Suffolk County Council slammed for Bentley quarry costs | East Anglian Daily Times

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/24551230.bentley-quarry-off-a12-suffolk-quashed-legal-action/ 

See comments from Marianne Monday about SCC ignoring warnings......

 https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/24563082.suffolk-county-council-slammed-bentley-quarry-costs/

 http://bentleypc.onesuffolk.net/news-posts/view/148

29th August

Village Correspondent

JOINT STATEMENT BY BENTLEY AND COPDOCK & WASHBROOK PARISH COUNCILS : BROCKLEY WOOD APPROVAL QUASHED

Today, the Royal Court of Justice has quashed the planning permission granted by Suffolk County Council (SCC) for the extraction, processing and sale of sand and gravel together with the processing of inert waste materials including concrete crushing at Brockley Wood. 

This is a direct result of action taken by Bentley and Copdock & Washbrook Parish Councils and a small group of Bentley residents, on behalf of their local communities.  This action was taken to hold SCC to account for their unlawful approval of this application and is just reward for the enormous amount of work undertaken by those individuals.

With planning approval quashed, all work on the site should cease as there is no longer any lawful basis for such works to be undertaken.  

Suffolk County Council have agreed that the applicant will need to re-consider their application in the light of the site being designated as a Valued Landscape.  They confirm that this will include re-consultation on any revised plans or documents submitted in order to ensure that SCC review all grounds of our Judicial Review Claim relating to Valued Landscape, HGV movements, noise levels for local residents and land raising issues, all of which must be considered lawfully.

Both Councils will engage with elected representatives at District & County level to do all they can to work together to ensure any subsequent application will have the least impact on our local communities and our valued landscape. We will continue to hold Suffolk County Council to account for the manner in which this process is conducted. 

We will update residents on developments as they unfold.

Cllr Marianne Munday

Chair of Bentley Parish Council

Cllr Adrian Ward

Chair of Copdock and Washbrook Parish Council

29 August 2024

BROCKLEY WOOD QUARRY AND INERT WASTE PROCESSING DEVELOPMENT - LEGAL CHALLENGE

Residents will be aware that, despite overwhelming local opposition and a number of significant omissions and shortcomings in the planning process, Suffolk County Council gave approval to this application at their planning meeting on the 19th March. 

Along with a wide range of local bodies and individuals, Bentley Parish Council had campaigned against industrialisation of the wonderful tract of valued landscape which is now proposed not only for the working of sand and gravel, but a major waste processing and concrete crushing plant sited right next to our ancient woodlands (with their protected species) and residents living in Grade 2* listed buildings.

It is deeply concerned, as are residents, about the impacts of 160 HGVs per day “at the gates of the village” and the potential for these HGVs to travel through our narrow lanes which are totally unsuited to accommodate this traffic, but to which navigation systems will undoubtedly direct this traffic when the trunk roads are congested, as they routinely are.

The Parish Council was so dismayed by Suffolk County Council’s treatment of the planning application and its lack of respect for our local rural communities that, quite exceptionally, it has taken advice from Leading and Junior Counsel who are well versed in the field, and requested the bringing of judicial review proceedings to challenge this decision together with a Bentley resident. This action is supported by other ‘interested parties’ including Copdock and Washbrook Parish Council and other local residents, all of whom are making financial contributions towards the legal costs. Due to this, Bentley Parish Council’s financial liability is limited. 

Now that the claim has been formally lodged with the Royal Courts of Justice, a High Court Judge must consider whether the case is sufficiently "arguable" as to be given permission to proceed to a full hearing. This decision should be known by 26th June and the Parish Council will continue to keep residents updated of any developments in the interim. 

Cllr Marianne Munday

Chair Bentley Parish Council

25th May 2024

 

East Suffolk Planning Alliance (ESPA)

Alert to residents & some bad news for Westerfield and Tuddenham.

 

 

ALERT RED HOUSE FARM TREES Application for Tree Works: Works to Trees Subject to a Tree Preservation Order

 

Please support our Campaign by writing to or emailing IBC.

Request that IBC exercise their statutory duties (for this important historical and biodiverse site);

• to seek professional expert review of the survey information, & independent verification of the

  landowner's tree survey recommendations

• remind that important and Protected Species who live on the site have been formally reported and Natural England’s advice should be secured

Save Our Trees!!- on Red House Park & Red House Farm site, North Ipswich

 

Please support our Campaign by writing to or emailing IBC.

 Request that IBC exercise their statutory duties for this important historical and biodiverse site;

• to seek professional expert review of the survey information, & independent verification of the

  landowner's tree survey recommendations

• remind that important and Protected Species who live on the site have been formally reported and Natural England’s advice should be secured

Ashcroft Road in Ipswich hit by flash flood during storm

Another Dailmer Road/ Loftus Drave Ipswich in the making?

https://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/23514390.ashcroft-road-ipswich-hit-flash-flood-storm/ 

" Hilary Bond, who was at her friend's house at the time of the flooding, said: "It happens everytime there is a heavy downpour. 

"The manhole cover lifts at the bottom of Larchcroft Road and the sewage empties into the road and into the lowest houses."

"It's been happening for years, he gets told its fixed but then it happens again.

"The fish in his pond end up being swept away and he's left with raw sewage in front and back gardens."

Suffolk Highways said it attended the road and found Anglian Water sewer covers had lifted as a result of heavy rainfall. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 SOCS - Planning re-consultation for IP/22/00013/OUTFL

Land To The East Of Westerfield Road And South Of The Railway Line, Red House Farm Westerfield Road Ipswich Update: April 2023

 

 

New requirements to consider 'BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN' in all Planning Applications decisions!

 On March 8th, Ipswich Borough Council Planning Committee voted in interim guidance on 'Biodiversity Net Gain' (BNG) requirements, which were outlined in law within the 2021 Environment Act.

 https://democracy.ipswich.gov.uk/documents/g2808/Public%20reports%20pack%2008th-Mar-2023%2009.30%20Planning%20Development%20Committee.pdf?T=10 

page 159, Item 6- 
COMMITTEE: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REF NO: PD/22/14 

DATE: 8 MARCH 2023 SUBJECT:INTERIM BIODIVERISTY NET GAIN PLANNING GUIDANCE NOTE FOR SUFFOLK REPORT AUTHOR:  

ANNA ROEHEAD OF SERVICE: JAMES MANN

This 'BNG' consideration is hugely important to 'greenfield sites such as the Red House Park Application which has proven and recorded protected species - as Great Crested Newts- SOCS registered them in 2015 with the Suffolk Biological Records office following a resident's survey.

New surveys and work will be required, as outlined in the above BNG guidance document, for all current and future determinations! 

The Ipswich Borough Area Committees, Planning & Development Department, local MP Tom Hunt, stakeholders Suffolk Wildlife Trust, 'Place' Biodiversity Consultancy, Natural England and the Environment Agency have been approached and petitioned by SOCS on this.These photos were taken in November 2022 by a licensed rescuer of some 20 Newts at risk, along the Westerfield Watercouse & tributary of the Gipping which flows alongside and within these important Ipswich Garden Suburb site. If you live in  IP4 bordering the area, please look out and report all sitings of protected species.

SOCS say save Red House Park:Application IP/22/00013/OUTFL does not meet the required tests of sustainable development.

Local Groups concerns-Fonnereau site on Ipswich Garden Suburb - IP/22/00036/REM - Land To South Of Railway Line Westerfield Road

 Local Groups concerns SOCS & North Fringe Protection Group

IP/22/00036/REM - Land To South Of Railway Line Westerfield Road

Objection: √ This feedback represents the 1000 resident’s continuing ongoing objections to Fonnereau Ipswich Garden Suburb development planning proposals - initially made in 2014 and in 2017.

Despite the intervening 6 years, it would appear few of the substantive concerns raised have been addressed; neither have they been adequately addressed within this application.

We suggest the application is inadequate, proposals DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF)

 

• Growth, must be measured against the potential for serious adverse effects and serious adverse impacts, which included adverse impacts on the Quality of Life and Public Health.

• The potential to secure a ‘sustainable future’ for the existing local population, future populations and future generations is an imperative not demonstrated by the application.

• The “Climate Change” agenda is insufficiently addressed. Proposals are contrary to NPPF 10- Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change.

• “Serious adverse effects” have not been properly identified, as required under compliance with the NPPF.

• NPPF 6-17) Achieving Sustainable Development for either the CS or development and control purposes.

• This situation is likely to render any planning application almost impossible to determine properly and therefore, we say, render the major IGS planning applications problematic. It also potentially renders stakeholder responses to planning applications a problem.

• NPPF-11 Conserving and enhancing the natural environment is not adequately taken into account.

• TAKING FULL ACCOUNT OF15 CUMULATIVE AND COMPOUND ADVERSE EFFECTS: requires that the assessment include identification of cumulative and synergistic effects including those produced by other neighbouring local authorities. The SA does not appear to take account of the cumulative effect of CSs Plans of neighbouring authorities with regard to housing, employment and especially transport/traffic and increased air pollution and traffic congestion.

There has been a growing recognition of the adverse cumulative impacts of poorly delivered development, unwise planning approvals - (often due to the pressures on Local Authorities of the NFPP 5 year House supply issue) - compounded by the failure of the Local Plan system (as well as NPPF) to deliver sustainable expansion, sustainable economic growth and housing delivery.

The Key Sustainability issues and concerns relating to this Development (and the other IGS developments) have remained essentially constant since these proposals were put forward in 2004 Local Plan Process.

The Ipswich Garden Suburb SPD in SOCS view, whilst providing basic steer, is in need of a review to take account of significant developments and constraints, and major requirements such as carbon neutrality, Air Quality pollution improvements from particulates, and failure to allow mitigation against emerging world events- such as food supply and security.

 

1. Public Health adverse Air Quality impacts, and premature deaths from the current and future likely increase in traffic, and the resulting critical increases in Air Pollution.

2. Public Health adverse impacts from the lack of primary care services and current GP availability, no Health Impact Assessment was submitted for this application despite our requesting it in 2012, ( a weakness we identity due to long planning time frame) due to delays from 2017 and application 5 years on as reserve matters; no planned GP primary care provision requiring that new patients would have to travel to existing overloaded and inadequate GP services further exacerbating Air Quality problems.(See copy of the correspondence re FOI.)

3. The real risk of overload, of Cliff Key, as advised by Anglian Water (for both Mersea Red House & Fonnereau) flood (see below) and resulting contamination (particularly of the Gipping area) from this and other cumulative development, No rivers in Suffolk currently meet government targets for good water quality, a report found. Strong measures are needed mitigating against Climate Change and from increasing adverse weather events.

   10 years on from the promise of an off site sewage plan for the Northern fringe, it appears no nearer any viable sustainable long term resolution. Suffolk’s rivers are in a parlous stage due to sewage pollution and lack of remedial measures or actions against it.¹

4. The current need to protect Farm Land and food production and food security issues. 

    

   THE FOLLOWING ON GOING ISSUES NEED TO BE FULLY AND ADEQUATELY ASSESSED

   Issues identified repeatedly but not resolved 2014, 2016, 2021, 2022

   DRAINAGE, Surface Water Drainage problem and Westerfield Water Course, Millennium Cemetery

   FLOODING LIKELIHOOD may increase at Westerfield.

   SEWAGE PROPOSALS INADEQUATE & likely to add to existing problems -Anglian W aware as are SCC. Suffolk County Council's flood risk management committee, which is due to meet on 17 May 2022 has been asked to take action to improve its rivers and water sources by opposition councillors from the Green, Liberal Democrat and Independent group, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service

   TRAFFIC PROPOSALS AND ADVERSE IMPACTS ON EXISTING RESIDENTS- no solutions Traffic Assessments Submitted in 2016 The TA was heavily flawed and didn’t include sufficient mitigation measures or additional highway structure that would prevent severe levels of congestion from additional traffic (even though the models under-estimate traffic volumes)." Suffolk County Council October 2016 agreed.

   AIR POLLUTION and impact on our children's health inadequate Air Pollution Action Planning

   ADVERSE PRESSURES ON HOSPITALS, SCHOOLS & ACCESS TO GPs and SOCIAL CARE No plans for health provision here on the IGS sites. * (See below recent evidence)

   ADVERSE EFFECTS OF ROAD WIDENING and REMOVAL OF TREES & VERGES

   LOSS OF HIGH GRADE LOCAL FOOD GROWING LAND Grade 2 and 3

   REMOVAL OF TREES, HEDGEROWS, HABITATS – Rare Trees and TPOs -Loss of amenity

   BIODIVERSITY LOSS PROTECTED SPECIES -https://socsnews.blogspot.com/2015/12/please-help-record-important-sightings.html recorded and logged on site- badgers, owls and bats, hedgehogs

   PROBLEMS WITH ACCESS AND EXIT- Road Safety issues with, road constraints rail crossing schools

   Where is the NEED FOR THESE houses and flats bearing in mind the LACK OF NEW LOCAL JOB?

   POSSIBLE PROBLEM WITH ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLY

   Full responses from SOCS and NFPG can be found here: 

   https://drive.google.com/file/d/12BWgCbQTgEBvSlbQ4kGEu1bDsFDfGDaq/view?usp=sharing

1https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-61396658 Suffolk's rivers fail to meet national quality targets, report says

1 Chair Tuddenham Road IP4

Save Our Country Spaces – SOCS Hybrid Planning application IP/22/00013/OUTFL by Mersea Homes for the Red House Park development - Objection

 

Save Our Country Spaces – SOCS

Hybrid Planning application IP/22/00013/OUTFL by Mersea Homes for the Red House Park development.

Full Planning permission for the two principal means of vehicular access and all pedestrian and cycle accesses off Westerfield Road. Outline planning application (all matters reserved) for a mixed use development for up to 1,020 dwellings (Use Class C3), a local centre etc

Objection: √

SOCS endorse all points for IP/22/00013/OUTFL - raised in the full technical detail response by Brian Samuel on behalf of the North Fringe Protection group and submitted by SOCS as Appendix A.

This feedback represents the 1000 resident’s continuing ongoing objections to Mersea Homes Fonnereau/ Red House Ipswich Garden Suburb development planning proposals - initially made in 2014 and resubmitted in 2017.

•   Growth, must be measured against the potential for serious adverse effects and serious adverse impacts, which included adverse impacts on the Quality of Life and Public Health.

•   The potential to secure a “sustainable future” for the existing local population, future populations and future generations is an imperative not demonstrated by the application.

•   The “Climate Change” agenda is insufficiently addressed. Proposals are contrary to NPPF 10- Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change.

•   “Serious adverse effects” have not been properly identified, as required under compliance with the NPPF.

•   NPPF 6-17) Achieving Sustainable Development for either the CS or development and control purposes.

•   This situation is likely to render any planning application almost impossible to determine properly and therefore, we say, render the major IGS planning applications problematic. It also potentially renders stakeholder responses to planning applications a problem.

•   NPPF-11 Conserving and enhancing the natural environment is not adequately taken into account.

•   TAKING FULL ACCOUNT OF 16 CUMULATIVE AND COMPOUND ADVERSE EFFECTS: requires that the assessment include identification of cumulative and synergistic effects including those produced by other neighbouring local authorities. The SA does not appear to take account of the cumulative effect of Core Strategy Plans of neighbouring authorities with regard to housing, employment and especially transport/traffic and increased air pollution and traffic congestion.

Despite the intervening 6 years, it would appear few of the substantive concerns raised have been addressed. Nor have concerns raised during the pre application Consultation March 2021 been satisfied.

Neither have they been adequately addressed within this ‘hybrid’ Application.

We suggest the Application is inadequate, proposals
DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF)

There has been a growing recognitive of the adverse cumulative impacts of poorly delivered development, unwise planning approvals - (often due to the pressures on Local Authorities of the NFPP 5 year House supply issue) - compounded by the failure of the Local Plan system (as well as NPPF) to deliver sustainable expansion, sustainable economic growth and housing delivery.

The Key Sustainability issues and concerns raised by stakeholders and the public to date relating to Mersea Homes Development (and the other IGS developments) have remained essentially constant since these proposals were put forward in 2004 Local Plan Process. There is now an imperative to address issues such as Food security and protection of grade 2 land, address impacts from Air pollution and particulates, mitigate against increasing flood risks and foul sewer contamination, to halt biodiversity loss in order to address the Climate Change & Emergency and meet rigorous new targets on this before it is too late.

The Ipswich Garden Suburb SPD in SOCS view, whilst providing basic steer, is in need of a review to take account of significant developments and constraints, and major requirements such as carbon neutrality, Air Quality pollution improvements from particulates, and failure to allow mitigation against emerging world events- such as food supply and security.

Public opinion and feedback from residents to us indicate, that over the time, areas of concerns raised by residents and stakeholders have not been addressed nor sufficient mitigation established to have any confidence in either the need, viability or sustainability of this application.

SOCS endorse all points for IP/22/00013/OUTFL - raised in the full technical detail response by Brian Samuel on behalf of the North Fringe Protection group and submitted by SOCS as Appendix A with kind permission.

Please see  full combined response from SOCS & NFPG here;

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pKXyo8i2HMqId9zZyBNQPpFoc0_k-BpV/view?usp=sharing