting would be significantly detrimentally affected. This is a rural setting of open plateau landscape with an infrastructure of roads which struggles to cope with its existing load. Industrial development here would be out of character and out of scale in this rural setting with far reaching visual impacts. On this basis I strongly object.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 8241

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mrs Christine Double

Representation:

I object to the change of use of agricultural land for industrial purposes, when there is already land allocated and as yet unoccupied. In my view, the road system in this area is inadequate for large industrial expansion also.

Full text:

I object to the change of use of agricultural land for industrial purposes, when there is already land allocated and as yet unoccupied. In my view, the road system in this area is inadequate for large industrial expansion also.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 8246

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Crispin Hall

Representation:

The map is incorrectly pointing to land in Tostock, West Suffolk.

There is already sufficient employment land in existence, further supported by the dormant land already part of the Mendlesham Industrial Estate which has permission but has been vacant for many years and unsuccessfully advertised for the last three years.

Developing agricultural land, which is not only already in use but is also enjoyed as a rural amenity by the residents of the surrounding hamlets surely cannot be supported before brownfield sites are put to reasonable use first.

Full text:

The map is incorrectly pointing to land in Tostock, West Suffolk.

There is already sufficient employment land in existence, further supported by the dormant land already part of the Mendlesham Industrial Estate which has permission but has been vacant for many years and unsuccessfully advertised for the last three years.

Developing agricultural land, which is not only already in use but is also enjoyed as a rural amenity by the residents of the surrounding hamlets surely cannot be supported before brownfield sites are put to reasonable use first.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 8256

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Mark Allen

Representation:

The map on your interactive web resource is incorrect and refers to another part of Suffolk. It is therefore not possible to know exactly which parcel is referred to here. However, assuming that 'East of Norwich Road' in Mendlesham refers to land adjacent to the existing Mendlesham industrial estate, I object to the further unwarranted development of what is currently agricultural land. Neither this Plan nor the current economic conditions justify this proposed expansion.

Full text:

The map on your interactive web resource is incorrect and refers to another part of Suffolk. It is therefore not possible to know exactly which parcel is referred to here. However, assuming that 'East of Norwich Road' in Mendlesham refers to land adjacent to the existing Mendlesham industrial estate, I object to the further unwarranted development of what is currently agricultural land. Neither this Plan nor the current economic conditions justify this proposed expansion.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 9002

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mr Crispin Hall

Representation:

The map is incorrectly pointing to land in Tostock, West Suffolk.

There is already sufficient employment land in existence, further supported by the dormant land already part of the Mendlesham Industrial Estate which has permission but has been vacant for many years and unsuccessfully advertised for the last three years.

Developing agricultural land, which is not only already in use but is also enjoyed as a rural amenity by the residents of the surrounding hamlets surely cannot be supported before brownfield sites are put to reasonable use first.

Full text:

The map is incorrectly pointing to land in Tostock, West Suffolk.

There is already sufficient employment land in existence, further supported by the dormant land already part of the Mendlesham Industrial Estate which has permission but has been vacant for many years and unsuccessfully advertised for the last three years.

Developing agricultural land, which is not only already in use but is also enjoyed as a rural amenity by the residents of the surrounding hamlets surely cannot be supported before brownfield sites are put to reasonable use first.

Support

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 11052

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Mr C. Voetmann

Agent: Savills

Representation:

The site provides a logical extension to an already well established commercial site within the District and importantly acknowledges the role that such sites can play in terms of accommodating important and significant new inward investment as well as being an essential provider of local jobs to the local workforce.

Site is strategically placed along the A140 and provides an alternative to any strategic allocation elsewhere in the District. We would confirm that the site is deliverable within the next 5 years and hope that the officers and Members acknowledge the importance that this site can play to meeting the economic objectives within the plan period.

Full text:

Draft Representations to Babergh and Mid Suffolk Joint Local Plan - Consultation Document (August 2017)
On behalf of Mr C. Voetmann
Q2. Do you agree with the identified objectives? Please explain reasoning?
The objectives that relate to the economy as it relates to the emerging plans for Babergh and Mid Suffolk are set out on page 12 of the document and are set out as follows:
* 'Encourage development of employment sites and other business growth, of the right type, in the right place and encourage investment in skills and innovation in order to increase productivity;
* To encourage inward investment to the Districts by supporting infrastructure improvements that will enable the continued growth of Felixstowe and strengthen the Districts' link to Felixstowe and the rest of the UK;
* To support the 'Ipswich Northern Route' project and the strengthening of Ipswich and the surround area and the key economic driver of the County.'
It is considered that all 3 economic objectives are relevant in the context of this Local Plan. To this end, we support such objectives but suggest a further additional objective which is addressed under Q3.
Q3. Are there other objectives which should be added?
Whilst we support the 3 objectives listed under the 'Economic' heading on page 12 of the consultation document, we note that there is no link between the three stated objectives and the amount of employment land that is needed within the plan period. The three objectives refer to new employment land being of the right type, in the right place and then supporting inward investment. All are indeed laudable but fail to acknowledge that the amount of new employment coming forward should be related to the amount of new housing being proposed in the plan.
Paragraph 161 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that a robust evidence base is needed to:
'Assess the needs for land or floor space for economic development, including both the quantative and qualatitive needs for all foreseeable types of economic activity over the plan period, including for retail and leisure development...'
Local Plans must acknowledge the link between new homes and new employment and consequently we consider that an additional economic objective should be inserted to read as follows:
* 'To provide land for significant new employment growth to meet employment demands arising from new housing within the plan period.'


Q13. Which option(s) for housing spatial distribution do you think is the best? Please explain your answer.
It is important that whatever option is chosen by the Councils, it is deliverable over the plan period. In our view a settlement hierarchy that is put forward which reflects the level of services and facilities within the settlement and then places it within the hierarchy is an appropriate approach to take. Such an approach is common to many Local Planning Authorities over recent years. Placing growth in a range of settlements within the District provides a logical approach to addressing sustainability and importantly provides for a range of sites that can come forward. The identification for sites for both housing and employment must respond to the market and consequently it is entirely appropriate that a range of sites in a range of locations should be identified within this plan to have a robust framework in place to accommodate new growth.
Q34. If we continue to protect existing employment areas, which areas should be identified?
It is the case that existing development plans for both Babergh and Mid Suffolk Councils seek to protect existing employment sites from development for further alternative uses. In Babergh the current policies seek to protect such areas through the identification of existing employment areas whilst in Mid Suffolk there is a criteria based policy which has the same effect.
The logic of such an approach within the existing development plans is sound and should be taken forward in any new joint plan covering both areas. Such an approach recognises the importance of the contribution that existing employment areas can make to the local area and consequently such well established employment areas (such as Mendlesham Industrial Estate) should be the focus for new additional employment allocations given the importance that such sites can make to the local economy.
Q40. If we expand, or allocate additional employment land where should these be?
It remains the case that there are a substantial amount of employment areas within both Babergh and Mid Suffolk which are well established commercial sites in more rural locations. A number of these well established industrial areas such as Mendlesham Industrial Estate provide for important significant local employment where firms and companies have made major investment into the local area. Such areas have been the subject of protective policies within the respective existing development plans for Babergh and Mid Suffolk and it is entirely appropriate that such policies are taken through into any new Local Plan review in order to recognise and acknowledge the importance that such areas have in terms of any economic strategy.
In circumstances where the debate about housing land supply and affordability is not limited to any particular area of the country, the focus for Local Planning Authorities is to ensure that they address in full their Objectively Assessed Housing Need and consequently it is imperative that Councils allocate new employment land to address such new growth. This is particularly the case when the Councils recently published Objectively Assessed Need (OAN) methodology looks to potentially increase annual rates in circumstances where plans are not submitted for Examination by the end of March 2018. In the event that housing numbers increase, then there has to be a commensurate increase in the employment land being provided within those Local Plans.
As with the approach to new residential development, it is essential that Local Planning Authorities provide for a range of sites in a range of locations and in the context where Mendlesham Industrial Estate is an established employment site providing important local employment, it is appropriate in such circumstances to seek to allocate an expansion of such sites to maintain a constant supply of potential new employment sites across the district.
Our client has instructed us to promote their landholding of some 17.8 hectares immediately south of the existing industrial estate and Mendlesham. A Site Submission Form 2017 has been completed and has submitted to the planning authority as part of this current consultation.
Q79. Are there any other sites/areas which would be appropriate for allocation? (If yes, please provide further information and complete the Site Submission Form).
On behalf of our client Mr C. Voetmann, we have enclosed a completed Site Submission Form for the promotion of a 17.5 hectare site immediately south of Mendlesham Industrial Estate for potential B2 and B8 uses complementary to the existing uses on the existing estate.
The site provides a logical extension to an already well established commercial site within the District and importantly acknowledges the role that such sites can play in terms of accommodating important and significant new inward investment as well as being an essential provider of local jobs to the local workforce. The site is identified as site reference SS0536 in the Draft SHELA (2017). The site is strategically placed along the A140 and importantly provides an alternative to any large strategic allocation elsewhere in the District. The enclosed completed form addressed the necessary issues raised by the Council in the questionnaire and we would confirm that this site is deliverable within the next 5 years and hope that the officers and the Members of the Council acknowledge the importance that this site can play to meeting the economic objectives within the plan period.

Object

BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive)

Representation ID: 12167

Received: 10/11/2017

Respondent: Miss C Smith & Mr L Jones

Representation:

I object to any new building

Full text:

See attachments