Home > Planning > Planning Policy

PLEASE NOTE: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

If you haven't got an account you can register now.
If you have forgotten your password you can request a new password.

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) - SS0286 - Land south of Kings Road, west of Park Lane

Representation ID: 11480

OBJECT Mrs Olive Smith

Summary:

The infrastructure and services such as school and doctors in Glemsford is already overstretched. access is restricted to a number of minor roads and the village is already littered with cars parked along it's one main road. Access to these proposed sites would be almost impossible without dramatic improvement in the infrastructure. Several new houses have been built in Glemsford over the last few years and I do not believe the village is able to take any of the proposed developments.

More details about Rep ID: 11480

Representation ID: 11427

OBJECT Mr Kevin Smith

Summary:

Over the last 25 years all the factories in Glemsford have been demolished and replaced with houses. There have been no corresponding improvement in infrastructure. This has resulted in the one main road through the village being littered with cars creating many dangerous blind spots.
Glemsford is only entered by minor roads which would not be able to take additional traffic and make access through the village almost impossible.

More details about Rep ID: 11427

Representation ID: 10588

OBJECT Mrs R Turner

Summary:

Park lane is unable to cope with anymore traffic.
Windmill Row is right on junction, cars travel at speed.
To drive on park lane is difficult because road is narrow, adding extra traffic will make it more difficult.
Flax lane is only 1 car width. Lane gets flooded when raining.
Trouble getting doctors appointments because not enough appointments.
Water pressure drops often and get sewerage blockages.
The school cannot take all local children as there are not enough spaces.
No employment in the village.
No hourly bus service.
The village has doubled in size over past 30 years.

More details about Rep ID: 10588

Representation ID: 10133

COMMENT Historic England (Katie Parsons)

Summary:

The site allocations
proposed could result in significant adverse impacts upon this historic village. Site
SS0286 is set furthest away from the conservation area and is buffered from the
historic centre by existing development.
The Glemsford Conservation Area Appraisal refers to the rich archaeological remains
within the parish which indicates further archaeological potential. 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: 10133

Representation ID: 10092

COMMENT Glemsford Parish Council (Mrs Deborah George)

Summary:

if it can be proved that there is a need for more housing in the village and we regard Site SS0286, Land south of Kings Road, west of Park Lane, as the only viable option. The present estate at Kings Road already has three access points built into its design, it is adjacent to Park Lane/Hobbs Lane which, once improved, will allow traffic to flow without major impact on existing roads and it will have the smallest visual impact on the village approaches.

More details about Rep ID: 10092

Representation ID: 8590

OBJECT Mrs H North

Summary:

Before we pack the village any further let us look at how we can improve what we already have. Herding more people in without any thought given as to how whether there is any space in the school or doctors is ludicrous. Also with the cuts in policing and an inadequate community centre it is really irresponsible to just go ahead and build.

More details about Rep ID: 8590

Representation ID: 8535

OBJECT Mr John Bangs

Summary:

Yet another Greenfield Site adjoining a Rural

Village location to be sacrificed on the alter

of our political masters' 'A Quick Fix' for the housing

problem.

Have a planners dream, build new settlements,

a Babergh Utopia,

then you will stop ruining all the existing

ones.

More details about Rep ID: 8535

Representation ID: 8449

COMMENT Glemsford Parish Council (Mrs Deborah George)

Summary:

If it can be proved that there is a need for more housing in the village we regard this site as the only viable option. The present estate at Kings Road already has three access points built into its design, it is adjacent to Park Lane/Hobbs Lane which, once improved, will allow traffic to flow without major impact on existing roads and it will have the smallest visual impact on the village approaches.

More details about Rep ID: 8449

Representation ID: 8432

SUPPORT Mr Todd Cunliffe

Summary:

With reservations as Glemsford has received more than its fair share of housing development over the last few years. Road access is poor and would need significant upgrading along with the infrastructure of the village.

More details about Rep ID: 8432

Representation ID: 8335

SUPPORT Mrs Linda Cunliffe

Summary:

SS0286 not ideal but has better road access than other options. The road would need to be improved/widened in places. Village infrastructure already struggling to cope with recent increase in housing. Some school classes full and unable to take residents. GP surgery at capacity. Insufficient local transport. Little local employment available.

More details about Rep ID: 8335

Representation ID: 8332

SUPPORT Mrs Linda Cunliffe

Summary:

SS0286 not ideal but has better road access than other options. The road would need to be improved/widened in places. Village infrastructure already struggling to cope with recent increase in housing and would need to be improved. Some school classes are full and unable to take residents and the GP surgery is at capacity. Both would need to be expanded. Local transport would need to be improved. There is ittle local employment available.

More details about Rep ID: 8332

Representation ID: 7318

OBJECT Mr Andrew ROWBOTHAM

Summary:

As before the village cannot cope with this amount of houses being built. Access to the village i.e. Hobbs Lane is too narrow to cope. The increase in traffic i.e 2-3 cars per household, you only have to look at the new houses built recently and the parking on the pavement etc to see the problems even more homes would cause.

More details about Rep ID: 7318

Representation ID: 7266

OBJECT Mrs AMANDA ROWBOTHAM

Summary:

The infrastructure for Glemsford is not adequate for the size of this development, it would change our village beyond recognition.

More details about Rep ID: 7266

Representation ID: 7086

OBJECT Mr Ernest Bellamy

Summary:

I do not believe the infrastructure and medical services will support this development.

More details about Rep ID: 7086

Representation ID: 7045

OBJECT Mr Adrian Ablitt

Summary:

Further development in Glemsford on the scale proposed is not desirable on the following grounds:-
1.Existing facilities at or beyond limits.
2.Drainage issues
3.No employment locally, requiring mass travelling on roads
4.Road system in rural areas inadequate
5.Agricultural land of this value is needed to grow every scrap of food we can. The future is uncertain, both due to Brexit and the population growth in areas of the world that currently export to us.

More details about Rep ID: 7045

Representation ID: 6257

OBJECT mrs Clare Hammond

Summary:

I feel that Glemsford does not have the capacity to accommodate any more houses at all. There has just been a development completed and already the local schools are over subscribed. Glemsford primary is full, as is Stour Valley secondary school. Also, I don't believe the country roads can take any extra traffic. Glemford used to have a reputation of anti-social behaviour, this has settled down now and it would be a shame if it were to resurface.

More details about Rep ID: 6257

Representation ID: 5789

OBJECT Mrs Teresa Rush

Summary:

The large scale of the proposals is a cause for concern given Glemsford's roads are already very busy and, in some parts of the village, dangerous as a result.
Bumper-to-bumper parking is commonplace along many roads, often obscuring visibility at junctions and leading to access problems. One need only try and drive along Brook Street when the refuse carts are doing their rounds to witness the problems and the potential danger to road users and pedestrians.
What is more, all approaches to the village are narrow country lanes, already unsuitable for the volume of traffic they are required to carry.

More details about Rep ID: 5789

Representation ID: 4977

OBJECT Mrs Marilyn Hughes

Summary:

Over burden on village infrastructure with pressure on already busy Doctor surgery and school.
Lack of adequate public transport system.
Increased traffic congestion on narrow roads which already suffer from on-street parking and reduced visibility leading to danger-points especially near the school.
Already been a lot of in-fill building which has exacerbated the problems above.
Employment opportunities in local area limited.

More details about Rep ID: 4977

Representation ID: 4906

OBJECT Mr Roger Hughes

Summary:

Village infrastructure (e.g. drainage) already creaking without any further development
Road network inadequate even for existing level of traffic-with previous expansion/in-fill having added to the increased traffic congestion, amount of on-road parking and consequential (and sometimes dangerously) reduced visibility in too many places in the village when passing parked vehicles(not least close to the surgery and school)
Village school capacity and surgery resources already stretched
Public transport for existing population already very limited-further growth will merely exacerbate this
Employment opportunities in immediate area very limited-with various consequential implications

More details about Rep ID: 4906

Representation ID: 4517

OBJECT David R. Clark

Summary:

Glemsford has had no alteration to its road infrastructure for many years and suffers from narrow and congested roads into and through the village, no or only very limited footpaths.

Traffic already has to pull over to allow vehicles to pass at many places. Vision is restricted in many places..

I suspect that there would be a difficulties for school, doctors surgery, water and sewage systems

There is little or no employment prospects in the village therefor any new residents will have to commute, possibly some long distance, for work increasing the fumes and pollution in the area.

More details about Rep ID: 4517

Representation ID: 4296

OBJECT Mrs Karen Crossan

Summary:

Again possible access to the site, please see my objections to SSO226, this land is again off Hobbs Lane and the access problems would be similar. Also should these proposed sites go ahead there would be a substantial increase to the traffic going through the village, most households having two cars, and this would bring with it an increased risk of highway safety to residents of the village, in particular the elderly and young children.

More details about Rep ID: 4296

Representation ID: 3985

OBJECT Mrs Merlyn Shepherd

Summary:

Village roads are inadequate for current levels of traffic
The present doctors surgery doesn't seem capable of dealing with current levels of population, parking adjacent to the surgery is often chaotic and dangerous as the parking area within the doctors forecourt is inadequate.
The Public transport is totally inadequate for Glemsford, what little buses that do run do not provide a consistent timetable
There does not appear to be any plans to attract employers to the area.
The present school will not cope with the influx of children that such housing developments would attract

More details about Rep ID: 3985

Representation ID: 3688

OBJECT Mrs Kerry Brown

Summary:

I object to more houses being built in Glemsford, at the moment we are just about a village, any more and we will be a town. The village roads are inadequate for current levels of traffic. GP surgery is struggling to deal with current population and the parking around the surgery is chaotic and dangerous. The school could not cope with the influx of children or the parking and crossing around it. The sewage system is not adequate, many homes already have constant problems. Roads are narrow and parking a problem in many areas of the village.

More details about Rep ID: 3688

Representation ID: 3422

OBJECT Mr Peter Shepherd

Summary:

Village roads are inadequate for current levels of traffic
The present doctors surgery doesn't seem capable of dealing with current levels of population, parking adjacent to the surgery is often chaotic and dangerous as the parking area within the doctors forecourt is inadequate.
The Public transport is totally inadequate for Glemsford, what little buses that do run do not provide a consistent timetable
There does not appear to be any plans to attract employers to the area.
The present school will not cope with the influx of children that such housing developments would attract

More details about Rep ID: 3422

Representation ID: 3157

OBJECT Mrs Anne-marie OSBORNE

Summary:

Drainage and water system are at present at breaking point, evidenced recently by serious disruptive work in Kings Rd, this without significant increase in demand from any new developments.
Doctors surgery and local school would be oversubscribed.
Roads throughout the village are narrow, congested and poorly maintained and not of a standard to take more vehicles.
Lack of local employment that will be exacerbated by the closure of Delphi.
Village infrastructure wouldn't be able to sustain developments of this size. Public transport is very poor and problems with recent new devolopment sites need to be re-examined and lessons heeded.

More details about Rep ID: 3157

Representation ID: 3097

OBJECT Mrs Loretta Edwards

Summary:

Glemsford does not have the infrastructure to cope with any further
significant building plans.
The roads through the village are narrow and can hardly cope with the
current level of traffic yet alone new resident's vehicles and construction
traffic. The school is full and the surgery at capacity. There are no
employment opportunities in the village and the limited bus service stops
after 6pm requiring residents to need transport for both work and leisure.

More details about Rep ID: 3097

Representation ID: 3087

OBJECT Mr Chris Edwards

Summary:


o Roads are inadequate for current volumes of traffic
o The School in the village has no capacity for more students
o The Surgery currently has only two doctors - one less than establishment
o Resulting damage to dwellings of historical importance is pertinent
o The 'Infil' developments have already had a detrimental impact on village infrastructure
* There are no employment opportunities in Glemsford.
* There is no rail link near Glemsford -
o The bus service to and from the village is primitive

More details about Rep ID: 3087

Representation ID: 2761

OBJECT Mr Alan Harmer

Summary:

Extra road Traffic generating considerable increase in vehicles entering and leaving village
on roads not designed to cope with such volume,and already in poor condition.

Potential Drainage and Sewage problems.

Local Surgery already under pressure.

Local School already under pressure.

More details about Rep ID: 2761

Representation ID: 2759

OBJECT Mr Alan Harmer

Summary:

Extra road Traffic generating considerable increase in vehicles entering and leaving village
on roads not designed to cope with such volume,and already in poor condition.

Potential Drainage and Sewage problems.

Local Surgery already under pressure.

Local School under pressure.

More details about Rep ID: 2759

Representation ID: 2507

OBJECT Mrs Pat Graves

Summary:

Planning Ref: SS0286, SS0257 & SS0226
My objection is to the number of houses planned for development in Glemsford.
Lack of suitable roads in and out of Glemsford village.
Parking is restricted in the village due to the roads.
The sewerage system is not adequate to accept any more pressure on it.
The doctors surgery is not large enough to accommodate the houses being anticipated being built.
The school is full already and who would want there five your old to travel by bus to other schools in the area.

More details about Rep ID: 2507

Representation ID: 2464

OBJECT Mr Neville Parry

Summary:

Totally object to this development (SS0286). Any development of this scale would cause major resource issues on already stretched school and medical services. A development of this scale is totally disproportionate to the existing village footprint. Lessons must be learned from the earlier disastrous large developments in Glemsford. The village simply cannot cope with further large scale population ingress The current volume of traffic in the village and access roads to this location already causes serious hazards. It would destroy the pleasant rural aspect of this side of the village. No further large development is wanted.

More details about Rep ID: 2464

Representation ID: 1994

OBJECT Mr J M McKenna

Summary:

This would mean traffic using this development would use either Park Lane or the Kings Rd. Estate (If any access was gained). More volume of traffic would increase the risk of accidents as the roads are narrow. As there is a national speed limit on the road , at that point, traffic could travel at up to 60 mph, legally.

Lack of infrastructure such as sewage/drainage. The school is virtually full now. The surgery would be under further pressure. Where will people work. Travel to work in places such as Bury St Edmunds and Haverhill will increase traffic. Public transport is dire. Roads through the village are narrow, made even narrower by parked vehicles.

More details about Rep ID: 1994

Representation ID: 1874

OBJECT Mr Sean Graves

Summary:

Planning Ref: SS0286, SS0257 & SS0226
My objection is to the sheer number of houses planned for development in Glemsford.
Getting a doctors appointment is difficult now let alone with the extra homes.
The local sewage works are already at breaking point.
The roads into and in the village are crumbling now.
Park lane and Hobbs lane are continually being patched due to the heavy vehicles that are using this lane.
Our local school is running at 100% capacity.
I'm not against development but just the sheer numbers being suggested.

More details about Rep ID: 1874

Representation ID: 1626

OBJECT Mrs Lucy Woodhouse

Summary:

My objections are on the grounds:
Design and layout, Highway Issues, Traffic Generations, Vehicular Access, Parking Issues, Capacity of Physical Infrastructure, Public Drainage/Water Systems, Lack of social facilities (i.e. employment), healthcare, community facilities, school spaces etc. We have enough problems in Glemsford with adding to them. So I wanted to ask the planning officers and planners to rethink these proposed plans.

More details about Rep ID: 1626

Representation ID: 1623

OBJECT Mrs J Byrne

Summary:

We have not got roads to take the traffic generation and highway safety we have no main roads in or out of Glemsford. We do not have a good bus service there is no work in Glemsford you have to have a car to live here we can not take any more kids in our school and they have no way to make it bigger. You can't get a doctors appointment now so what will it be like with another 3000 going to the doctors. We cant take any more here.

More details about Rep ID: 1623

Representation ID: 1511

OBJECT Rob Abbey & Dennis Hopwood

Summary:

Development would have a significant impact on the existing conservation area.

Roads in and around Glemsford are not capable of handling an increased demand. Improvements needed before development.

Limited employment opportunities leading to more benefit claimants and linked increase in crime.

Primary school, ambulance service and doctors surgery could not cope with additional demand. Policing is already an issue in Glemsford, this will only cause additional problems. Sewage issues.

Development should be adjacent to the A1092, no additional traffic impact on Glemsford, no historic interests.

More details about Rep ID: 1511

Representation ID: 1508

OBJECT Alex Bull & Shaun Everett

Summary:

Development would have a significant impact on the existing conservation area.

Roads in and around Glemsford are not capable of handling an increased demand. Improvements needed before development.

Limited employment opportunities leading to more benefit claimants and linked increase in crime.

Primary school, ambulance service and doctors surgery could not cope with additional demand. Policing is already an issue in Glemsford, this will only cause additional problems. Sewage issues.

Development should be adjacent to the A1092, no additional traffic impact on Glemsford, no historic interests.

More details about Rep ID: 1508

Representation ID: 1410

OBJECT Michael & Glenda Hunt

Summary:

Glemsford does not have the underlying infrastructure to support this amount of expansion. Water main on Kings Road has needed attention at least 6 times. Current volume of traffic means that parking spaces are at a premium. Hobbs Lane/Egremont St/Park Lane has a mass of potholes & require attention. School places & healthcare facilities are already stretched to bursting, there are very limited opportunities for employment in the village which means extra traffic in & out of the village on a daily basis.

More details about Rep ID: 1410

Representation ID: 1313

OBJECT Sue Challis

Summary:

The village has seen considerable expansion, with recent large developments. There has been no consideration given to social facilities such as clubs & play areas particularly older teenagers. Tensions have boiled over between elderly residents and young families, because planners & builders gave no consideration to social & leisure facilities.

There is no public transport into/out of the village after 6.00pm, youngsters cannot attend clubs. The current road system is very poor & cannot take any further increase in traffic. The school cannot expand.

Glemsford is being turned into a town. Education, healthcare, employment, leisure, transport & roads are all under significant pressure already. Glemsford does not have the infrastructure to accommodate this expansion.

More details about Rep ID: 1313

Representation ID: 1308

OBJECT Mr Ian Macpherson

Summary:

The village infra-structure could not possibly sustain this level of development.
We only have one ill maintained road through the village which could not cope with the increase in traffic.
The primary school is certainly not large enough without building an additional school to meet the needs of the increased population.
The doctor's surgery is already one doctor short and has been for a while.
Water and sewage would need upgrading.
Already there are developments going on in the village the impact of which have not yet been fulfilled.
I therefore oppose these development applications.

More details about Rep ID: 1308

Representation ID: 992

OBJECT Doug Ellis

Summary:

Roads in Glemsford are already dangerously inadequate for present demand. We have too many cars and not enough parking spaces already. On road parking makes it difficult to progress through the village. Increasing the population of this village will serve only to exacerbate the existing problem.
The school and doctors surgery is struggling to keep up with demand. Presumably you will be checking that supplies of water and facilities for sewage are adequate for the additional demand.

Before further building in Glemsford is considered I would urge that current inadequacies in the village infrastructure are addressed. The problems already exist.

More details about Rep ID: 992

Representation ID: 985

OBJECT Miss Vicky Stonell

Summary:

I strongly object to the 3 proposed development sites in Glemsford as this would increase traffic in an already very busy and narrow road infrastructure, parking in the village is already potentially dangerous and access to the village is hard enough.
Local schools will struggle to accommodate the increase in people
Local doctors surgeries will not be able to cope as it is hard enough now to get appoints at the best of times.
The drainage/water system is already overstretched therefore any population increase would lead to major problems
I hope that the council will reconsider this proposal.

More details about Rep ID: 985

Representation ID: 978

OBJECT Henrietta & Michael Soffe

Summary:

Increased traffic generation on to the main road to Sudbury and narrow local roads would be dangerous.
Parking in the village is a real problem and the increase could not be justified
School facilities would struggle
Lion Surgery facilities are already stretched
Lack of local employment
Noise and disturbance problems from local teenagers would almost certainly recur due to increases in population
The local drainage/water system is overstretched, any population increase would lead to major problems

More details about Rep ID: 978

Representation ID: 763

OBJECT Roger Newman

Summary:

Least Impact Area: Traffic Generation, Highway Safety, Capacity of Physical Infrastructure, Lack of Social Facilities.

More details about Rep ID: 763

Representation ID: 759

OBJECT Mrs K A King

Summary:

Our doctor's surgery already finds it difficult to cope at times. Our primary school is pretty full, extra water will be needed in an already dry area, not to mention sewage. Skates Hill is already a nightmare with so many parked cards. I feel I take my life in my hands every time I drive up or down it. To top all that, Delphi's in Sudbury is due to close within two years. Where will all the people work, their children go to school. I strongly object to all this building, for the sake of the infrastructure.

More details about Rep ID: 759

Representation ID: 742

OBJECT Stewart Hurrell

Summary:

Will access be constricted to the B1066 via Stansted and Park lane in order for normal traffic flow to utilise the Egremont Street/Skates Hill roads?

How will the current roads cope with increase in traffic?

Glemsford School has a waiting list for admissions.

Doctors - every 500 new houses will require 0.5 of a doctor, this should need inclusion in the planning especially with the problems of recruiting GP's into a rural practice.

Drainage and sewerage - given that certain recently built properties are having problems with sewerage - will the current system be upgraded?

More details about Rep ID: 742

Representation ID: 738

OBJECT Christine Beetles

Summary:

The village cannot sustain any further developments, the school is oversubscribed. It is very difficult to get a doctors appointment. Parking has already become horrendous, the roads in the village are not sufficient to take any more traffic. Ongoing problems with the sewers must be a matter of priority before exaggerating the existing problems by adding more dwellings. I understand the need for more affordable homes to be built but let's get things done in the right order. I would recommend a neighbourhood plan so that the people of the village, the government and the local councils all have their opinions taken into consideration.

More details about Rep ID: 738

Representation ID: 726

OBJECT Mrs Sandra Coster

Summary:

1. Access to Glemsford is limited to 3 roads ,each. Of which does not allow large vehicles to pass each other
2 the school will not be able to take the extra children
3 doctors surgery is just managing now
4 our roads through the village are congested with parked vehicles
5 could our sewers take the extra input?

More details about Rep ID: 726

Representation ID: 721

OBJECT Mr George Mathews

Summary:

Highways are not suitable
Already there is a problem with sewerage in the village/ new houses not linked properly to waste.
Drains and flooding
School would not be able to facilitate any more children it is a listed property with no room to develope.
Our Doctors have problems now with appointments/parking

More details about Rep ID: 721

Representation ID: 607

OBJECT Trinda & Terry Baxter

Summary:

Glemsford cannot accommodate any more large developments. This is a village and fast becoming a town and is just not big enough for the three proposed developments. This village needs its fields, trees and open spaces. There are many new estates and gardens accommodating new builds recently and that is enough.
Doctors surgery and village school cannot accommodate hundreds more people.
The infrastructure, drainage and water systems will not be able to cope.
Traffic generated now through the village is at its limit. What will happen with hundreds more houses and the pollution and safety issues due to excess traffic.

More details about Rep ID: 607

Representation ID: 592

OBJECT Carl & Betty Slater

Summary:

This village has been under seige by developers of housing estates for the last few years. Glemsford is a village and we (Glemsfordians) want it to remain so. These new housing estates are merely creating a dormitory for workers. Our roads are at times almost impossible to manoeurve and before long there will be an accident.

Doctors' surgery and village school are overstretched now. Our infrastructure would need improving.

Please bear in mind Glemsford is a village. Housing estates need to be built next to the towns that need the workers thereby decreasing the constant flow of traffic and pollution.

More details about Rep ID: 592

Representation ID: 588

OBJECT Heather Parsons

Summary:

The school and surgery need to be able to cope with all these families.
There will be a considerable amount of traffic using this lane. The building of all these proposed homes will also impact greatly on the road access through the village, it is already a nightmare travelling from Churchgate to Skates Hill.
I also have concerns regarding the cemetery, the graveyard is almost full now. When you keep building on farmland do you not understand that you take away wildlife sanctuary and cause flooding as these fields absorb water,you concrete over them and where does the water go?

More details about Rep ID: 588

Representation ID: 585

OBJECT mrs vickki wright and 1 other

Summary:

Roads are already an issue due to parking and over crowding of cars, the increase will affect commuting and the safety of village residents especially children.
We do not believe the facilities available in the village are sufficient to increased volume, the school would be extremely over subscribed meaning places will not be available to those that need them.
Internet speeds are sub-standard. Drainage is an issue, it is not capable of taking the extra load. Noise and debris from building sites will be unbearable. Loss of natural sunlight.

More details about Rep ID: 585

Representation ID: 581

OBJECT Douglas & Kay Mitchell

Summary:

1. Traffic Generation: Roads into the village are narrow and already busy.
2. Highway Safety: Safety issues caused by on road parking. Increased traffic would greatly adversely impact on safety issues around the school, pubs, shops, post office and other community areas. Speeding cars is an issue.
3. Parking issues: Greatly increased traffic volume would exacerbate the existing local parking problems. Parking would be made considerably more difficult around the community areas.
4. Noise & Disturbance: Certain to increase. Traffic and road noise already a problem.
5. Strain on Facilities: Healthcare and schools will not cope with extra demand.

More details about Rep ID: 581

Representation ID: 577

OBJECT Chrissy Marshall

Summary:

Drainage and water delivery through mains services easily breaks down, with unforeseen foul water backup, and reduced mains water flow.
Road safety issues on Egremont Street
Glemsford Surgery is struggling. No way can the current facility be increased to accommodate a further 800 to 1000 homes, which would double the size of the surgery patient role.
Youth and the elderly, especially without transport already have limited opportunity for social and community facilities.
The school is totally inadequate in terms of size to accommodate an increased influx of primary school age children, which links again to school transport issues.

More details about Rep ID: 577

Representation ID: 568

OBJECT Jennifer Moore

Summary:

Over development of our already over crowded village. Infrastructure of the village can not cope now let alone if more people move here. The school is over subscribed you have to wait for ages to get a nurse appointment. Parking is a major issue now.

More details about Rep ID: 568

Representation ID: 520

OBJECT Mr Joshua Askew

Summary:

My concern stems from 3 large sites being proposed at once. The school and doctors surgery would not be able to cope. Wait times at the surgery are already long.

There's also the serious concern of the roads. At current, the village already experiences heavy bottlenecks due to road being too narrow (due to road parking). Roads are often in disrepair. Adding more traffic will only make matters worse. If the village's infrastructure can be upgraded to deal with extra housing, then I do not see a problem, but as things stand, the village cannot support the current plans.

More details about Rep ID: 520

Representation ID: 501

OBJECT Mr Paul Grant

Summary:

Insufficient village infrastructure

More details about Rep ID: 501

Representation ID: 500

OBJECT Mr Paul Grant

Summary:

The village infrastructure is insufficient

More details about Rep ID: 500

Representation ID: 497

OBJECT Mrs Christine Nelson

Summary:

Lack of social facilities, schools , healthcare,our roads could not cope with the extra traffic
Our drains certainly could not cope with drainage.

More details about Rep ID: 497

Representation ID: 488

OBJECT Ms Polly Rodger Brown

Summary:

Glemsford cannot support any more development. Its streets are already crowded with cars - driving through the village is impossible as it is. The school is overcrowded and so is the surgery. Currently every space in the village is being filled with new houses. No more development.

More details about Rep ID: 488

Representation ID: 480

OBJECT Mr John Borley

Summary:

I do not feel in any way that the infrastructure of Glemsford can accommodate a development of this size, especially the school and doctors surgery. Also the increase in traffic through the tight road that runs through our village would not be safe for pedestrians and especially children.i so I object in the strongest possible way against this development.

More details about Rep ID: 480

Representation ID: 466

OBJECT mrs claire Martin

Summary:

Reason for objection: Highway Issues,Hobbs lane being a narrow road will not cope with volume of traffic.Traffic Generation, Highway Safety, Parking Issues Noise and Disturbances Capacity of Physical Infrastructure( drainage/water system) This is already a problem with pathways bursting leaks along Kings Road. The school is a listed building and with no room to build onto. Doctors surgery could not with stand the capacity.

More details about Rep ID: 466

Representation ID: 373

OBJECT Ronald Newley

Summary:

Increase of traffic, school places, doctors trying to cope and drainage (sewage) all applies as above as well as the village roads trying to cope with the extra massive amount of extra vehicles.

More details about Rep ID: 373

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

Powered by OpusConsult