Statement of Community Involvement LAND AT TRIMLEY MUSHROOM FARM HIGH ROAD TRIMLEY ST MARTIN

Transcription

1 LAND AT TRIMLEY MUSHROOM FARM HIGH ROAD TRIMLEY ST MARTIN

2 CONTENTS Page 1. Introduction 3 2. The Consultation Process 4 3. Consultation Feedback 6 4. Responses to Consultation Feedback Conclusion 18 Appendices A. Public Consultation Invitation Postcard 19 B. Public Consultation Invitation Letter 21 C. Public Consultation Press Release 23 D. Public Consultation Media Coverage 27 E. Public Consultation Public Notice 30 F. Public Consultation Exhibition Boards 32 G. Public Consultation Website 42 H. Public Consultation Feedback Form 44 2

3 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report is a summary of the public consultation undertaken by Taylor Wimpey in relation to a detailed planning application for the development of up to 66 residential dwellings on land at Trimley Mushroom Farm, Trimley St Martin, Suffolk. 1.2 By way of background, Suffolk Coastal District Council is required to produce a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) as part of its Local Development Framework (LDF) to govern how the Council will consult the community and stakeholders in the preparation of planning documents. The SCI for Suffolk Coastal District Council was adopted in September 2014, and has been reviewed by the Applicant. 1.3 The role of community involvement in the planning process is further supported by the Government in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which expects applicants to work closely with those directly affected by their proposals to evolve designs that take account of the views of the community. The NPPF considers that proposals that can demonstrate this in developing the design of the new development should be looked on more favourably (Paragraph 66). 1.4 The Applicant has made efforts to comply with all local planning guidance and has discussed appropriate pre-application requirements with the Local Authority. 3

4 2. THE CONSULTATION PROCESS 2.1 The community engagement process for the detailed planning application which accompanies this document centred around a public consultation programme staged by Taylor Wimpey in Trimley St Martin during October The programme included a public consultation event held in Trimley Sports and Social Club, Trimley St Martin, on Tuesday 14 th October. The activity which was conducted in relation to this consultation event is detailed below. 2.2 In order to publicise this exhibition, a total of 933 informative postcards were distributed to properties in the immediate vicinity of the application site inviting local residents to attend and find out more about Taylor Wimpey s proposals. These postcards were distributed by first-class post on Tuesday 7 th October. A copy of the postcard can be viewed at Appendix A. 2.3 In addition, 50 local representatives and key stakeholders including members of Trimley St Martin and Trimley St Mary parish councils, officers and local ward representatives from Suffolk Coastal District Council and Suffolk County Council, plus local businesses, schools and community groups were invited to attend a preview consultation session taking place immediately prior to the main public consultation on Tuesday 14 th October. Invitations were distributed by first-class post on Thursday 2 nd October. A copy of the invitation letter can be viewed at Appendix B. 2.4 Furthermore, a press release was issued to local newspaper titles, including the East Anglian Daily Times, the Ipswich and Felixstowe Star, Ipswich Advertiser and the Suffolk Free Press on Friday 3 rd October. A public notice was also placed in the East Anglian Daily Times and the Ipswich and Felixstowe Star on Tuesday 7 th October. A copy of the press release can be viewed at Appendix C. A copy of the media coverage received can be viewed at Appendix D. A copy of the public notice can be viewed at Appendix E. 4

5 2.5 The public exhibition was held in Trimley Sports and Social Club, High Road, Trimley St Martin (less than 100 metres from the application site) on Tuesday 14 th October from 3pm to 8pm, with the preview session for local representatives and stakeholders taking place between 2pm and 3pm. The purpose of the exhibition was to inform interested parties of the Applicant s intention to submit a detailed planning application for residential development at the site off High Road and to give them the opportunity to provide their feedback on the scheme. On display at the exhibition were a number of information boards which set out the background to the application and provided details of the proposed development. It was hosted by key members of the Applicant s project team who were available to answer questions and respond to comments raised. A copy of the exhibition boards can be viewed at Appendix F. 2.6 Alongside the public exhibition, a dedicated area of Taylor Wimpey s website detailing the public consultation ( was activated on Tuesday 14 th October. This included all the information displayed at the public exhibition to ensure that those unable to attend the event could still participate fully in the consultation process. A selection of pages from the website can be viewed at Appendix G. 2.7 Those participating in the public consultation were invited to complete feedback forms enabling them to comment on specific aspects of the proposed scheme. Paper copies of the feedback form could be returned to a member of the team on the day of the exhibition, or returned to the Applicant by or post. Alternatively, feedback could be submitted via the consultation website. Feedback was accepted by the Applicant up to and including the end of the consultation period on Tuesday 28 th October. A copy of the feedback form can be viewed at Appendix H. 5

6 3. CONSULTATION FEEDBACK 3.1 The public consultation event hosted by Taylor Wimpey on Tuesday 14 th October 2014 was attended by 127 people, and the Applicant received a total of 30 feedback forms during the consultation period. 3.2 Below is a summary of all responses to the specific questions posed on the feedback form for the public consultation event. Where appropriate, some respondents comments have been directly quoted. All of the comments and questions received by the Applicant in relation to the proposed scheme have been considered in finalising the accompanying planning application. Q1 Our masterplan shows the proposed layout of the development Are you in favour of the layout? 3.3 The majority of consultees (53%) said they are in favour of the proposed layout, with 20% opposing the layout. The remainder either stated they did not know, or did not answer the question. Our masterplan shows the proposed layout of the development Are you in favour of the layout? Yes 16 (53%) No 6 (20%) Don t know 3 (10%) Did not answer the question 5 (16%) If you ticked No, please tell us why and explain the changes you think could be made to the layout. Responses to this question are categorised and summarised below. 6

7 3.4 Development layout and density Fewer houses with more space between them (3) More smaller homes (1) It is as good as any other 66 houses are 66 houses (1) Doesn t look overly crowded (1) 3.5 Location of public open space Public space is too far from the village, making it harder for residents/children the other side of High Road to use it/no other public open space in the village, apart from sports & social club. Relocate open space to front of development (3) Teenagers walking through estate to open space could be a problem (2) 3.6 Traffic, parking, highways and access Concern about increase in traffic through village (2) Not all properties have garages, so will it be off street or on street parking? (1) High Road is very busy during school run. There is no safety crossing, and all shops and post office are on the other side of the road (1) Smaller homes would mean less cars (1) Would like to see some safety provision for children at the entrance to the site (1) With Reeve Lodge so close to hand, the problem is traffic would be heavier and with no traffic lights or proper crossing it could cause problems. A lot of us at Reeve Lodge are disabled and have to use wheelchairs, scooters and walking aids. (1) 3.7 Employment opportunities Will there be any new jobs? (1) 3.8 Education Schools already full to capacity (1) 3.9 Retail provision 7

8 No shop planned (1) 3.10 Impact on existing properties New homes will devalue property at 280 High Road (1) 3.11 Affordable housing/home ownership schemes I m in favour of any new build, but reasonable size and present ability to part own or buy with help. Correspondent goes on to state they are employed, can manage bills, but cannot get a mortgage due to their age, so would be interested in part rent/part purchase property (1) Q2 Our proposals include public open space which could include a play area. What kind of play equipment do you consider would be appropriate in the proposed location? Responses to this question are categorised and summarised below. Play equipment Swings (6) Slides (4) Equipment for teenagers/place for them to meet (4) Outdoor gym/fitness/circuit/exercise equipment (3) Climbing frames (3) Wooden play equipment (3) Seating/benches for adults (3) General children s equipment (3) Toddler equipment (2) Roundabouts (2) Adult equipment (2) Similar set up to Kirton recreation ground (2) Teenage shelter (1) Skateboard park (1) 8

9 Cargo net/ropes (1) Rocking items for toddlers (1) Monkey bars (1) See-saw (1) Football goal for older children (1) Play areas for very young children using natural materials (1) Caged multi use games area (1) Facilities for physically and mentally disabled people (1) Trees (1) Make equipment chunky/robust (1) Dog exercising Provide dog waste bins (1) Enforce no dogs in play areas rule and keep dogs on leads in open space (1) Fencing to prevent dog fouling in play areas (1) Off-site open space provision...re-commission the play area adjacent to TMS Hall. Perhaps money could be provided to complete that project that would leave an open play space and spaces with a pavilion so as to cater for all age groups and equipment associated with field sports (1) Open space users Ensure play area is for local children, not just residents of the proposed development (1) Other suggestions for open space Allotments (1) Other comments Open spaces never seem to stay open. I bet you build on it (1) 9

10 The open spaces look good, hopefully all that is promised will materialise. Children need plenty of safe areas to play (1) More than one park is needed (1) Consult local PCSOs for ideas to cater for teenagers (1) Q3 Our initial designs for the new homes are influenced by traditional Suffolk architecture, while some homes will reflect the style of Longford House. What do you think of these designs? Responses to this question are categorised and summarised below Design of homes Okay (6) Good (2) Keep designs in keeping with village styles (2) Rustic/cottage designs to reflect rural surrounds (1) They are innocuous (1) The style is contemporary and homogenous. However, I m sure purchasers who like that particular style will be attracted (1) Looks nice (1) Appears reasonable (1) Have an executive look. Designs are quite sympathetic (1) They seem to reflect the area well (1) Keep character traditional, both in design and landscape (1) They are not village housing, but estate housing. A pity as this is a village community (1) Looks like a big council estate from plans/drawings (1) 3.13 Sustainability Why no solar panels? (1) 10

11 3.14 Other comments Hard to comment on designs exhibited. Will be in a better position to comment when detailed designs are displayed (1) Q4 Do you have any other comments you would like to make on our proposals? Responses to this question are categorised and summarised below Design of homes Soundproof homes to protect against noise from social club, especially in summer (1) Most homes built in last 15 years are too small, even two-bedroom homes. They often have too much garden which many people don t want. Maybe smaller garden bigger home, or smaller home bigger garden. Give people a choice. (1) 3.16 Affordable housing Make sure you keep to your remit of selling affordable homes (1) 3.17 Traffic, parking, highways and access Install pedestrian/zebra crossing outside Reeve Lodge retirement home, which would help elderly residents cross the road and access the bus stop (6) From the roundabout to Longford House entrance it is a shared cycle and pedestrian path. As you come off the roundabout it narrows on a blind corner. It s very easy for both parties to have right of way widening the path would be great (2) Consider traffic calming in Trimley St Mary to discourage rat running, and encourage motorists to use the A14 (1) Concern about increase in traffic in High Road (1) 3.18 Education Trimley St Martin and St Mary schools are full to capacity and cannot cope with increased population (1) 11

12 3.19 Open space, ecology, arboriculture and landscaping Keep open space (2) Retain as many trees as possible (1) Plant fruit trees to promote self sufficiency (1) Use trees to screen the rear of the development from the social club and fields (1) Infill field boundaries with traditional hedging to create social club sound barrier (1) Open space as opposed to allotments (1) Children should be catered for (1) Create a protected, small Woodland Trust/conservation area on open space land. Involve local school children and new residents in its running (1) Support for wildlife corridors (1) 3.20 Other comments Is this just phase one? (1) General opposition to proposals (1) Would rather see your small, discreet addition to our village than the large, modern new estate added some 15/20 years ago with no thought on how it would enhance the area which it doesn t (1) ADDITIONAL CORRESPONDENCE 3.21 An additional piece of correspondence was received by the project team during the consultation period. It is copied, in full, below. I am an occupational therapist working with disabled children throughout the county of Suffolk. I would be grateful if you could send me the contact details of the best person from your development team with whom I could liaise regarding the registered providers you are working with on this scheme, the number of social housing units to be provided and what scope there might be to include suitable properties for families with children with disabilities. 12

13 4. RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION FEEDBACK 4.1 The following section sets out the Applicant s responses to the comments resulting from the public consultation, including the ways in which the development proposals have been amended to take account of the feedback received. All comments have been taken into consideration in finalising the planning application which is submitted alongside this Statement of Community Involvement. Development density 4.2 The Applicant notes comments requesting a lower density of homes on the site. However, the density of the site was approved by the local planning authority in May 2013 when it granted outline planning consent for a scheme of up to 66 homes. Another respondent questions whether the site is phase one of further development in the village. The Applicant can confirm the 66-home development is the only one proposed by Taylor Wimpey in Trimley St Martin. Housing design 4.3 The Applicant notes the broad support for the housing designs which were presented during the public consultation, plus support for homes in keeping with the local area. As a consequence, the proposed new homes will be chiefly in keeping with the initial designs proposed at the consultation stage. The development layout includes a number of different character areas, defined by subtle changes in the styling of the houses and the materials that have been used. Proposed materials will be of traditional Suffolk design, with the use of pantiles, red brick and render. Homes near to Longford House will be in keeping with the Grade II property s style, including a new single storey four-bedroom home located next to Thorpe Cottage, which will benefit from a traditional 19th century style, with symmetrical form and material finishes to complement Longford House. The detailed designs are contained within the Design and Access Statement which accompanies the application. 13

14 The Applicant notes one comment regarding the interior of new homes being too small, and states that all house types meet national regulations. The room sizes and overall dwelling sizes are driven by the market. The HBF argue that there must be a balance between space and affordability. One respondent also suggests homes are adequately soundproofed. The Applicant can confirm all homes will include high performance double glazed windows as standard. In many instances, when building close to a noise source additional acoustic improvements can be included. Affordable housing 4.4 Three respondents are keen to see affordable housing commitments met by the Applicant. The Applicant can confirm 22 (33%) of the 66 homes will be affordable properties, available as shared ownership and/or social rent homes. One respondent requested the contact details of somebody from Taylor Wimpey in order to liaise with the registered social housing providers working on the scheme, to ascertain the scope for providing homes for families with children with disabilities. This person has been contacted directly with the details they requested. Sustainability 4.5 One respondent would like to see solar panels installed on the new homes. While solar panels will not be installed on the new homes, each affordable dwelling will meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3. The Private dwellings will be built to meet the standards required by the building regulations Education 4.6 Two respondents claim local schools are full to capacity and cannot cope with an increased population in the locality. The Applicant will be making a number of contributions to the local community as part of the proposed development. These contributions have not yet been finalised and will be allocated by the local authority in 14

15 accordance with local need. However, they are likely to include contributions towards education in the area. Public open space 4.7 Three respondents would prefer to see the proposed area of public open space located nearer to High Road, which they feel would be more accessible for existing residents in the village. However, the location of the public open space has already been agreed with the local planning authority within the terms of the outline planning consent, which was granted in May The Applicant notes the wide variety of suggestions for play equipment within the public open space. The play area will meet the requirements of a Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP) and will include a minimum of five pieces of play apparatus, with the specifics of the facility to be discussed as part of the planning process. One respondent would like to see an existing off-site play area enhanced. The Applicant will be making a number of contributions to the local community as part of the proposed development, including 47,784 towards the provision of off-site play space and sports ground facilities in Trimley. Impact on existing properties 4.8 One Applicant feels their property will be devalued by the proposed development. Any potential change in value of existing properties as a result of new development is unfortunately not a material consideration that can be taken into account in the determination of planning applications. Employment opportunities 4.9 One respondent questions whether any new jobs will be created by the development. Research by the Home Builder s Federation (HBF) has found that every new home built leads directly to the creation of 1.5 full-time jobs. 15

16 New housing and home-building is considered by the Government to contribute significantly to the national and the local economy through both direct and indirect employment. Furthermore, the new residents occupying the new homes would help support local services including the village pub and shops. Ecology, arboriculture and landscaping 4.10 The Applicant notes support for existing trees to be retained and complemented with new planting, including a request to screen the development from the social club and fields, plus the planting of fruit-bearing species and the wish for wildlife corridors. New trees and evergreen hedges will be planted in residential streets to soften and improve the appearance of the street scene. Flowering ornamental shrubs will be planted throughout residential areas to further enhance the setting of the homes. Character trees, including field maple, oak and Scots pine, will be planted in key locations to create focal points for the development and to complement existing trees within the site. Native hedges and smaller flowering and fruiting trees will be planted at the boundaries of rear gardens at the edges of the site to improve the visual impact of the development from surrounding areas. Although some sections of hedgerow will be removed to allow for the access road construction, this will be more than compensated for by the planting of large trees at the site entrance, as well as the creation of the various planting and landscaping features outlined above. The provision of the new planting, private gardens and retention of existing vegetation will ensure the site will provide wildlife corridors. Traffic, parking, highways and access 4.11 A variety of issues concerning traffic, parking, highways and access have been raised by respondents, including: concern about increased traffic levels; the provision of on-site parking; safe access in and out of the site for pedestrians, particularly children; requests for a safe pedestrian crossing over High Road, in particular, near to Reeve Lodge retirement home; traffic calming in High Road and improving the 16

17 shared cycle/pathway between the High Road-Howlett Way roundabout and Longford House entrance. It should be noted that matters such as access and impact on the transport network were considered during the outline planning application stage, and have already been agreed with Suffolk Coastal District Council and the highways authority, Suffolk County Council. 17

18 5. CONCLUSION 5.1 This Statement of Community Involvement summarises the public consultation process which has been undertaken prior to the submission of the accompanying outline planning application for residential development on land at Trimley Mushroom Farm, Trimley St Martin. 5.2 The Applicant would like to thank all local residents, representatives and stakeholders who have contributed to the consultation process. All comments received have been considered by the project team in preparation of the application. 5.3 Local residents and stakeholders will receive further opportunity to comment directly to Suffolk Coastal District Council during the statutory consultation process, which begins following the registration of this application. 18

19 APPENDIX A Public Consultation Invitation Postcard 19

20 20

21 APPENDIX B Public Consultation Invitation Letter 21

22 22

23 APPENDIX C Public Consultation Press Release 23

24 24

25 25

26 26

27 APPENDIX D Public Consultation Media Coverage 27

28 28

29 29

30 APPENDIX E Public Consultation Public Notice 30

31 31

32 APPENDIX F Public Consultation Exhibition Boards 32

33 33

34 34

35 35

36 36

37 37

38 38

39 39

40 40

41 41

42 APPENDIX G Public Consultation Website 42

43 43

44 APPENDIX H Public Consultation Feedback Form 44

45 45

46 46