This is an extract of the letter sent from Tuddenham St Martin Parish Council 18th February 2013 to Borough Council regarding the Northern Fringe Supplementary Planning Document and follows the public meeting held at the Tuddenham Village hall 12th February 2013.

‘Tuddenham St Martin Parish Council recently held a public meeting to consider the details in the Supplementary Planning Document and as a result I am writing to express the views of the Parish Council.

1. We feel that unfinished and alternative projects, e.g. Waterfront, Ravenswood and brown field sites can be utilised, as well as two significant public sector organisations with land that may be available for use, rather than the major new development proposed. The two sites are Ipswich Hospital and the Mental Health Foundation Trust, with the site at St Clements Hospital, which both have current good bus routes and the basic infrastructure required. The sustainability of the Northern Fringe development is therefore in question. A current review of the forecast increase in population and parallel growth of employment opportunities in the area is required to justify this development in light of the current financial climate, as well as evidence that consideration has been given to the housing development opportunities already being explored by neighbouring districts in the Greater Ipswich area.

2. We are surprised that no consultation between Ipswich Borough Council and Greater Anglia Railways has taken place. Within the Issues and Options Report the accessibility, parking and usage of Station is a key element of the transport infrastructure for this development.

3. Within the highways infrastructure there is no consideration as to the impact of additional traffic through and around the village of Tuddenham St Martin. There is already concern by residents at the amount, speed and sometimes hazardous driving of traffic now using the roads through the village and this is a regular topic for Parish Council meetings.

The village currently experiences high volumes of traffic at peak times with speeding vehicles causing danger to pedestrians and highway users. The road through the village from Ipswich (a C class road) has to already accommodate traffic to and from several villages to the north-east of the town (, Playford, Bealings, , which are only the nearest). In addition traffic to and from Woodbridge and the A12 northwards makes use of the road through Tuddenham in preference to the A1214.

The roads through the village contain a number of bends and curves restricting visibility. To cross the road, for instance, on foot from the bottom of Church Hill can be difficult at the best of times. For the aged or infirm it is hazardous. There are no footpaths at various places through the village already making it necessary for pedestrians to use the roads where visibility is restricted. This includes the approach to the village from Westerfield Lane. This road leads from Tuddenham St Martin to Church Lane and is used by an increasing number of road users as a ‘quick’ detour for the major route to and from Ipswich and the surrounding areas including Castle Hill, Henley and Westerfield. This road includes stretches of single track with passing places. Difficulties frequently arise by the junction of this road to The Street Tuddenham St Martin, owing to the narrowness of the road, the angle of the junction and the need for the occupiers of the adjacent cottages to park their vehicles.

Recreational traffic, in addition to the peak traffic flow, passes through the village and surrounding lanes, including walkers, cyclists, runners and horse riders due to its proximity and easy access to the Fynn Valley.

4. We have major concerns with the late delivery of the proposed secondary school within the development. Currently there is a shortfall of available school places within the catchment as well as limitations in parental choice. We feel that option one can potentially address this issue with an early build of a new secondary school within the area.

5. The Country Park is a key element in all three proposed options and must be provided in parallel with the onset of the site and residential development. This could be commenced at the same time as the ground works for the drainage swale. It is accepted that partial provision of the Country Park space may be in proportion to actual scale of residential development at that time.

6. We understand that Anglia Water have been in discussion with Ipswich Borough Council about the possible routing of foul effluent to the Donkey Lane treatment works in Tuddenham St Martin. We presume the site would have to be significantly expanded to enable the treatment of waste from such a large development. This will have a detrimental effect within the surrounding Environmentally Sensitive Area designation of the Fynn Valley. The additional discharge into the river Fynn will increase the current problem of flooding which has increased over the past 25 years following development of and Tuddenham St Martin. There would also be additional heavy vehicle traffic down Fynn Lane to cater for the additional processed waste disposal. For these reasons the Parish Council are opposed to this proposal.’

Ipswich Borough Council acknowledged the letter and confirmed ‘comments will be given due consideration before any decision is reached on the preferred option. You can track progress on the Northern Fringe SPD on-line at www.ipswich.gov.uk/northernfringe