Saxmundham

Local Plan Public Hearing – this Thursday 5th September is Saxmundham Day – come and join us!

This coming Thursday morning – 5th September – is “Saxmundham morning” at the Local Plan Public Examination, starting 9.30 a.m. This is when the Planning Inspector will ask questions and invite comments/replies on the proposed (800 new dwelling) South Saxmundham Garden Neighbourhood and other issues,

If free, do join us a bit earlier, when we unfurl our “Save Our Sax” banner at 9 a.m. outside the venue at East Suffolk Council’s offices. A strong presence will help highlight the concerns expressed  on many occasions by residents.

The address is:  East Suffolk House, Melton, Woodbridge. IP12 1RT. It is just opposite Melton Station. 

You can then stay to listen to the hearing, if you want… the discussions can be a bit dry at times, but sometimes get more animated… and the outcome truly affects the future of our town. SaxmundhamTown Council and the Leave the Layers Alone group will be at the hearing, with speaking rights – as will be the lawyers and represenatives of the respective developers and main landowners… who disagree among themselves on the best location for future housing in and around Saxmundham.

For those interested in the more detailed points for the session, here are the questions posed by the Inspector.  SCLP means “Suffolk Coastal Local Plan”.  You can find SCLP12.28 and 12.29 at pages 271 and 278 of the Final Draft Local Plan    (heavy document to download!)

And here are our written answers, submitted a few weeks ago:  Response to Inspector Qs on Matter 3

Saxmundham
Policy SCLP12.28: Strategy for Saxmundham

Q3.34 Is the ‘and’ at the end of point e) necessary to make the Policy effective?

Policy SCLP12.29: South Saxmundham Garden Neighbourhood
Q3.35 Is the allocation of land for approximately 800 dwellings achievable within
the area indicated for housing between the A12 road and railway line on the
indicative draft masterplan?

Q3.36 Is the indication of the area to the east of the A12 road for mixed use
development justified given it would be used to provide open space?

Q3.37 In the context of Policy SCLP3.3: Settlement Boundaries, is the definition
of the settlement boundary to include land which would be solely used for
informal/open space justified? Why is the proposed employment land outside of
the settlement boundary?

Q3.38 Would the provision of the SANG to the east of the railway be effective
given the limited crossing points of the railway? Is the extent of land indicated
for informal/formal open space to the east of the railway justified?

Q3.39 Would the Policy give rise to coalescence with Benhall village?

Q3.40 Would the Policy be effective in achieving the provision of required
education facilities? Is it justified to include early years provision within both
criteria a) and b)?

Q3.41 Are there any factors which would mean that the site is not ‘deliverable’ or
‘developable’ as per the definitions in the Framework?

Q3.42 Is it justified that the site is accessed via a single vehicular access?

Q3.43 Would the Policy be effective in addressing the needs for off-site
infrastructure requirements arising from the development?