The Development Debate

• The site is prone to flooding and should not be developed.
• The omission of a Flood Risk Assessment invalidates planning application
• Area acts as a soak away reducing likelihood of other houses flooding.
• Location is inappropriate for development and its development would conflict with PPG25.
• Sea defences are inadequate and crumbling.
• Size of development will overwhelm existing properties and be out of character with the area.
• Development opposite Manor Terrace will be inconsistent with the character of the existing built environment.
• Proposed development will introduce modern buildings into an area which is characterised by traditional housing.
• Density of 82 dwellings per hectare IS 63% more than the highest figure by the  Government. This is not justified in an area with poor transport links.
• *Would be a precedent for other unacceptable development in Felixstowe eroding the character of those areas.
• Will result in overlooking and loss of privacy.
• New modern houses are out of character with this end of Felixstowe.
• A previous application for 3-storey holiday flats on the land facing Orford Road was refused permission for loss of light and dismissed on appeal.
• Height and location of buildings will affect rights of light.
• Proposal is inconsistent with Government advice in PPG3 in that it does not make the best use of land.
• Community facilities and services are inadequate for the additional residents.
• Development constitutes a threat to the safety and quiet enjoyment by local people of their existing houses.
• The plan put forward is contrary to Local Plan in that no provision is made for major outdoor activity
• The loss of the Herman de Stern building is regrettable. It had the potential to offer facilities for the residents of Felixstowe that would be more beneficial than what is being proposed.
• Loss of Herman de Stern conflicts with requirements of Local Plan.
• There are no play facilities for children living in the area.
• Will result in increased noise.
• Will devalue the area.
• Development will have an unacceptable and irreversible adverse effect on the Martello Tower.
• Why is restoration of the Martello Tower to be undertaken by the District Council rather than the developer.
• Application contravenes Local Plan because it does not secure a public use of the Martello Tower.
• Development will result in the loss of an area of SSSI.
• Development will generate extra traffic; road network is incapable of handling additional traffic resulting in highway dangers.
• Problems of access for emergency services when roads are congested
• Provision for car parking within scheme is inadequate.
• No environmental impact assessment has been produced.
• Development represents bad value for the District Council and Council taxpayers.
• Application should be accompanied by financial information.
• The proportion of affordable houses is too low.
• Concern that houses will be bought as 'second homes'.

Suffolk Coastal District Council Ignores Objections

• And so it goes on .. Even  the two letters of support expressed concerns