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) - SS0185 - Land south of Ipswich Road, Brantham

Representation ID: 10584

SUPPORT Hopkins Homes Ltd represented by Armstrong Rigg Planning (Mr Geoff Armstrong)

Summary:

We consider that our Client's site to the south of Ipswich Road, Brantham (SHELAA Site SS0185) represents an entirely appropriate opportunity to deliver a sensitively planned yet significant residential development comprising up to 250 dwellings on the northern edge of one of the District's most sustainable villages.

SHELAA estimates around 50 dwellings is appropriate. Our Clients are confidents that stated constraints can be overcome whilst clear in their view that such a low level of delivery would fail to exploit an opportunity to significantly boost the housing supply at Brantham and within the District.

More details about Rep ID: 10584

Representation ID: 10102

COMMENT Historic England (Katie Parsons)

Summary:

The Grade II* listed Church of St Michael and All Angels and its
Grade II listed lychgate lies to the immediate south of proposed site allocation
SS0185. The site is currently undeveloped and its open nature contributes positively
to the setting of the church. There is concern that development of this site would
harm the setting of these heritage assets to the detriment of their significance. The
presence of these heritage assets should be considered carefully as part of the site
allocation process.

More details about Rep ID: 10102

Representation ID: 9818

OBJECT mr mike palmer

Summary:

I have tried to register and comment on the website but frankly I think you need a degree to work that out!

I would like to add my complete horror at the thought of this development for the following reasons:

* Road congestion - the A137 is already over stressed and on many mornings and evenings, traffic sits at a standstill outside our home

* Infrastructure - impact on trunk road, lack of paths and streetlights, traffic congestion, pressure on railway bridge

* Nature of Brantham village - loss of space and impact on aesthetic nature of area

* Value of adjacent properties

More details about Rep ID: 9818

Representation ID: 9519

OBJECT Emma Last

Summary:

I am writing to express how disgraceful it was to come home from work this evening to find a letter informing us of a development for 250 residential houses and only having less than 24 hours notice to comment on this!I would like an explanation to why you feel it is acceptable for providing us with very short notice and a very poor quality of map.
I am objecting to this development as extremely concerned how our roads will cater for the large volume in additional traffic, let alone how our local schools and doctors surgery will cater!? This area is seeing a extremely high increase in residential development's but no additional doctors surgery or schools being built.

More details about Rep ID: 9519

Representation ID: 8988

OBJECT Mr Edward Jackson

Summary:

Development of this 8ha site in historic Brantham would bring disproportionate housing levels to remaining rural and tranquil part of the village. Church Lane on southern boundary is mainly single track with low traffic, high pedestrian/recreational use by local community.
Site is surrounded by Priority Habitat hedgerows, supporting Priority Species including stag beetle and foraging bats. It is well-connected to wider ecological networks and adjacent to Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB.
Development would require Habitats Regulation Assessment of increased recreational impacts on the Stour & Orwell Estuaries SPA / Ramsar Site, acknowledging 'In-Combination' effects with Brantham Regeneration Area.

More details about Rep ID: 8988

Representation ID: 8298

OBJECT Mrs Lorraine Prentice

Summary:

I would like to put in an objection on behalf of myself and my husband for the proposed building on the above plot of land. We believe that this would have an impact on St Michael's Church and the nursery school nearby, causing concern for the small children with increased traffic. We feel there is insufficient infrastructure to support additional housing. It will also cause increased congestion on an already busy highway.

More details about Rep ID: 8298

Representation ID: 7911

OBJECT Mr Mal Bridgeman

Summary:

A small spread out village with significant development already approved, makes this development unnecessary and unsustainable.

Traffic through the village is trapped by the railway bridge by the Brantham Bull pub and the gates/underpass at Manningtree - Adding the cars of all the planned developments is not sustainable - due to congestion, pollution, safety and quality of life

This old part of Brantham provides access to walkers and horse riders access to the Stour river/estuary which is part of the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

More details about Rep ID: 7911

Representation ID: 7771

OBJECT Mrs Lorraine Pepper

Summary:

Lived here for 21 years how its become a built up area where the countryside is just disappearing, we've noticed abig increase of traffic. Theres concerns raised of traffic and speeding through the village, already had houses built behind us how you want to build in front of us therefore again spoiling views. The only part of picturesque Brantham left because of views of the church and fields . The residents on the Ipswich Road have to put up with continuous traffic lights outside their houses because of the building of houses on two sites on the A137 NO MORE

More details about Rep ID: 7771

Representation ID: 6884

OBJECT Mr Andrew Mills

Summary:

The main consultation document suggests a 10% increase in population in Babergh between 2014-2036. The already agreed development at the southern end of the village of 300+ houses represents perhaps a 20% increase in housing alone, within that timescale. Site SS0185 site along with the others in Brantham seem to be a vast over development of such a small village.
This particular location would impact traffic flow through the village with access directly onto the A137.
This site also is close to the historic church and graveyard in Brantham - one of the few remaining historic parts of the village.

More details about Rep ID: 6884

Representation ID: 6843

OBJECT Mrs Ann Mills

Summary:

The road around the site (church lane) leads to the river and a quiet haven for wildlife and AONB which will be ruined with extra traffic and people.
The infrastructure will not be sufficient for traffic or people and with a bridge one end and railway line the other end of the village it can't be improved.
There is no GP Surgery in place, the post office is now closing and the school will not be large enough. To satisfy these needs more building would be added to the already crowded village area

More details about Rep ID: 6843

Representation ID: 6237

OBJECT Mrs Rosalind O'Donnell

Summary:

With the proposed development of the factory site in Brantham I cannot see why further development is needed.
This stretch of the A137 is already highly congested during commuting hours and under strain to cope, additional housing will certainly not help.
Brooklands School is not large enough to cope with more applications for spaces.
Local doctors surgeries are already over subscribed.
This end of the village is more rural and should remain so, it is extremely close to the river and an AONB.

More details about Rep ID: 6237

Representation ID: 3924

OBJECT Annabel Roberts

Summary:

Highways- impact on function of A137 with development at Industrial Site/nearby villages. Safety: for existing residents pulling onto A137; children crossing road to school bus; residents crossing road to access local amenities; poor sightline for any access points and the excess speed of existing traffic.
Infrastructure- no footpath, pedestrian crossing, doctor or post office. Drain/sewer capacity, poor wider transport network, traffic congestion under railway bridge at peak times.
Historic part of Brantham- church, graveyard, old school house, hedgerows and access to the river/AONB. Sense of place and tranquility as you enter Church Lane lost with the scale of development proposed.

More details about Rep ID: 3924

Representation ID: 3802

OBJECT Suffolk Coast & Heaths AONB (Ms. Paula Booth)

Summary:

The site is within close proximity of the Suffolk Coast & Heaths AONB and is considered to be within the setting of the Protected Landscape. It is also in close proximity of the designated sites associated with the Stour & Orwell estuaries. Development on this site is unlikely to meet the purposes of conservation and enhancement of these assets and is therefore unsuitable for major development.

More details about Rep ID: 3802

Representation ID: 889

OBJECT mr trevor nobbs

Summary:

Brantham Hill/A137 is dangerous
Traffic volumes on A137 will rise further with new developments on the peninsular/surrounding villages
Pollution is a major concern when HGVs have to slow or stop on the Hill, which will increase due to traffic lights/pedestrian crossings required for new developments.
Agreement has been given for c350 houses to be built, c25% growth in village, The impact on the village, highways, services, infrastructure and the railway crossing at Manningtree will not be known until the development is complete.
A long term solution to the problems at the crossing at Manningtree is required.
Post office is closing.

More details about Rep ID: 889

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

Powered by OpusConsult