Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments Company / Response ID Full Name Question Title Comment Organisation The only areas of Haverhill that should be Noted considered for development are Haverhill West (Hanchett village area) and Haverhill Northwest where there is room to build enough housing to Haverhill Question allow realistic expansion, without adversely 49 Mr John Baker Strategic 8 affecting the quality of life of people in the rest of Sites the town. It is also the side of town best served for travel between Haverhill and main routes (eg M11/A14) as well as Cambridge and Bury St Edmunds. Option 1: I disagree because of - distance from Noted town centre, flooding risk, sewerage issues - not much more capacity of current system, accessibility Haverhill to already full A1307 road. Option 2: disagree - Mrs Rosemary Question 125 Strategic sewerage issues, distance from Withersfield (too Wenham 8 Sites close), maintaining the integrity of the village and keep rural boundary of Withersfield. Option 3: disagree for same reasons - flooding, sewerage, communications. Noted I feel that other areas around Haverhill could be The Council has considered for development - e.g. Area S.E of town worked closely near existing bypass. Options 1 & 2 for Haverhill with Braintree Haverhill would appear to cover part of Parish of District Council Mrs Rosemary Question 134 Strategic Withersfield, but are Cleary outside the settlement when considering Wenham 8 Sites boundary for Wiithersfield. It is important that any locations for future development of Haverhill ensures that there strategic growth, are sufficient jobs in Haverhill to mean that people however at this do not have to leave the town to go to work. time it is not perceived to be Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments Company / Response ID Full Name Question Title Comment Organisation suitable to locate development south of the A1017. Living in Bury, I cannot comment closely but there Noted are strong arguments for focusing any new development of Haverhill in the light of the: need Haverhill for regeneration in the town; requirement for new Mr Jim Question 166 Strategic housing linked specifically to local employment Sweetman 8 Sites rather than out commuting; requirement to develop equivalent regional key centres across the region; support for change and regeneration in the 2008 issues report. Haverhill Noted Question 264 Mr Peter Crofts Strategic No comment 8 Sites Haverhill It is impossible to comment meaningfully as to Noted Suffolk Preservation Question 582 Richard Ward Strategic which is the most appropriate, if any, of the sites at Society 8 Sites this stage given the limited information available. In terms of the sites that have been highlighted by Noted the council for possible development, it is It is considered that whilst some Greenfield sites will acknowledged Haverhill need to be allocated for development in the District that the three Question 359 Mr S Oakley Strategic to meet future housing needs, Brownfield sites strategic sites are 8 Sites should be considered in the first instance and as a not the only sites preference, Our client’s site at Charter House, along being considered Sturmer Road in Haverhill (SS14 Haverhill South for development. East), is a 1960’s employment site containing a A number of sites Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments Company / Response ID Full Name Question Title Comment Organisation number of asbestos roofed industrial buildings. New put forward employment areas in Haverhill and elsewhere in the across the District are providing new industrial buildings that borough are are insulated and more appropriate to the needs subject to a and requirements of businesses. Our client’s site is separate, but Brownfield, not within an area at risk of flooding, a parallel Conservation Area or Area of Special Landscape and consultation as there is no known contamination of the site. The part of the Site site is also close to existing services and facilities Allocations Plan and is considered to be an ideal location for Document. residential development, ahead of Greenfield sites that are located further away from facilities. The loss in employment land at Charter House would not be significant and would improve the surrounding environment, in particular for the residential dwellings located opposite the site along Sturmer Road. Whilst it is recognised that not all new residential growth in the District can come form brownfield sites, there are opportunities available (such as our client’s site) that should be considered in detail before support is given to the larger Greenfield and edge of town sites. I wish to register my objection to the proposed Noted. extension of Haverhill [Haverhill Strategic Sites 1, 2 Haverhill is part & 3]. The LDF takes no account of the current of the Cambridge Haverhill Question respective sizes odf Haverhill and Bury St Edmunds. Sub-Region and, 610 Dr David Gilligan Strategic 8 To propose that both towns have a 40% share is along with a ring Sites illogical as Burt St Edmunds has by far the more of other market advanced infrastructure to support any new towns, meets the developments. Haverhill has no Hospital, railway housing needs Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments Company / Response ID Full Name Question Title Comment Organisation etc. Bury has x 10 retail developments This plan is which cannot be merely a repeat of the 1999 plan The A 1307 is met by currently struggling to cope with traffic flow at peak Cambridge alone. and other times, expansion will only make this worse and increasingly dangerous. Flooding in area The distribution 1 is a major issue The current sewerage cannot for growth has cope The developments in areas 1 and 2 will come been reassessed to within 580 meters of the village boundary. with the publication of the Core Strategy. It is acknowledged that there is an ongoing need for investment in transport infrastructure in South Cambridgeshire, not only to address the issue of commuting, but to meet the needs of the local economy. Service providers, including Anglian Water, have been involved in the Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments Company / Response ID Full Name Question Title Comment Organisation LDF process and are aware of the levels of growth planned for Haverhill. Anglian Water can use this information to plan future sewage treatment capacity. We do not think we have sufficient information, Noted Councillors Haverhill insight and local knowledge to make judgements on Question 395 Ereira-Guyer & Strategic the massive growth identified for Haverhill; and we 8 Cockle Sites would leave this to our councillor colleagues in the south of the borough to make their opinions known. Option 1 Haverhill Western Edge is prone to Noted flooding and if the integrity of the village is to be maintained it is too near Withersfield. Option 2 Haverhill Mrs Moira Question Haverhill Northern Edge again is too near 416 Strategic Willmot 8 Withersfield and the A1307 barely copes with its Sites traffic now and any increase would be disastrous Option 3 North Eastern Edge is the most suitable of those options. SW of the Bypass would be better. We are writing to you to give comments of the St Noted. Edmundsbury Local Development Framework and in The distribution Haverhill particular to questions 8 and 9 regarding Haverhill for growth has Mr James Paice Question 555 Strategic expansion. We are elected representatives of parts been reassessed MP 8 Sites of Southern Cambridgeshire most affected by the with the recent and future growth of Haverhill We note that publication of the the LDF allows for at least 540 homes to be built Core Strategy. Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments Company / Response ID Full Name Question Title Comment Organisation each year of which a minimum of 40% are planned for Haverhill. While we recognise the need for affordable housing in the area, it is our opinion that It is the continued expansion of Haverhill is not acknowledged sustainable without significant improvements to the that there is an transport and road infrastructure through Southern ongoing need for Cambridgeshire. We note that the LDF states that investment in there is already a high level of out-commuting from transport Haverhill. It is our opinion that the employment infrastructure in needs of this number of future inhabitants are South extremely unlikely to be met within the town. Cambridgeshire, Therefore the issue of increased commuters must not only to be addressed with investment in infrastructure. This address the issue must include a significant re-engineering of the of commuting, A1307 as well as investment to prevent rat running but to meet the along minor roads through South Cambridgeshire needs of the local villages. We have a serious concern that s106 economy. It also monies alone may not be sufficient to meet the has to be required investment for upgrading the A1307. We acknowledged note that you recommend promoting the A1307 “as that Haverhill is a strategic public transport corridor with improved part of the public transport to provide a more effective Cambridge Sub- competitor to car travel, especially for journeys to Region and, Cambridge”. We do not believe this alone will along with a ring provide a sustainable solution to the commuting of other market needs of Haverhill residents as we note the number towns, meets the of different destinations residents already access, housing needs including Stansted and other areas of the which cannot be Cambridge Sub-region. The A1307 The A1307 is the met by main commuting route for Haverhill residents Cambridge alone. accessing either Cambridge or Stansted. It already Such investment Question 8 ‐ Haverhill Strategic Sites Comments Company / Response ID Full Name Question Title Comment Organisation one of the most congested roads in Cambridgeshire will require and the entire route was described as “close to partnership capacity” by independent consultants back in 2005 , working between since when traffic has increased.