Object

Representation ID: 25570

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: Scott Bridges

The current natural area adjacent to Alnesbourn Crescent forms an important part of the natural beauty and wildlife land of Ravenswood. The proposal, especially of IP150d would greatly reduce the natural habitat in the Ravenswood estate.

Traffic is already of a major concern to residents on the estate, with the current Ravenswood roundabout congested during both rush hours. The addition of new homes on the estate would put an undue stress on an already stretched junction and there is no detail of how these concerns would be alleviated.

Object

Representation ID: 25635

Received: 08/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

We note that site 150d is allocated for employment use in the current Local Plan as part of site 150b. As with sites 150b and 150d this area, the continued allocation of this area is regrettable as it is an area of wildlife value and forms part of the ecological corridor on the south-eastern edge of the town. Proposals for any development on this site must be informed by survey and assessment of all of the ecological receptors likely to be impacted by the development. Appropriate ecological mitigation and enhancement measures must be embedded as part of any proposal.

Object

Representation ID: 25849

Received: 12/03/2019

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

This should be described as "land south of Alnesbourn Cresent". There is no justification for this allocation which is an odd shape to be developed effectively particularly as a neighbouring development to a sports park. The plan is vague about this site. Again, if it is to be proposed then it should be part of a wider allocation. The site has serious nature conservation issues. Unclear how the Sports Park would be integrated with such a strange shape of development. It looks like a frontage development with a Sports Park to the rear, contrary to Designing Out Crime principles.

Object

Representation ID: 25850

Received: 12/03/2019

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

No justification for reverting from employment to housing. Traffic impact has not been assessed. Nothing to rule out piecemeal planning applications. The site is visually and ecologically connected to the adjacent nature reserve. Density at 35dph is higher than surroundings. Need for green infrastructure will increase this density. Vagueness about how it will come forward. Without a comprehensive and cumulative assessment of all proposals in this area the piecemeal developments would exacerbate bad planning impacts on biodiversity, green space, traffic, noise and air quality. A comprehensive proposal must be subject to EIA. Referred to as brownfield but clearly greenfield land.

Object

Representation ID: 26118

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Ravenswood Residents Association

Cumulative impact of IP150e, IP150d and IP150a (UVW) = 254 dwellings. Recommendations:
1) To be kept informed on the plans which should reflect IBCs undertaking for 65.8% Private Housing and 34.2% Social Housing mix.
2) Additional new access/egress to Ravenswood to cope with the expected surge in traffic volumes, as already heavy congestion problems at the current /2 roundabout access point during:
- morning/ evening rush-hours
- school drop-off/ pick-up times
- lunch times - restaurant traffic particularly the McDonalds queue which blocks roundabouts and prevents traffic going to/ from the busy shopping mall, but also IMPORTANTLY any EMERGENCY VEHICLES.