Home > Planning > Planning Policy

PLEASE NOTE: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.

Representations on BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive) - Q58

Representation ID: 12976

COMMENT Dr Jonathan Tuppen

Summary:

We don't know how important a heritage asset will be to future generations.

They should be cared for if we can, neglected if we can't but never wilfully removed or destroyed. Heritage assets would best be identified by local parishes and any changes to their status or relevance should be considered at the same level.

More details about Rep ID: 12976

Representation ID: 12418

COMMENT Old Newton Parish Council (Mrs Karen Price)

Summary:

Consult local opinion through public forums.

More details about Rep ID: 12418

Representation ID: 12113

COMMENT Gladman (Mr Richard Crosthwaite)

Summary:

For non-designated assets, the policy must reflect the guidance set out within paragraph 135 of the Framework. This states that the policy test that should be applied in these cases is that a balanced judgement should be reached having regard to the scale of any harm and the significance of the heritage asset.

More details about Rep ID: 12113

Representation ID: 11704

COMMENT Lady Valerie Hart

Summary:

A policy approach consistent with the weight afforded to non-designated assets in the NPPF should be applied.

More details about Rep ID: 11704

Representation ID: 11299

COMMENT The Lavenham Society (Jane Gosling)

Summary:

Lavenham is in the process of drawing up a 'Local List' and the Society believes that structures on it should attract the same level of protection as Grade ll buildings.

More details about Rep ID: 11299

Representation ID: 11135

COMMENT Rattlesden Parish Council (Mr Doug Reed)

Summary:

In terms of protection of non-designated assets, the Council believes that where there are local heritage features, it is vitally important to protect and enhance those. Rattlesden is fortunate in that it has a number of such 'assets'.

More details about Rep ID: 11135

Representation ID: 11063

COMMENT Stowmarket Town Council (Ms Michelle Marshall)

Summary:

Stowmarket Town Council believes that the current arrangements are sufficient.

More details about Rep ID: 11063

Representation ID: 10827

COMMENT Mendlesham Parish Council (Mrs Sharon Jones )

Summary:

No specific situations put forward but it needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis.

More details about Rep ID: 10827

Representation ID: 10084

OBJECT Historic England (Katie Parsons)

Summary:

It would be helpful to clarify what is meant by an identified heritage assets, does this mean a locally listed heritage asset? We would recommend that as a minimum a local authority has established criteria for identifying non-designated heritage assets, and ideally has a local list of assets linked to planning policies. A good example is Peterborough.

Appeal cases indicate that inspectors regards non-designated heritage assets, and something on a local list, as an important material consideration in planning decisions.

Robust provision of these heritage assets will increase the soundness of your forthcoming plan.

More details about Rep ID: 10084

Representation ID: 9870

COMMENT Stowupland Parish Council (Claire Pizzey)

Summary:

The specific locations should be those identified by Neighbourhood Plans and by reference to the Heritage Settlement and Landscape Sensitivity Assessment.

More details about Rep ID: 9870

Representation ID: 9752

COMMENT Miss R P Baillon

Summary:

A high level of protection should be given to maintain the uniqueness of Suffolk. HA1 is acceptable but it needs the vigilance of the appropriate departments of Mid Suffolk and research to be carried out on these assets. Collaboration with scientific organisations could help with this situation.

More details about Rep ID: 9752

Representation ID: 9566

COMMENT Cllr John Hinton

Summary:

Consideration should be given to a "village" being just that and not a mini town in the making. Rural and village locations benefit from characteristic street scenes and approaches, including ancient trees and hedgerows which should be protected (as stated in the NPPF). Removal of these on the basis that a "new" planting will replace them is not a sustainable option. It creates a new artificial and inappropriate street scene and approach and effectively increases the potential for new pests and diseases to be imported and to then destroy existing vegetation.

More details about Rep ID: 9566

Representation ID: 9462

COMMENT Bacton Parish Council (mrs tina newell)

Summary:

Consult local opinion on a case by case basis

More details about Rep ID: 9462

Representation ID: 8835

COMMENT Mr Philip Schofield

Summary:

Must be done case by case. That they're not designated may be an oversight

More details about Rep ID: 8835

Representation ID: 8574

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

*These would be best identified by lists from Parish Councils.
*The logical answer would surely be each individual asset will be different and it would be best to consult and negotiate with the Parish Council supplying the list.

More details about Rep ID: 8574

Representation ID: 8501

COMMENT Sproughton Parish Council (Mrs Susan Frankis)

Summary:

Refer to Qtn 57.

More details about Rep ID: 8501

Representation ID: 8414

COMMENT Acton Parish Council (Mr Paul MacLachlan)

Summary:

The Planning Authority should create a register of important non-designated assets within local communities.
In order to avoid frivolous nominations local community nominations will be subject to approval by the Planning Authority.
The Planning Authority will have regard to the protection agreed when considering applications for development.

More details about Rep ID: 8414

Representation ID: 8302

COMMENT Botesdale & Rickinghall CAP Group (Mr. William Sargeant)

Summary:

Support policy HA1 with an approach consistent with NPPF.

More details about Rep ID: 8302

Representation ID: 8158

COMMENT Tattingstone Parish Council (mrs Jane Connell-Smith)

Summary:

We support option HA1

More details about Rep ID: 8158

Representation ID: 8045

COMMENT Suffolk Preservation Society (Bethany Philbedge)

Summary:

The level of protection is set out in para 135 of the NPPF. A balanced judgement must always be taken which has regard to the significance of the heritage asset and the scale of any harm or loss.

More details about Rep ID: 8045

Representation ID: 7685

COMMENT Chilton Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

A policy approach consistent with the weight afforded to non designated assets in the NPPF should be applied.

More details about Rep ID: 7685

Representation ID: 7616

COMMENT Mrs Annette Brennand

Summary:

The level of protection afforded non-designated assets should be a subjective exercise (each asset on its own merits) however, such an exercise should be undertaken in consultation with relevant local communities (parishes).

More details about Rep ID: 7616

Representation ID: 7524

COMMENT Dr DAVID Brennand

Summary:

The level of protection afforded non-designated assets should be a subjective exercise (each asset on its own merits) however, such an exercise should be undertaken in consultation with relevant local communities (parishes).

More details about Rep ID: 7524

Representation ID: 7459

COMMENT Ms Sharon Maxwell

Summary:

Parish councils could provide lists and identification.

More details about Rep ID: 7459

Representation ID: 7323

COMMENT Great Waldingfield PC (Mr Cecil Allard)

Summary:

. Same protections . If they have same protections why would you favour one above the other unless for financial gain?

More details about Rep ID: 7323

Representation ID: 7236

COMMENT Mr Bernard Rushton

Summary:

World War 2 sites should be automatically protected. The balance should always be in favour of protecxting the non-designated assets.

More details about Rep ID: 7236

Representation ID: 7129

COMMENT Thurston Parish Council (Mrs Victoria Waples)

Summary:

Those sites that are locally identified as special areas eg protection of high quality agricultural land

More details about Rep ID: 7129

Representation ID: 7030

COMMENT Mrs Tania Farrow

Summary:

Assets should always be protected as a priority unless this will negatively on the continued viability of the area

More details about Rep ID: 7030

Representation ID: 7022

COMMENT Mrs Linda Rushton

Summary:

World War 2 assets, although non-designated, should be protected to encourage International Tourism.

More details about Rep ID: 7022

Representation ID: 6647

COMMENT Denham Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

Denham Parish Council favours protection unless there is an adverse impact for the community.

More details about Rep ID: 6647

Representation ID: 6575

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

N/A

More details about Rep ID: 6575

Representation ID: 6455

COMMENT Barham Parish Council (Mrs Joanne Culley)

Summary:

By ensuring developments are not detrimental to existing sites.

More details about Rep ID: 6455

Representation ID: 6179

COMMENT Colne Stour Countrside Association (Mr. Charles Aldous)

Summary:

Specific protection should be given to the AONB and the area proposed for its extension and as well the wider area along the Stour Valley and it tributaries managed by the Project. Development should not be allowed which adversely affects the character, quality, views or distinctiveness of extended area for the AONB or does not support the environmental, social and economic objectives of the Management Plan. There should be consistency over this with Braintree DC, particularly as some areas overlap. We suggest incorporating similar wording to paragraph8.27 of Braintree DC draft New Local Plan, which recognises this areas importance.

More details about Rep ID: 6179

Representation ID: 6114

SUPPORT Mr Carroll Reeve

Summary:

Such items commonly referred to as a local lists, should have the same protection as a grade ll *. In Lavenham a local list is in preparation, we also have a medieval water culvert under Water Street that is in danger of collapse, albeit that it is still used by Anglian Water - this was built before 1500.

More details about Rep ID: 6114

Representation ID: 6003

COMMENT Little Waldingfield Parish Council (Mr Andy Sheppard)

Summary:

LWPC believe that additional protection be given on a case by case basis where appropriate.

More details about Rep ID: 6003

Representation ID: 5997

OBJECT Colne Stour Countrside Association (Mr. Charles Aldous)

Summary:

There should be a presumption against development in or near both the AONB and the area proposed for extension if it adversely affects the special landscape qualities of the area. to be allowed, development within the wider area managed by the Project must support the wider environmental, social and economic objectives set out in the Management Plan. Babergh DC should be consistent with Braintree, particularly as some important areas overlap DCs. Please include similar wording to that in paragraph 8.27 of Braintree's draft New Local Plan

More details about Rep ID: 5997

Representation ID: 5927

COMMENT Little Cornard Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

Support HA1.

More details about Rep ID: 5927

Representation ID: 5635

COMMENT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

Protected or by a case by case objective.

More details about Rep ID: 5635

Representation ID: 5139

COMMENT Stradbroke Parish Council (Odile Wladon)

Summary:

will be addressed in the local neighbourhood plan.

More details about Rep ID: 5139

Representation ID: 5025

COMMENT Brantham Parish Council (Mrs Sarah Keys)

Summary:

These should be systematically identified, by a consultation to provide a local supplementary list.

More details about Rep ID: 5025

Representation ID: 4965

COMMENT Nedging with Naughton Parish Council (Miss LYNN ALLUM)

Summary:

Identified non-designated assets should be protected where they are clearly identified by local residents as being of significant local importance.

More details about Rep ID: 4965

Representation ID: 4798

COMMENT Woolverstone Parish Council (Mr Simon Pearce)

Summary:

We have covered our response to this in Q57 above

More details about Rep ID: 4798

Representation ID: 4722

COMMENT Lavenham Parish Council (Carroll Reeve)

Summary:

Such items commonly referred to as a local lists, should have the same protection as a grade ll *. In Lavenham a local list is in preparation, we also have a medieval water culvert under Water Street that is in danger of collapse, albeit that it is still used by Anglian Water.

More details about Rep ID: 4722

Representation ID: 4670

COMMENT Holton St Mary Parish Council (Ms Dorothy Steeds )

Summary:

There should be a non-listed heritage property category which identifies other properties that should be protected.

More details about Rep ID: 4670

Representation ID: 4512

COMMENT Kersey Parish Council (Mrs Sarah Partridge)

Summary:

The question is not well enough worded to be able to answer.

More details about Rep ID: 4512

Representation ID: 4303

COMMENT Mrs Sheila Hurdwell

Summary:

Publish list of locally important buildings/sites and adopt as JLP. Thus the significance of listed buildings or sites (in own right and as a contributor to wider strategic planning objectives) can be better taken into account in planning applications affecting the building, site, its setting

More details about Rep ID: 4303

Representation ID: 3708

COMMENT Mr Neil Lister

Summary:

Publish list of locally important buildings/sites and adopt as JLP. Thus the significance of listed buildings or sites (in own right and as a contributor to wider strategic planning objectives) can be better taken into account in planning applications affecting the building, site, its setting. Conservation of listed assets is an objective of NPPF and a material consideration when determining planning applications.

More details about Rep ID: 3708

Representation ID: 3524

COMMENT Fressingfield Parish Council (Mr Alexander Day)

Summary:

The response to question 57 outlines the concerns the Parish Council has, should non - designated sites not have protection and expects the standards alluded to in HA1 to be upheld.

More details about Rep ID: 3524

Representation ID: 3495

COMMENT Mr John Kitson

Summary:

I suspect in most cases these will be identified via Parish Councils. Each individual asset would probably be different and it would be best to consult and negotiate with the Parish Council involved.

More details about Rep ID: 3495

Representation ID: 3015

COMMENT Wortham & Burgate Parish Council (mrs Netty Verkroost)

Summary:

To take note of our Village Design Statement

More details about Rep ID: 3015

Representation ID: 2959

COMMENT Diss & District Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group (Ms Deborah Sarson)

Summary:

According to specific situation and setting, with the presumption in favour of protection.

More details about Rep ID: 2959

Representation ID: 2665

COMMENT Cockfield Parish Council (Mr Doug Reed)

Summary:

Cockfield Parish Council believes that they should be considered on their own merits, as many locations have unique local history and heritage features which give local amenity value. Additional efforts should be made to protect and enhance their value/usage and in so doing preserve the past for future generations.

More details about Rep ID: 2665

Representation ID: 2624

COMMENT Hadleigh Society (Margaret Woods)

Summary:

As Non Designated Heritage Assets are irreplaceable any policy should emphasise the need of the developer to demonstrate how the asset is to be retained, and that its removal and or destruction ought be a last resort based upon an assessment of the assets merits versus that of the development. Where necessary the council should consider seeking the assets formal listing.

More details about Rep ID: 2624

Representation ID: 2304

COMMENT Chelmondiston PC (Mrs Rosie Kirkup)

Summary:

Important cultural and heritage assets should be protected whether they are officially designated or not.

More details about Rep ID: 2304

Representation ID: 2251

COMMENT Battisford Parish Council (Mr Chris Knock)

Summary:

If specific situations arise there should be local consultation on the way forward

More details about Rep ID: 2251

Representation ID: 2076

COMMENT Mrs Kathie Guthrie

Summary:

What a pity we don't have green field status

More details about Rep ID: 2076

Representation ID: 1954

COMMENT Palgrave Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

According to the specific situation and with the presumption in favour of protection.

More details about Rep ID: 1954

Representation ID: 1880

COMMENT Hoxne Parish Council (Mrs Sara Foote)

Summary:

NPPF Para 139 should refer and once identified a local list should be produced

More details about Rep ID: 1880

Representation ID: 1858

COMMENT Debenham Parish Council (Mr Richard Blackwell)

Summary:

See response to Q51.

More details about Rep ID: 1858

Representation ID: 1856

COMMENT Debenham Parish Council (Mr Richard Blackwell)

Summary:

See response to Q51.

More details about Rep ID: 1856

Representation ID: 1855

COMMENT Debenham Parish Council (Mr Richard Blackwell)

Summary:

See response to Q51.

More details about Rep ID: 1855

Representation ID: 1782

COMMENT Mr Richard Blackwell

Summary:

See response to Q51.

More details about Rep ID: 1782

Representation ID: 1780

COMMENT Mr Richard Blackwell

Summary:

See response to Q51.

More details about Rep ID: 1780

Representation ID: 1594

COMMENT Mr Alf Hannan

Summary:

Be very wary of requests for developments in these areas

More details about Rep ID: 1594

Representation ID: 1163

COMMENT Great Ashfield PC (arthur peake)

Summary:

The range is huge, suggest this is left to local planning consultation rather than a top down policy.

More details about Rep ID: 1163

Representation ID: 1044

COMMENT Mr Roy Barker

Summary:

with the land owners consent

More details about Rep ID: 1044

Representation ID: 827

COMMENT Supporters Against Fressingfield Expansion (SAFE) (Dr John Castro)

Summary:

Equal protection is needed to preserve open countryside, only protecting designated sites is too narrow a policy that leaves other areas vulnerable to over development. A new paper should be commissioned on the current heritage assests in the Local Authority area.

More details about Rep ID: 827

Representation ID: 677

COMMENT Redgrave Parish Council (Mr John Giddings)

Summary:

RPC considers this unnecessary.

More details about Rep ID: 677

Representation ID: 316

COMMENT Mr Simon Barrett

Summary:

This should be to encourage owners to invest in their decaying properties.

More details about Rep ID: 316

Representation ID: 132

COMMENT Mrs Sara Knight

Summary:

By recognising the needs that will help protect them for the future rather than simply preserving the status quo.

More details about Rep ID: 132

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult