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) - SS0624 - Land east of London Road

Representation ID: 12957

COMMENT Suffolk County Council (Mr. Robert Feakes)

Summary:

Belstead Quarry Extension - The current safeguarding areas are proposed to change to more defined areas. Sand and gravel is a nationally important resource and Suffolk has a sand and gravel sub regional apportionment figure and it is required to plan for sites to meet this apportionment. The minerals safeguarding area (MSA) is an area of potential mineral resource, identified through the best available data from the British Geological Survey. Its purpose is to protect potentially exploitable sand and gravel deposits from being sterilised by development on top of, or adjacent to those deposits. Following guidance in defining this area , the County Council is looking to safeguard all areas of sand and gravel within the county with an additional 250m buffer to prevent sterilisation of the sand and gravel resource by adjacent development.

More details about Rep ID: 12957

Representation ID: 12832

OBJECT Copdock and Washbrook Parish Council (Angela Chapman)

Summary:

Dual carriageway does not automatically mean good road access. High proportion of journeys will be towards Ipswich. Traffic will have to cross the London Road, to turn right and then head for congestion at Whights Corner, Swan Hill junction, Swan Hill, Beagle roundabout, Hadleigh Road Junction. At that point congestion might ease. Using either Hadleigh Road or London Road traffic will meet up at Hadleigh Road, Ranelagh Road and London Road junction. Suffolk draft Mineral Plan will create noise and dust on the opposite side of the A12 adjacent to this site extraction takes place. Believe destined for a land fill site in years to come adding smell and wind bourne rubbish.

More details about Rep ID: 12832

Representation ID: 12427

OBJECT Mrs Zena Gravener

Summary:

This site is ancient farming land with at least 2 green lanes and several footpaths crossing it. There are ancient oaks and other trees. It is inhabited by badgers, foxes, bats, newts, owls & much other wildlife. Adjacent to this site are 4 grade 2 listed buildings. Obviously this site is not suitable for industrial use, it would be totally out of place and ruin what is essentially an ancient, rural site, albeit sandwiched between two dual-carriageways. Housing would also completely ruin what is an oasis of special, traditional English countryside which is all too rare in this situation. This particular site - close to Boss Hoggs should at all costs be preserved for future residents to enjoy.

More details about Rep ID: 12427

Representation ID: 12381

OBJECT Mrs Stacey Achour

Summary:

Would be better to create more purpose built developments like idea of 'Garden City' where provision of services etc. is considered alongside the housing.
This is not the area - Copdock/Washbrook because of the congested poorly designed A12/14 Interchange and Copdcock it totally isolated and stationary when there are issues with the Interchange due to the sheer volume of traffic.

More details about Rep ID: 12381

Representation ID: 12233

OBJECT Mr Raheem Achour

Summary:

100 houses on the marked land is disproportionate to size of village and the village does not have
1. Infrastructure
2. School/doctors/dentist/shop with no plan of how it would provide this and can't add further pressure/burden to surrounding areas. There is already congestion on Old London Road through Washbrook at peak times.
* Air quality will reduce with extra traffic as no one can walk/cycle as poor infrastructure.
*Not appropriate to build around/encircle historically important listed buildings.
*Copdock & Washbrook is NOT Ipswich Fringe and should not be allowed housing as this. It is hinterland.
*New housing unlikely to suit/be in keeping with the village.
*The Old London Road is dangerous as currently is let alone with more cars.

More details about Rep ID: 12233

Representation ID: 12216

OBJECT M Flaherty

Summary:

Pollution from old and new A12. Without considerable updating existing A12 access would be dangerous. Crops taken away.

More details about Rep ID: 12216

Representation ID: 12177

OBJECT Marilyn Baldry

Summary:

Traffic from industry and 100 houses would leave the village via Swan Hill which at the moment at busy times is at gridlock. The corner is tight and cannot be improved. They won't use the A12 - there's always congestion. 100 houses will have many children - our school is full. We have no shops or doctors.
The village is full.
Public transport is poor.

More details about Rep ID: 12177

Representation ID: 12175

OBJECT Graham Baldry

Summary:

Too much high density development within a village environment can have great effects on living conditions regarding noise and air pollution from increased traffic. Local roads cannot cope and will result in more grid-lock situations.

More details about Rep ID: 12175

Representation ID: 10884

OBJECT Mrs Elena Stephenson

Summary:

A12 and Old London Road are operating above their capacity now
There will be an Impact on the sensitive landscapes and historic environment
Local services and facilities are already stretched beyond the capacity

More details about Rep ID: 10884

Representation ID: 10124

COMMENT Historic England (Katie Parsons)

Summary:

Site SS064SS0918* is a substantial site and its development would have a
significant impact upon the character and appearance of the area. However, the site
is bounded by two existing roads to the east and west which would help contain
development. The road to the west is a Roman Road which increases the potential
archaeological interest of the site. The Grade II listed Copdock Lodge and Felcourt
are located to the north of the site.

Any development of these sites has the potential to impact upon these heritage
assets. The presence of these heritage assets should be considered carefully as part
of the site allocation process.

More details about Rep ID: 10124

Representation ID: 8948

OBJECT Mr Hugh Richards

Summary:

The village is small and has barely any infrastructure; certainly not sufficient to cope with the volume of proposed housing and industrial development. Pollution will be increased and the character of the village will be completely changed for the worse. In particular, the old A12 is already used by traffic every morning and evening as a rat run to avoid the roundabout at the A12/A14 junction so without major traffic management measures being introduced, Copdock will become a car park.

More details about Rep ID: 8948

Representation ID: 8751

OBJECT Mr Michael Bray

Summary:

Infrastructure not sufficient for the size of the development proposed. The increased noise, light and air pollution would have a negative impact on our living standards on our village as a whole.
This would put pressure on our already over-stretched schools, doctors and roads
Is there not vacant properties within the Ipswich area that could be re-used, surely making good of existing vacant properties and businesses would be more practical than building more houses and businesses within our rural areas. Losing agricultural land is a big sacrifice to make on our local area for everyone including the wildlife.

More details about Rep ID: 8751

Representation ID: 8706

OBJECT Mr Joshua Thorpe

Summary:

I live in a 500 year old grade 2 listed thatch Cottage that as it stands if planning consent is agreed could have 150 house and industrial units surrounding it to 3 sides. The construction of this development could seriously impact the stability of the ground that my house sits on and could be detrimental to the foundation of my house and it's structure. Also the amount of noise and light pollution would be significantly increased if this goes ahead which will be detrimental to my life and that of the a wildlife.

More details about Rep ID: 8706

Representation ID: 8011

OBJECT Mrs Linda Emery

Summary:

SS0624 No provision seems to have been made for the enormous increase in village inhabitants and road users. The impact on and infrastructure changes proposed for the areas Schools, Doctors, Dentists, an already struggling sewerage system, queues on the A12 and A12 Jr and Swan Hill need to be investigated by relevant bodies, with findings being made publicly available.

The increase in traffic turning off/onto the A12 Jr would increase danger for motorists and cyclists, an activity the council seeks to encourage, not least with the increase of and proposed plans for cycle lane provision.

More details about Rep ID: 8011

Representation ID: 7955

OBJECT Mr Simon Gibbs

Summary:

This is an unforgivable loss of green field, Babergh should be concentrating on brown field sights

There is not enough servises etc. within Copdock to service a development of this size.

The road system is not up to standard it may be a dual carriage way but it is a local road and is already heavily congested

The transport links are awful, there is 7.5ton exclusion in Sproughton and swan hill so all traffic from the west will have to go round the Copdock Interchange. There is already severe build up of traffic this will only add to that

More details about Rep ID: 7955

Representation ID: 7346

OBJECT Mrs Joanne Bray

Summary:

I object to the proposed development due to the serious impact on our local village and environment:-
This large development would not constitute a village environment.
Increased air, noise and light pollution.
This is agricultural land and we need to keep this to provide food for increasing population and becoming self-sufficient (Brexit) Once a field has been built on its been lost forever.
Loss of wildlife habitats.
Insufficient infrastructure - doctors, schools and roads. A12 Copdock will be at full capacity by 2021 and that's as it stands now.

More details about Rep ID: 7346

Representation ID: 7278

OBJECT Mr Watling Michael

Summary:

In its proposed format the size of the development area in in proportional to the size of the village. Our infrastructure of roads, public transport, schools and medical facilities in the village are inadequate to cope with the numbers of properties and industrial area proposed.

More details about Rep ID: 7278

Representation ID: 7155

OBJECT Andrew Butters

Summary:

There is some evidence that living within 200 metres of a busy road represents an increased risk to health over the long term.

As much of this land is within 200 metres of the main A12 (which is extremely busy, often with stationary or slow-moving traffic which tails back to this point from the Copdock interchange), it would surely be irresponsible to permit new development upon it.

More details about Rep ID: 7155

Representation ID: 5613

OBJECT mr simon downey

Summary:

similar objections to SS0945 on site access, location and sustainability. This area in particular is a potentially large development which would not form "part" of the existing village - the national planning policy framework document does not recommend such types of development.

More details about Rep ID: 5613

Representation ID: 4408

OBJECT Mr Terry Corner

Summary:

Volume of traffic reaching to Ipswich. Negative effect of proposed mineral extraction site on opposite side of A12. Although alongside London Road, the dual carriageway does not automatically mean good road access

More details about Rep ID: 4408

Representation ID: 4175

OBJECT Mr Stephen Clarke

Summary:

A nearby planning application for just 7 houses was rejected in 2016 with the inspector commenting that it could not fulfill requirements to be sustainable. Any housing on this plot would involve significantly more houses/industry so similarly would not be sustainable. The local infrastructure (roads, public transport, shops, doctors, dentists, sewage etc) simply cannot support such large scale development and the entire character of the village would be changed for the worse by it.

More details about Rep ID: 4175

Representation ID: 3857

OBJECT Mrs Michaela Chan

Summary:

No infrasructure in place. Loss of wildlife habitats. Noise and air pollution increased.

More details about Rep ID: 3857

Representation ID: 3577

OBJECT Mr Richard Barnes

Summary:

An already noisy area would become more noisy and poluted from either light industrial or residentual occupation. This area has always been agricultural and it should remain to be used for this purpose.

More details about Rep ID: 3577

Representation ID: 3566

OBJECT Mrs Margaret Briggs

Summary:

There is plenty of land available for business use at the old sugar beet factory site that you are shortly to approve permission (as per Tom Barker) for 35ha of business use. The infrastructure of roads is not suitable for all the development proposed in Copdock. Commercial development is not necessary in Copdock. The sugar beet factory land should be developed first.

We live in Copdock because we want to live in a village not to be enveloped by Ipswich.

I am happy to work and co-operate with Babergh to help housing development, where necessary, in a sympathetic way.

More details about Rep ID: 3566

Representation ID: 3149

COMMENT Iain Pocock

Summary:

As with all the C&W sites there is no village infrastructure to support major levels of incremental housing and the village is already a rat run for those seeking to avoid the A12/14 intersection.This makes London Road, intersections and surrounding lanes congested and dangerous for users (drivers, pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders)

More details about Rep ID: 3149

Representation ID: 3063

OBJECT Mr Peter Sutters

Summary:

1) Prime agricultural land.
2) Provides a green lung to Copdock & Washbrook from A12
3) Would add to road congestion
4) Way out of village settlement boundary

More details about Rep ID: 3063

Representation ID: 2899

OBJECT MR STEPHEN EDGELL

Summary:

While I accept new home construction is needed in the area, this proposal is excessive,in terms of increased infrastructure - the traffic on Old London Road is already noisy and we are triple glazed to try and reduce existing noise.
100 homes: we might expect many 2 vehicle families to be accessing A12/A14 on a regular basis - or the alternatives such as Swan Hill
There are no local facilities in terms of shops / doctors / schools etc, so every household journey requires a vehicle on the road.
Industrial use proposal would make this traffic situation much worse.

More details about Rep ID: 2899

Representation ID: 2836

OBJECT Mrs Susan Mundy

Summary:

This is prime agricultural land and it's loss would spoil the rural aspect of the village plus the ability to provide the crops required for a growing nation. It would destroy ancient rights of way and hedgerows including badger setts, skylark nesting sites, bat habitat and deer covers. The prevailing wind comes from the southwest and spread noise pollution especially during the construction phase followed by light pollution from street lighting needed for such a large development. No spare capacity at the doctor's surgery, dentist, or school. Extra vehicles would add to the already chaotic local congestion

More details about Rep ID: 2836

Representation ID: 2743

OBJECT mr david green

Summary:

the infrastructure of the roads/lanes in and around copdock would not cope withe the extra traffic.
higher air and noise pollution.
copdock and caple primary school, east bergholt high have limited spaces or none.
local doctors surgery have either none or limited spaces.

More details about Rep ID: 2743

Representation ID: 2564

OBJECT Jill Worrall

Summary:

There are several listed buildings within the village, adding to its character and charm. One is a Tudor barn, chose for its beautiful rural location as a wedding venue lying adjacent to our ancient church. The livelihood of local businesses, such as my own are linked to this venue and surely will be affected if development of more houses and industrial sites here are allowed to succeed.

More details about Rep ID: 2564

Representation ID: 2535

OBJECT Lucy Worrall

Summary:

Over- populating Copdock would increase crime rates, pollution and lower the quality of life. Thus, ruining the villages infrastructure and historical values.

Copdock Church was broken into last month, we do not want a continual repeat of this due to your overpopulating on our ground.

More details about Rep ID: 2535

Representation ID: 1424

OBJECT Mr & Mrs A. J. Foreman

Summary:

We strongly object to houses being built in Folly Lane Copdock, or London Road, Copdock. Folly Lane not adequate for any more traffic. A12 from Copdock to Ipswich/Felixstowe is already heavily congested with traffic, and cannot take any more.
We are advised that sewers cannot cope with any more effluent and currently get blocked. More houses will make medical surgery more stretched.

More details about Rep ID: 1424

Representation ID: 949

OBJECT Mr Kristian Thorpe

Summary:

Our property to have it's boundary extended as has been done with our neighbouring properties.
Current infrastructure of Copdock & Washbrook is not good enough for over 600 houses and Industrial areas.
Old A12 already used as a rat run by commuters and current A12 soon to running above capacity.

More details about Rep ID: 949

Representation ID: 422

OBJECT Mrs Wendy Thorpe

Summary:

I live in a 500 year old Grade II listed cottage currently with fields to 3 sides. If this development goes ahead I will be surround with new builds to 3 sides of my house. This is not why I moved to this location 11 years ago. My Chocolate Box cottage will be devalued.
The village does not have the amenities for further housing, the infrastructure the road could not cope with the addition people and traffic.
We have a lot of wildlife living in these fields. Crested Newts are often seen in the ponds. Wild ducks often breed here.

More details about Rep ID: 422

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

Powered by OpusConsult