The Battle continues

The past few weeks have seen Tesco flexing their muscles. As the Babergh offices were about to close for Christmas they received the expected new planning application for a Tesco store on the riverside site. The application was to be registered on the 7^th January and we have not yet seen the details. However we did learn from a call from the press based on a Tesco press release that there were two applications based on different entrances from Bridge Street. One is via the Babergh car park and one via the Bungalow site. It was not until New Years Eve that the owners of one of the bungalows received a letter from Tesco saying that they had applied for conservation area consent to demolish their home.

As you know, Babergh are part way through amending the Local Plan and the Council had identified the Buyright site as being the most suitable location for a new supermarket. At a meeting of Babergh’s Strategy Committee, it was decided to recommend to the full Council that they should change from the Buyright to the Tesco riverside site. The Committee was influenced by a potential change in Government advice contained in a consultative document (PPS6).  As the Government’s consultation period continues until March we are seeking information as to the validity of the advice given to the committee.

There are apparently two lines being pursued by Tesco at the moment.  One is the dual application which will be dealt with as a normal application by the Development Control Committee. Whatever the outcome of this we anticipate that it will lead to an appeal or “call in” by the Secretary of State and a Public Inquiry.

The Strategy Committee’s Local Plan recommendation goes to the full Council for a decision at the end of February.  It is worth noting that last year the strategy committee had their recommendation reversed by the full Council which led to the choice of the Buyright site.

It is not clear how the separate paths of the planning application and the Local Plan proposals will interact; it may be that they will both be dealt with at the same inquiry.

The Society will be objecting to the planning application and to the allocation of the riverside site for a supermarket in the Local Plan.

What can you do?

First, the planning applications: as soon as they are advertised you can write to Babergh objecting to them.

Some reasons for your objections might be:

Ø         The effect that the development would have on the riverside walk: noisy cars, visual impact of the store and its car park.

Ø         The problems created by traffic entering and leaving the site from Bridge Street.

Ø         The intrusiveness of the traffic lights that would be needed both at the entrance and at the High Street junction.

Ø         The dangers to children walking to school, particularly to the new Beaumont school.

Ø         In one application the need to demolish a privately owned bungalow to gain access. In the other, the use of Town-owned allotments for an access road.

Ø         The way that the appearance of Bridge Street would be changed, with its many listed grade II and II* buildings (including the bridge).

Ø         The loss of amenity caused to residents by traffic, particularly those living close to the entrance.

Ø         The risk of flooding, of the store, of its car parks and of the access road.

Ø         The damage done to our small shops, some of which may be forced to close.

Much the same objections can be made against the allocation of the site in the Local Plan.

It may seem silly but we’ve got to play the numbers game: sending separate letters from each person in a household appears to carry more weight than a joint letter, so please write. You will need to write separate letters against the planning applications and against the Local Plan allocation. They should be delivered to the planning department at Babergh DC, Corks Lane. To save you a walk, if you put them through my letterbox (106 High Street) clearly addressed to Babergh, I will make sure they get there safely.

We also want to collect as large a petition as possible opposing any supermarket on the riverside. If you have access to any group of people who support such a petition or if you would be prepared to call on people to collect signatures please contact me (see back page) for some forms.

Jan Byrne, Chairman

Next Event

Highway Robbery in Hadleigh

About 15 months ago Sue Andrews and Glenda Druce were looking at Hadleigh material at Bury Record Office and came across a small packet that consisted of newspaper reports of a crime and trials with verbatim comments, lists of criminals, letters to their relatives and final confessions, among other things.

The History Group started to research this further. It took them to old newspapers, further crimes and convicts, books on policing and transportation, the National archives, the Internet and some Australian websites, social history of the 1820’s and much more – too much!

They decided they would like to present their findings to the Society and Gerard Melia has kindly used some of the material for a script which the History Group, and one or two friends, are looking forward to sharing with you on Tuesday 3^rd February. 

They have found it fascinating and hope you will too, so do come to The Old Town Hall at 8pm on Tuesday 3^rd February and hear about the Highway Robbery in Hadleigh that took place on Wednesday 9^th March 1825.  

Elizabeth in Suffolk

As recalled by Clive Paine last November.

Elizabeth made two royal progressions through Suffolk.  The first in 1561 only just crossed over from Essex, arriving from Harwich, up river on a barge to Ipswich.  Second stop was Shelley Hall, although we don't know if she came through Hadleigh on route.  Next was Bures, before returning through Essex by way of Castle Hedingham. 

The second visit in 1578 had a more serious political agenda.  Elizabeth always sought the religious middle way but having been excommunicated by the Pope, Catholics were themselves at risk of the same if they dealt with the Queen, but were absolved of any sin against her.  On the other hand, the fine for not attending the Church of England was 1 shilling (which still stands!). 

Burleigh's spymaster on religious matters planned a route which took in a succession of hosts of varying persuasions.  Unlike modern visits, this one was only settled two months ahead, leaving time to get new clothes, but no time to do building.

With two thousand in the train it was an immense burden to host the royal party and those who would not compromise on their Catholicism were quickly sent ahead to Norwich jail to await the Queen’s pleasure. The stop at Melford Hall was typical, with 5 days of hunting, picnicking and receiving French ambassadors, before moving on.

The queen’s furniture would be brought in before her and carried on to the next stop after she left.  Cost to the host was about £500.  Anyone living within 10 miles of the route was also liable to provide food, carts, horses and labour.  The final risk was that a messenger from the plague ridden capital from which the Queen had escaped would leave several local victims as well as his message.

Evening entertainment was an important feature of the visit, as it is with any Clive Paine visit, and this occasion was brought to a rousing close as Clive led the audience in a re-enactment of one of those Elizabethan performances.