REPORT TO PARISHES, Mid-Samford Ward:
July 2008
Sue Carpendale
Review of Key Projects
The recent adoption of a ten-year strategic plan for the council
(noted in my May report to the Parish Councils) plus the impending
LGR, required a review of the timing and scope of the bigger
capital projects. Strategy Committee has recommended the following
priorities:
• Hadleigh facilities – top priority
• The proposed expenditure on the Kingfisher Leisure Centre
is unlikely to meet the business case requirement, so should
not proceed unless it is cost neutral
• Weekly food waste collection is considered desirable
but there are major concerns about capital and revenue cost
• However – a joint refuse collection depot is agreed
as a second priority
• Other projects and requests, such as via the Haven Gateway
Partnership and University Campus Suffolk will be assessed in
the normal planning cycle
Facilities in Hadleigh
An outline design and business plan is to be prepared for a
new community building, adjacent to the existing pool. This
could include community space, for casual hire but would also
be suitable for playgroups, clubs and other activities; a 35-station
gym, a 150m2 dance studio plus supporting services e.g. kitchen,
changing rooms, etc. We hope to have a report back during September,
in order to decide whether to proceed to tendering.
East of England Regional Plan – Regional Spatial
Strategy
This was finally published by Government on 12th May 2008. There
are still some legal challenges to be resolved, but the headline
outcomes for Babergh are as follows:
• Just over ½ million new homes and 450,000 jobs
in the region by 2021
• The regional target for “affordable” homes
is confirmed as 35%
• Babergh’s housing allocation is also confirmed
at 5000, + about 600 on the edge of Ipswich
• The role of the Haven Gateway as a sub-region and growth
point is confirmed, with high levels of growth to be concentrated
on Ipswich and Colchester
EERA have just sent out a press release regarding plans for
nearly 50,000 new homes in “eco-towns” in the East
of England. They deem this to be “unacceptable”,
and are concerned that the planning system is being by-passed.
The new homes are not linked to jobs and public transport, which
could make them instant dormitory towns with high levels of
commuting by car. EERA has already planned for two new settlements
at Northstowe in Cambridgeshire and Wixams in Bedfordshire as
part of the development up to 2021. Government issued a consultation
document with a short list of 15 eco-towns on 3rd April 2008.
10 of the 15 shortlisted eco-towns are expected to go forward;
East of England region has four shortlisted locations as follows:
• Bedfordshire Marston Vale (7000) and New Marston (15,400)
• Cambridgeshire Hanley Grange (8000)
• Essex Elsenham (8000 of 5000)
• Norfolk RAF Coltishall (10000) Total 48,400
Open Day for Babergh Tenants
Housing tenants are invited to an event to explain the services
and roles of the Council, the Police, and the Tenants’
Forum This will take place at Babergh's offices in Hadleigh
from 2pm to 7pm on Wednesday 16th July, and is open to all housing
tenants in the District.
Sheltered Housing in Capel St Mary
It was recently announced that funding has been secured for
this development, and work is likely to begin in October this
year. Priority will be given to local residents, including those
in nearby villages.
Local Government Review
Most people will by now have heard of the recommendations from
the Boundary Committee, which seem to have united everybody
in their opposition. Both of their proposals exclude Lowestoft
from the Suffolk arrangements, and the preferred option of two
unitary councils has suggested boundaries which defy most explanations.
These boundaries are, however, “indicative” not
necessarily final. There is now a consultation period for public
and stakeholders until 26th September, and work to be done on
the affordability of any options being considered.
Babergh’s initial preference – pending argument
re the boundaries – appears to be for the two unitary
option. (The Council’s rationale is available on the website.)
Anecdotally, a single unitary would make much of Suffolk “remote”
from the centre, and it is difficult to see how a sufficient
culture change could be achieved from the present county council
– both officers and members. Area committees and offices
would be needed – maybe replicating the present District
arrangements?! – and would not necessarily drive the efficiencies
we are looking for. Last year, for example, the County ran up
20 million business miles at a cost of £8m. This could
only get worse. Local knowledge, essential for planning decisions,
could be overlooked – a demonstration of which lies in
the drawing of present boundaries for the new unitaries. There
is a strong case for ensuring that all of the catchment area
for the proposed new SWISS centre is in the potential southern
unitary area, and an equally strong case for including the Haven
Gateway area, which is well defined and extends through to Aldeburgh.
This would have significant strategic advantages for the area,
and reinforce current planning. Many people would prefer to
have “Suffolk” somewhere in the unitary title.
The BC’s report does few favours in referring to “Ipswich
and Felixstowe”, when it might have referred to Southern
Suffolk. Population would be around 200,000 – even better
with Hadleigh and maybe Woodbridge added – which would
balance out any dominance of Ipswich. People in Stratford St
Mary might want to question their near neighbours in Dedham,
to see if they have concerns about being “run” by
Colchester.
We are told that the “status quo” is not an option.
Babergh does strongly favour unitary government. The agenda
being handed down to local councils is too great for small councils
to cope with, and whilst there is too much duplication in some
areas, there is a lack of skills and capacity in others.
