Suffolk Coastal Local Plan: Modifications

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

582 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Bremner, Gerry 01 Aug 2020

Main Modifications General Comment

  • Comment ID: 560
'Further response received following contact made with those who expressed they felt disadvantaged in the consultation due to the Covid-19 situation' Although I accept there has been some attempt by East Suffolk Council (ESC) to mitigate the impact of the pandemic on the local communities ability to participate in the consultation on the Local Plan major modifications, I do not accept that they are sufficient and broad enough taking into context the overall impact of this global crisis and the
Waltham, Barbara and Bruce 31 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 564
'Further response received following contact made with those who expressed they felt disadvantaged in the consultation due to the Covid-19 situation' I attach herewith a copy of an article that has appeared in a newspaper yesterday. We have of course placed our objections re Chapel Field but I want to reiterate that no developments are built off lanes even a lane that may be possible to widen, but a lane that leads to more lanes that are even narrower. We based our objections on the lack of a
Waltham, Barbara and Bruce 25 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 561
'Further response received following contact made with those who expressed they felt disadvantaged in the consultation due to the Covid-19 situation' I have been given permission by a resident who lives in Half Moon Lane to forward the below to you. We know the time for objections is over but this needs to be placed on record somewhere. Our water pressure is always going up and down and has worsened since Felgate Way was developed, and often we have burst mains in the main B road through this v
Waltham, Barbara and Bruce 25 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 562
'Further response received following contact made with those who expressed they felt disadvantaged in the consultation due to the Covid-19 situation' I attach some photographs and a short dossier of flooding in Post Mill Close. Again I am fully aware that the time for objections is over but a need to have these sent to you for information purposes. I will have to send the remaining via a second email.
Waltham, Barbara and Bruce 25 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 563
'Further response received following contact made with those who expressed they felt disadvantaged in the consultation due to the Covid-19 situation' Re Post Mill Close Grundisburgh Woodbridge – FLOODING In 1973, and from that time, EVERY TIME we had heavy rain the Close would flood. This mostly affected the residents of number 4, 6, and 8 as the lowest part of the Close is where the driveways of those properties join the Close. Over the next several years the council were phoned to report it
Payne, Ms 23 Jul 2020

Main Modifications General Comment

  • Comment ID: 565
'Further response received following contact made with those who expressed they felt disadvantaged in the consultation due to the Covid-19 situation' Thank you for your email and letter. I actually didnt raise anything about Covid, simply that the website was very difficult to negotiate in order to make comments. It would be good to have a lay person check it for you in future. I almost gave up responding, but I'm glad I didn't. This is a vital issue in Grundisburgh to save killing people.
Waltham, Barbara and Bruce 20 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 547
Late Representation We in the village of Grundisburgh would like to know why Hopkins Homes are making statements as follows :- The settlement proposed offers appropriate and complimentary level of development to the existing settlement of Grundisburgh They also state they are carrying out an environmental study So this smacks to us that they think/know that planning permission will be granted on a site ESC has stated is unsuitable. We want to know what is going on because it appears Hopkins
Manning, Nichola 18 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 543
Late Representation SCLP12.52 Chapel Field I am unsure if you are the right person but I felt I had to write to voice my utmost horror and dismay at the thought of 70 or more houses on this field in Grundisburgh. This site is most unsuitable and definitely not well situated for any large housing development. I am unsure why it was included in the draft local plan, when it was not deemed suitable By highways, when it was being considered for the village hall site. Please use some common sense
Waltham, Barbara and Bruce 18 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 548
Late Representation I attach here photos showing the area around Chapel Field Grundisburgh and the field itself. How anyone could ever begin to say that this is a suitable site which beggars belief, which the Council did say it was UNSUITABLE when removing another field which the Council was stated was suitable. Due to the amount of photos I no doubt will have to send others under separate cover.
Waltham, Barbara and Bruce 18 Jul 2020

Main Modifications MM86

  • Comment ID: 549
Late Representation More Photos. How anyone could ever say this site is suitable is totally unreal it would be a cul de sac with no connection to this village. The feelings in this village are running so high and we ask has anyone ever actually physically visited this site, because anyone viewing this has said no way the impact on the village and the site is totally unacceptable.
Next pageLast page