October 2026 update: further consultation to follow
We are providing an update on the proposed industrial pit and what this means.
TRU7 has indicated that they are finalising yet more highways mitigation measures, and they want to submit these as part of their application. As a result, there will be a further round of public consultation.
This means that the determination of the application will be delayed again, and it will not be considered at the committee meeting on 20th October. We have heard that the application may be heard at the committee meeting on Tuesday 15th December 2026, but this is not confirmed.
Further consultation – what does this mean?
As happened previously, the additional information TRU7 provides will be publicly available. We will share further information as soon as we know when the consultation will open and, importantly, will provide clear guidance on how you can respond and object.
We are interested to see what highways mitigation measures TRU7 can conjure up next. Presumably, we can expect further totally inaccurate information and manipulated figures. The evidence remains - the B1077 is a narrow rural road. No amount of minor alterations to kerbs, embankments, or junctions changes the fact that this is a rural road network that simply cannot accommodate an industrial-scale operation.
We have to ask the question: How many more opportunities does TRU7 need?
TRU7 has already had significant opportunities to develop their application, including nearly two years of pre-application discussions, the opportunity to respond to the Environmental Impact Assessment process, the submission of the full planning application, and the subsequent Regulation 25 submission.
No matter how many opportunities TRU7 are given, it does not change the fact that:
There is no need for this industrial pit. TRU7's "Need Case" significantly overstates the amount of sand and gravel needed for new homes.
The B1077 is not a suitable road. The proposed changes do not address the fundamental inability to safely accommodate the 151% increase in HGV movements.
The economic impact only benefits TRU7. Local businesses and the wider rural economy will suffer long-term economic harm.
Noise and vibration have not been properly assessed. Impact on nearby residents, Fynn Valley Golf Club, footpaths and bridleways has been dismissed.
Air Quality remains an issue. The application fails to properly account for the pit's own contribution to air quality impact, including dust and pollution.
Revised plans do not reduce the harm on landscape and heritage buildings.
The community's health will not be protected. TRU7 relies on vague, unenforceable commitments rather than firm measures protecting residents from the effects of HGV movements, noise and air pollution.
Our community deserves better. The application received the highest number of objections ever received for a planning application in Suffolk County Council's history. Thousands of people have taken the time to formally object. Why does TRU7 continue to be given further opportunities to manipulate their application, while the concerns of the community appear to carry so much less weight?
Whilst we recognise the Council has to follow a proper planning process, surely there has to be a point where enough is enough?
So, what now?
We appreciate that another delay is extremely frustrating and disconcerting, and we will continue to update you when we can.
As soon as the consultation opens, we will provide clear guidance on how to respond. We thank you again for your original objections and objections to the Reg 25, and will look to you once again to respond to the new information TRU7 provides - whenever that may be.
We will continue to challenge the process where necessary and ensure that the strength and breadth of local concern remains clear - the evidence shows that this industrial pit is entirely for private greed, not public need.
Comments