Home > Planning > Planning Policy

Please note: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.

Representations on BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive) - SS1023 - land north of Hadleigh Road and East of Church Lane

Representation ID: 13255

OBJECT Sproughton Parish Council (Mrs Susan Frankis)

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (highways, cordon sanitare and A14 noise, impact upon landscape, townscape and heritage assets, and biodiversity impact upon protected species and habitats - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
*The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique unique & designated as an SLA. The mix of landscape characteristics is similar to Dedham Vale, and AONB
*Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
*Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
*Provision of schools and health services
*The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 13255

Representation ID: 13208

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Mr. James Bailey)

Summary:

(SS0191, SS1024, SS1023) Being promoted as a mixed use development to include a two-form entry primary school. Site is well-connected to Ipswich and partly abuts the settlement boundary for Ipswich. Well connected to Ipswich. We consider that Sproughton and Ipswich Fringe should be given new settlement boundaries to incorporate Land North of the A1071. Site is in a sustainable location with good access to a number of services and facilities, therefore development in this location should be supported in principle.

More details about Rep ID: 13208

Representation ID: 13010

OBJECT Dr Jonathan Tuppen

Summary:

Site not suitable for development

More details about Rep ID: 13010

Representation ID: 12780

OBJECT Mr Gary Clark

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 12780

Representation ID: 12722

OBJECT Mr Bryan Fawcett

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 12722

Representation ID: 12632

OBJECT Mr Alastair Powell

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique and subject to SLA.
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley) and Green wildlife links with the Chantry Park
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 12632

Representation ID: 12168

OBJECT D.L. Bradbury

Summary:

We do need a few houses for all ages but not the large amount as has been suggested.

Around the River Gipping is subject to flooding. I have seen flooding for many years. The fields between London and Hadleigh Roads are good farm lands. We need land for growing crops and for grazing to produce food for the people. Besides that there are many animals, birds, bats and other creatures and flora in the area, which would be lost if the land was built on.

Traffic already a very great problem especially through Lower and High Street and at the Beagle roundabout. School is full, no medical premises - doctors, chemists etc, so people have to travel for help.

I do hope that you will reconsider and only allow a small number of houses to be built.

More details about Rep ID: 12168

Representation ID: 11902

OBJECT Mrs Julie Clark

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (highways, cordon sanitare and A14 noise, impact upon landscape, townscape and heritage assets, and biodiversity impact upon protected species and habitats - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 11902

Representation ID: 11858

OBJECT Mr & Mrs Heather & Michael Earey

Summary:

SS1023: Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (highways, cordon sanitare and A14 noise, impact upon landscape, townscape and heritage assets, and biodiversity impact upon protected species and habitats - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
*The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
*Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
*Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
*Provision of schools and health services
*The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 11858

Representation ID: 11576

OBJECT Annette Powell

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique and subject to SLA.
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley) and Green wildlife links with the Chantry Park
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 11576

Representation ID: 11451

COMMENT Greenways Countryside Project Partnership (Mr. James Baker)

Summary:

if any development is thought suitable here, substantial new semi-natural open space should be required to extend Chantry Park and link towards the River Gipping corridor. The small valley feature crossing the area from south to north should be retained within a wider context due to the landscape and wildlife value it adds.

More details about Rep ID: 11451

Representation ID: 11449

COMMENT Greenways Countryside Project Partnership (Mr. James Baker)

Summary:

site forms part of 'green rim' and strategic separation between Ipswich and Sproughton. Also has significant landscape and wildlife value and potential. Any development in this area would need substantial green infrastructure provision to mitigate for loss of and damage to landscape and wildlife value. Part of a sizable extension to Chantry Park should be allocated and required to be delivered, which links down to the River Gipping through this area. This new strategic green space would meet local needs as well as helping to draw visits away from protected sites (estuaries etc), and would provide a large site close to many homes, to meet the needs of people and wildlife.

More details about Rep ID: 11449

Representation ID: 11392

OBJECT Sproughton Playing Field (Damian Lavington)

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (highways, cordon sanitare and A14 noise, impact upon landscape, townscape and heritage assets, and biodiversity impact upon protected species and habitats - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 11392

Representation ID: 11132

OBJECT Peter Warren

Summary:

Object - this site is not suitable for development! The site assessment summary already identifies requiring further investigation on highways, cordon sanitaire, A14 noise, impact to landscape, townscape and heritage assets. Additional obstacles include education and health services and coalescence between Ipswich and Sproughton. The infrastructure requirements would also cause a heavy financial burden. Maintenance of a River Gipping corridor, appropriate drainage and biodiversity impact must remain a primary consideration as is the protection of the village identity of Sproughton itself.

More details about Rep ID: 11132

Representation ID: 10970

OBJECT Mrs Carol Marshall

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (highways, cordon sanitare and A14 noise, impact upon landscape, townscape and heritage assets, and biodiversity impact upon protected species and habitats - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 10970

Representation ID: 10775

OBJECT Ms Caroline Powell

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (highways, cordon sanitaire and A14 noise, impact upon landscape, townscape and heritage assets, and biodiversity impact upon protected species and habitats - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique and subject to SLA.
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley) and Green wildlife links with the Chantry Park
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 10775

Representation ID: 10710

OBJECT Mrs LP Wheatley

Summary:

Development would start to merge Sproughton with Ipswich. If there is a genuine need for housing in Sproughton and Babergh then the houses that may be needed should be proportionate to the size of the present communities.

More details about Rep ID: 10710

Representation ID: 10455

OBJECT Wendy Lavington

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 10455

Representation ID: 10037

OBJECT Charlotte Lavington

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 10037

Representation ID: 9936

OBJECT Ms Helen Davies

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
further investigation in the site assessment summary highways, cordon sanitare and A14 noise, historic and environmental impacts - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all. Consideration should also be given to:
The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale
Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
Provision of schools and health services
The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village

More details about Rep ID: 9936

Representation ID: 9677

OBJECT Mr Chris Marshall

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (all of which are reasons for not permitting development) consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 9677

Representation ID: 9613

OBJECT Mrs Annette Brennand

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
further investigation required - highways, cordon sanitaire, A14 noise, impact on landscape, townscape and heritage assets, biodiversity impact - all reasons to NOT permit development on given scale.
Should also consider
- setting and views into and from Chantry Vale
- maintain a green corridor along River Gipping
- Topography of proposed site and water course/drainage
- provision of schools and NHS
- creeping "coalescence" between Ipswich town and Sproughton village

More details about Rep ID: 9613

Representation ID: 9160

OBJECT Wendy Shorrock

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development due to:
- The environment (Chantry Vale)
- creeping coalescence with Ipswich
- lack of supporting infrastructure and services (schools and health)

More details about Rep ID: 9160

Representation ID: 8880

OBJECT Mrs Hannah Lord-Vince

Summary:

* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 8880

Representation ID: 7138

OBJECT Mr David Brown

Summary:

This land provides great visual amenity along the entry to and exit from Hadeigh Road from Ipswich. It supports the context of the Red House and is part of our area of outstanding natural beauty . Hadleigh Road here cannot take additional traffic generated by housing proposed along this road so close to the bottlenecks around Ipswich.

More details about Rep ID: 7138

Representation ID: 6804

OBJECT Paul Seymour

Summary:

Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary, consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 6804

Representation ID: 6606

OBJECT Mrs Rhona Jermyn

Summary:

SS1023: Site not appropriate for development.
In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary (highways, cordon sanitare and A14 noise, impact upon landscape, townscape and heritage assets, and biodiversity impact upon protected species and habitats - all of which are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, if at all)

More details about Rep ID: 6606

Representation ID: 6236

OBJECT Neil Fuller

Summary:

In addition to those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary consideration should also be given to:
The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are almost unique
*
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 6236

Representation ID: 4068

OBJECT Mr Vic Durrant

Summary:

Those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, cohesion, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 4068

Representation ID: 3896

COMMENT Mr Clive Harris

Summary:

Please include the A1071/A14 link proposal as you consider the need for additional transport infrastructure to accommodate the growth planned. This link would help to relieve congestion (a) on the A1214 (London Road) in the region of Poplar Lane and Tesco, and at the A12/A14 Copdock Interchange, and (b) in Sproughton village. It would also provide an A14 off network emergency diversion route that avoids Sproughton village

More details about Rep ID: 3896

Representation ID: 3874

OBJECT Mrs June Durrant

Summary:

Those matters identified as requiring further investigation in the site assessment summary are reasons for NOT permitting development on the scale indicated, consideration should also be given to:
* The setting and the views into and from Chantry Vale, which are unique
* Maintaining a green corridor along the route of the River Gipping (i.e. the Gipping Valley)
* Topography of the proposed site and water courses / drainage
* Provision of schools and health services
* The 'creeping coalescence' between Ipswich town and Sproughton village, which would threaten the identity, cohesion, if not the very existence of, Sproughton village.

More details about Rep ID: 3874

Representation ID: 247

COMMENT Rebecca Lockwood

Summary:

I hope that developers will be required to fund a road/bridge that will take traffic straight down to the Sproughton A14 junction rather than it coming through the centre of the village (note this applies to ALL potential developments in Sproughton and surrounding areas). Traffic already comes to a standstill during the rush hour causing potential health issues from pollution and safety issues for those walking along High Street or trying to get in and out of their driveways. Sproughton High Street/Lower Street can't cope with any increase on current traffic volumes.

More details about Rep ID: 247

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult