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) - Key Environmental Issues
COMMENT Environment Agency (Miss Charlie Christensen)
Although we welcome the inclusion of water quality as a key environmental issue, we would expect to see here reference to wastewater infrastructure. Wastewater infrastructure is the most important pressure on environmental water quality. Growth and development - potential to reduce the efficacy of.... infrastructure leading to major problems
There is no mention of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), and the requirements and obligations laid out in the Anglian River Basin Management Plan (RBMP).This links to water quality, but also biodiversity and amenity. Overall we would expect to see the WFD considered to a greater extent throughout the Local Plan.
SUPPORT Dedham Vale Society (Mr. David Eking)
The Society is entirely happy to support and applaud your objective under the first bullet point under the Environment to protect and enhance environmental assets.
COMMENT Dedham Vale Society (Mr. David Eking)
The comments made by the Society which follow are confined to aspects of the consultation paper which are considered to have a potential impact on the landscape, appearance, buildings or tranquillity of the Dedham Vale AONB (note incorrectly designated on page 11 under Landscape). We consider it is most important to acknowledge that developments immediately proximate to the AONB can be just as damaging to the area as those actually within the designated boundary and should be subject to the same stringent standards. We would also expect the plan explicitly to reaffirm the Council's support for the proposed extension of the AONB to Bures and north towards Sudbury.
OBJECT Suffolk Wildlife Trust (Mr James Meyer)
This section should also include reference to Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Ramsar sites and County Wildlife Sites (CWSs). SACs and Ramsar sites are of international nature conservation importance and CWSs are of at least county importance, these designations are present in one or both of the districts and so should be recognised in this section.
As well as designated sites, UK Priority habitats (under Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)) should also be recognised as being considerable assets in the districts. Recognition of these as assets should then be apparent in plan policies.
OBJECT Mrs Lynda Shephard
Undesirable and irresponsible to build industrial units off A134 in Long Melford. Would lose beautiful agricultural land which residents in Harefield and villagers currently enjoy and appreciate. This offers a marvellous habitat for many species of birds. In our garden alone we have counted 24, 10 of which are unusual. They all nest here as well. Seems totally inappropriate to consider building industrial units here which will be noisy with transport coming and going, bright security lights and ruining the spectacular country views we currently enjoy. Plenty of unoccupied business units already nearby
COMMENT RSPB Stour Estuary and Wolves Wood (Mr Mark Nowers)
We welcome the Councils' commitment to the strategic mitigation plan currently under development for recreational impacts of new housing developments on internationally-designated sites, known as the Recreational Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy (RAMS).
Alongside the RAMS, we consider that the key means to avoid increasing pressure on designated sites will be through provision of high quality green space close to people's homes and at a scale that is appropriate to the level of planned growth. This should be wildlife rich green space, again in line with the Council's biodiversity duties.
COMMENT Mrs Sarah Knibbs
A coherent 20 year plan will ensure that the environment is protected - maintaining what we have and planning for improvement where required.
The impacts of climate change will affect our coastline and flood plains. Any construction within or adjacent to these areas should be avoided.
The road systems require significant work if they are to manage increased traffic movements and help to improve air quality.
COMMENT Mr Peter Powell
BDC already have adequate environmental policies, but the planning department dosn't apply them robustly.
BDC also have the duty devolved from Natural England to ensure Biodiversity issues are enforced, they have failed to do that robustly.
SLA's are under consideration but are perfectly applicable, if applied robustly.
But in the case of Wolsey Grange they apparently were turned inside out so the inside of the development looked nice but its perimeter was ringed by three story flats which will present like alcatraz on the hill top of Chantry Vale. This is not robust application of policy.
COMMENT MSDC Green Group (Cllr John Matthissen)
Please see revised text in our submission
COMMENT Stowmarket Society (Mr Michael Smith)
You have omitted to give the number of Conservation Areas in Mid Suffolk.
COMMENT Mr Colin Johnston
Babergh contains a large number of SLAs (not mentioned) which point up the natural diversity and beauty of the rural areas. Conservation areas were considered for many more villages and these should be brought forward for action: such areas containing both the best of the built up and natural assets would help focus communities on what is important to them while, at the same time, giving the tourist industry a boost, by presenting Suffolk at its best.
COMMENT Mr Andy Day
Surely what attracts people to this area is its natural beauty ,the farmland the rivers ,wildlife to lose this to a huge housing development would be unthinkable and have a huge impact on the environment , I have lived in Sproughton for 10 years and have seen Barn owls , foxes, deer Buzzards kestrels numerous smaller birds to lose their habitat would be criminal , I understand the need for housing but surely more suitable brown field sites could be used rather than the wonderful Chantry vale and surrounding areas
COMMENT Janet Weavers
The environment (green spaces, recreational areas, wildlife habitat etc) must be protected and enhanced. If people are to be encouraged to be more healthy then easily accessible open areas must be provided - it's counter-productive to make people use their cars to access recreation/wildlife areas. The general landscape must also be protected so that we do not lose the distinctiveness of our Suffolk countryside. Sprawl is not good. "Dumping" is not good - we had that in the 70s. Once gone, our special tourist-attracting landscape is gone forever.
COMMENT mr k j white
The drive for housing at all costs (presumed consent) is certain to have a negative impact on the protection of our rural environment, viz heritage assets; landscapes; and biodiversity in wildlife and flora. Being involved in conservation, heritage and the natural environment in both my private and professional life, with few exceptions I see little to praise in the current protection given to these areas all of which enhance the quality of our lives. Any further erosion in the planning processes will irreversibly damage the rural environment and the heritage treasures it holds for posterity.
OBJECT RSPB Stour Estuary and Wolves Wood (Mr Mark Nowers)
The RSPB considers it is essential that the Council undertakes an exercise to map the network of designated sites, priority habitats and species across the District and that this map is presented as part of the evidence base for the Local Plan in preparation.
We commend Ipswich Borough Council's "Ipswich Wildlife Network" (https://www.ipswich.gov.uk/sites/default/files/ipswich_wildlife_network.pdf) and in accordance with the Duty to Co-operate, would urge Babergh to undertake a similar exercise. This would accord with paragraph 117 of the National Planning Policy Framework which says that local planning authorites should plan for biodiversity at a landscape-scale across local authority boundaries.
COMMENT Mr Peter Sutters
Air quality along the A12/A14 corridors can be poor at times - it is most desirable to maintain a quasi Green Belt/ Green Lung around the A12/A14 corridors o protect settlements from pollution.
COMMENT Mr Andrew Coxhead
Development of land must take into account Environmental Impact.
COMMENT Ms Carole Skippen
it is very important to remember that climate change will affect all of us, more importantly the Strand and along the peninsular and along the Wherstead Road are already affected by flooding especially at very high tides. To build on, or near, areas which are all ready affected by flooding does not make any sense. To build on Land between Bourne Hill and the A137 will cause increased risk of flooding and also with surface water and sewerage.
COMMENT Mr Graham Shorrock
Much of the environmental attractiveness of the districts is not only attributable to the landscape but also to the many hamlets and villages that are within the area. In considering housing development it is vital that theses are not compromised by developments that merge villages together without maintaining adequate green spaces between the towns and villages.
OBJECT Mr. Nick Miller for Sudbury Green Belt Group
Environmental Assets and Biodiversity: We do not doubt that many such areas of priority habitat etc have been recorded, though not all have a system of protection is in place. Lack of a green strategy on the part of the bodies consulted, means that important urban fringe sites are overlooked. Our contention is that given the new future development scenarios, all areas facing extensive development need an independent appraisal.