Rushmere St Andrew: Campaigners’ fears over woodland homes scheme

The commemorative woodland at Rushmere St Andrew The commemorative woodland at Rushmere St Andrew

Yhyhyhyhyhy yhyhyhyhyhy
Saturday, February 22, 2014
8:45 AM

A group of charities seeking to develop housing on commemorative woodland in east Suffolk have been accused of “riding roughshod” over the community’s wishes.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Residents of Rushmere St Andrew fear the proposals to build 14 homes on land adjacent to The Street will erode the village’s separation with Ipswich and see the loss of a treasured community asset.

Barbara Robinson, a member of Save Our Country Spaces, claims more than 100 people from the village and surrounding area have planted trees on the site over the past 20 years, some of which held a “highly personal”, commemorative element.

“These people would feel really aggrieved that their efforts over the past 20 years would have been of no consequence at all,” she said.

Mrs Robinson has also highlighted the “interesting history” of the land and adjoining thatched cottage as grounds for preservation, referring to its “quintessentially rural landscape” and the horticultural enterprise devised by its former owners, the Baldwin family.

A spokesman for Knight Frank LLP, which submitted the application “on behalf of a number of charity beneficiaries”, said the company could find no evidence of the trees being commemorative.

“Nonetheless, we have carried out an arboricultural survey of the site and intend to preserve as many of the trees as possible,” they added.

The developers also say their designs respected the separation of the village from Ipswich in a style that is “in sympathy with the local vernacular”.

However, Mark Newton, a Suffolk Coastal district councillor for Rushmere, claims the vast majority of the village would disagree with those claims. “The community does not want the development or anything that would go towards eroding the separation that currently exists between Rushmere village and Ipswich borough,” he said. “We want the village to be maintained as a separate entity. The local authority has policies in place that are supposed to protect the open space between Ipswich and Rushmere.

“This particular developer seems to want to ride roughshod over those polices and obviously the residents are not in favour.”

Philip Richings, the chairman of Rushmere St Andrew Parish Council, which has recommended the application’s refusal, also acknowledged there was an “element of concern” over the commemorative trees.

“There may be an emotive side to it, but in law the charities are the owners and they can put in a planning application,” he added.

A decision is due by March 24.

7 comments

  • These "developers" just want a quick buck. Green belt separating Ipswich from surrounding villages is important and needs to be maintained for ecological reasons. Plenty of brownfield sites lying unused within Ipswich borders so no need to destroy the countryside.

    Report this comment

    Steve Blake

    Saturday, February 22, 2014

  • See how pathetic this system of posting is ! the last post goes on staright away !

    Report this comment

    Poppys Dad

    Sunday, February 23, 2014

  • So where is my earlier submission on this matter ? I find the way that some things appear and others don't very irritating ! Anyway what is wrong with nimbyism ? None of us want negative things happening to our environment or where we have chosen to live , do they ? This matter is not about Self , its about a Community who happen to want to preserve the area they live in , there are other areas that cn be built on before this lovely area . The owner of the land wanted it to remain as it is otherwise he would have soought planning permission and sold the land for maximum profit . Shame on the charities who have been left this land in good faith , we will find out who you are and will bear that in mind for our future donations .

    Report this comment

    Poppys Dad

    Sunday, February 23, 2014

  • More selfish NIMBYism.

    Report this comment

    Winston Barrington Jr.

    Saturday, February 22, 2014

  • What do you think the whingers properties are built on.

    Report this comment

    m01

    Saturday, February 22, 2014

  • We don't want to become part of Ipswich , our property was built in 1920 as many of rushmere vilage were and before this . Why is it selfish Winston to want to protect the area we live in ? If they were going to knock down the place nextdoor to you and put up a block of flats i am sure you would object too !There are no houses there and there is no need to have them there either . Failure to protect the green areas that we have developed over the years will create a concrete jungle which can never be undeveloped ! The Trees planted there were to celebrate the millenium and we planted family tree there , this was what the owner of the land wanted and if it works i have attached a photo to prove that my wife planted a tree there . Why do you think we all took photos there ? We have agreed for Rose to build ten houses in Rushmere village and they are still completing them but in an area that was not celebrating anything and would not be contavening any wishes of the owners or villagers . We'll just build over everything shall we ? No , we all want nice places to frequent don't we . What if IBC said they were going to build on Christchurch park ? There would be plenty of moans and groans i'm sure from those people who poke fun at the NIMBYs

    Report this comment

    Poppys Dad

    Saturday, February 22, 2014

  • It is nice to have some open spaces.nice walks in hadleigh at the moment.

    Report this comment

    TERENCE MANNING

    Saturday, February 22, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT