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) - Q76

Representation ID: 13251

COMMENT Sproughton Parish Council (Mrs Susan Frankis)

Summary:

Not that we are currently aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 13251

Representation ID: 13005

COMMENT Dr Jonathan Tuppen

Summary:

Not that I am aware of

More details about Rep ID: 13005

Representation ID: 12436

COMMENT Old Newton Parish Council (Mrs Karen Price)

Summary:

27 Church Road is already within the curtilage of the village envelope, however it is not marked as part of the call for sites. The parish council would be in agreement should this be put forward for development. The parish council would also like to see this as part of the housing quota for the village if developed in the future.

More details about Rep ID: 12436

Representation ID: 12370

COMMENT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Mr. James Bailey)

Summary:

We consider that Stowupland should be given a new settlement boundary to incorporate Land south of Stowmarket Road, Stowupland. Further promotion of this site is provided in Section 2.

More details about Rep ID: 12370

Representation ID: 11730

COMMENT Haughley Park Consortium represented by Boyer Planning (Mr. James Bailey)

Summary:

As detailed in Section 3 of this response, we consider that a separate boundary could be identified to incorporate land at Haughley Park and Lawn Farm.

This would include the proposed enabling residential development in the south-western part of Haughley Park and the re-located employment site at Lawn Farm, as per the Site Location Plan.

More details about Rep ID: 11730

Representation ID: 10856

COMMENT Mendlesham Parish Council (Mrs Sharon Jones )

Summary:

No

More details about Rep ID: 10856

Representation ID: 10694

OBJECT Mrs LP Wheatley

Summary:

No

More details about Rep ID: 10694

Representation ID: 10385

COMMENT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Kate Kerrigan)

Summary:

We consider that Needham Market should be given a new settlement boundary to incorporate Land East of Barking Road.

More details about Rep ID: 10385

Representation ID: 9770

COMMENT Miss R P Baillon

Summary:

I am not in a position to comment.

More details about Rep ID: 9770

Representation ID: 9584

COMMENT Cllr John Hinton

Summary:

Areas of "East End" East Bergholt, are developed and have properties of long standing, but are outside the proposed boundaries and not indicated on the maps. One can only conclude that the OS maps are well out of date by about 100 years!!

More details about Rep ID: 9584

Representation ID: 9480

COMMENT Bacton Parish Council (mrs tina newell)

Summary:

No

More details about Rep ID: 9480

Representation ID: 9397

COMMENT Beyton Parish Council (Ms Adele Pope)

Summary:

Given the current Planning Authority/MSDC policy, this village is not identified for development other than infill. Areas within and surrounding the village are identified as of particular visual importance and would not be available for development in the future. It would be preferable to use brown field sites or run down areas for new settlements. This means there are no further settlements within the parish that require incorporation.

More details about Rep ID: 9397

Representation ID: 8981

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

Not that I am currently aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 8981

Representation ID: 8454

COMMENT Acton Parish Council (Mr Paul MacLachlan)

Summary:

The Council recommends the creation of a settlement boundary for Newman's Green. The Parish Council has made a separate submission on this issue.

More details about Rep ID: 8454

Representation ID: 8381

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

Summary:

The answer to Q 75 was compiled with reference to the settlement of Rickinghall and Botesdale, and I consider that each community should identify how they perceive that the settlement should be drawn and reviewed.

More details about Rep ID: 8381

Representation ID: 7979

COMMENT Ms Helen Davies

Summary:

Not that we are currently aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 7979

Representation ID: 7815

COMMENT Mr J Rapley

Summary:

Within Beyton's there are no identified settlements that require adjustment to the proposed settlement boundaries.

More details about Rep ID: 7815

Representation ID: 7631

COMMENT Mrs Annette Brennand

Summary:

None that I am aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 7631

Representation ID: 7568

COMMENT Dr DAVID Brennand

Summary:

Not that I am currently aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 7568

Representation ID: 7539

COMMENT Ms Sharon Maxwell

Summary:

NO

More details about Rep ID: 7539

Representation ID: 7428

COMMENT Denham Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

None within the village of Denham, Mid Suffolk.

More details about Rep ID: 7428

Representation ID: 7390

COMMENT Great Waldingfield PC (Mr Cecil Allard)

Summary:

At this late stage and without the current data it is a difficult task to identify these settlements.

More details about Rep ID: 7390

Representation ID: 7198

OBJECT Thurston Parish Council (Mrs Victoria Waples)

Summary:

Option BND1 - Review and designate boundaries for all settlements above a threshold of 10 dwellings adjacent to or fronting an existing highway is sufficient going forth

More details about Rep ID: 7198

Representation ID: 7133

COMMENT Mrs Tania Farrow

Summary:

Not in this immediate locality

More details about Rep ID: 7133

Representation ID: 6869

COMMENT mrs elizabeth clarke

Summary:

Please can you refer to the proposed settlement boundaries as set out in the Lawshall Neighbourhood Plan they are described as defined clusters.

More details about Rep ID: 6869

Representation ID: 6774

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

Not that we are aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 6774

Representation ID: 6121

COMMENT Little Waldingfield Parish Council (Mr Andy Sheppard)

Summary:

LWPC believes No

More details about Rep ID: 6121

Representation ID: 5964

COMMENT Little Cornard Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

Area adjoining B1508 in Little Cornard towards Sudbury should be considered as a settlement. Significant population and better infrastructure.

More details about Rep ID: 5964

Representation ID: 5671

COMMENT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

None known

More details about Rep ID: 5671

Representation ID: 5078

COMMENT Mr Graham Jones

Summary:

Given the current Planning Authority/MSDC policy, Beyton is not identified for development other than infill. Areas within and surrounding the village are identified as of particular visual importance and would not be available for development in the future. This means that there are no further settlements within the parish that require incorporation.

More details about Rep ID: 5078

Representation ID: 5049

COMMENT Brantham Parish Council (Mrs Sarah Keys)

Summary:

We wonder if the Brantham Bull area at the east end of the Parish should be considered for Hamlet status.

More details about Rep ID: 5049

Representation ID: 4991

COMMENT Nedging with Naughton Parish Council (Miss LYNN ALLUM)

Summary:

There are within our Parish, clusters of dwellings, some listed, some in a conservation area, that should be identified as settlements. In general, any further development in these clusters would be inappropriate but identification would help avoid any anticipation of new development.

More details about Rep ID: 4991

Representation ID: 4836

COMMENT Woolverstone Parish Council (Mr Simon Pearce)

Summary:

Not that we are aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 4836

Representation ID: 4774

COMMENT Lavenham Parish Council (Carroll Reeve)

Summary:

Perhaps

More details about Rep ID: 4774

Representation ID: 3727

COMMENT Mr Neil Lister

Summary:

Hadleigh, to the S and E. No significant landscape designations and the settlement will not join other large settlements if it expands.

More details about Rep ID: 3727

Representation ID: 3559

COMMENT Fressingfield Parish Council (Mr Alexander Day)

Summary:

The Parish Council assumes that this question relates to the entire region covered by MSDC and not to their village. There are no additional settlements that should be given consideration. It is fair to say that too many have been considered already in the village to date. In general terms we would expect to see the settlement boundaries flexed around Ipswich fringe and Urban areas and Market towns to redress the disproportionate development skewed towards rural areas in the past few years and detailed in response to question 75.

More details about Rep ID: 3559

Representation ID: 3518

COMMENT Mr John Kitson

Summary:

Not that I am currently aware of

More details about Rep ID: 3518

Representation ID: 3356

SUPPORT Lindsey Parish Council (Victoria Waples)

Summary:

If the criteria for boundaries is 10 or more dwellings then should the dwellings around the Church and Village Hall in Lindsey have a defined settlement boundary? Similarly this would apply for the group of dwellings in Lindsey around the Forge triangle.

More details about Rep ID: 3356

Representation ID: 3034

COMMENT Wortham & Burgate Parish Council (mrs Netty Verkroost)

Summary:

Yes. The whole of Burgate including Little Green and Great Green should be shown in the settlement boundary.

More details about Rep ID: 3034

Representation ID: 2996

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

Summary:

The DDNPSG leaves commenting on these to the individual Parishes affected at this stage but reserves its position to comment in future as work on the DDNP progresses in parallel.

More details about Rep ID: 2996

Representation ID: 2686

COMMENT Cockfield Parish Council (Mr Doug Reed)

Summary:

Cockfield Parish Council believes that there is no need to identify further settlement boundaries.

More details about Rep ID: 2686

Representation ID: 2322

COMMENT Chelmondiston PC (Mrs Rosie Kirkup)

Summary:

Yes, Pin Mill should be separately designated as "Hamlet". It is detached from the main built area of the parish and as an important historical and beauty spot with both "Conservation" status and "AONB" status, should be protected from inappropriate development.

More details about Rep ID: 2322

Representation ID: 2209

COMMENT Mr. A. Breen

Summary:

Yes they are called civil parish boundaries the foundation of the lowest level of local democracy.

More details about Rep ID: 2209

Representation ID: 1974

COMMENT Palgrave Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

No.

More details about Rep ID: 1974

Representation ID: 1613

COMMENT Mr Alf Hannan

Summary:

None in/near Haughley

More details about Rep ID: 1613

Representation ID: 1291

COMMENT Raydon Parish Council (Mrs Jane Cryer)

Summary:

Not aware of any

More details about Rep ID: 1291

Representation ID: 1080

COMMENT Mr Roy Barker

Summary:

Great Ashfield Village Main road and Elmswell road areas
all Hinterland villages

More details about Rep ID: 1080

Representation ID: 339

COMMENT Mr Simon Barrett

Summary:

None

More details about Rep ID: 339

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

Powered by OpusConsult