Home > Planning > Planning Policy

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

If you haven't got an account you can register now.
If you have forgotten your password you can request a new password.

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) - Option BHD1

Representation ID: 16158

COMMENT Paul Reeley

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16158

Representation ID: 16136

COMMENT Ms. Perpetua Ratcliffe

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16136

Representation ID: 16114

COMMENT Mr P. Pollard

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16114

Representation ID: 16092

COMMENT Mrs Natalie Brook

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16092

Representation ID: 16070

COMMENT Mrs J. Pollard

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16070

Representation ID: 16048

COMMENT Mr Gavin Brook

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16048

Representation ID: 16026

COMMENT Mr Michael Hills

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16026

Representation ID: 16004

COMMENT Mrs Helena Knight

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 16004

Representation ID: 15982

COMMENT Mr Roger Knight

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15982

Representation ID: 15960

COMMENT Mrs J. A. Moore

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15960

Representation ID: 15938

COMMENT Miss Jane Anne Moore

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15938

Representation ID: 15916

COMMENT Mr John Moore

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15916

Representation ID: 15894

COMMENT Mr Dennis John Griggs

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15894

Representation ID: 15872

COMMENT Miss Hockley

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15872

Representation ID: 15850

COMMENT Mr Castle

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15850

Representation ID: 15828

COMMENT Mrs Linda Rowntree

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15828

Representation ID: 15806

COMMENT Mr Carl Rowntree

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15806

Representation ID: 15784

COMMENT Miss Patricia Copeman

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15784

Representation ID: 15762

COMMENT Mr Barry Pearce

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15762

Representation ID: 15740

COMMENT Mrs Faith Marsden

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15740

Representation ID: 15718

COMMENT Mrs Clare Kiely

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15718

Representation ID: 15696

COMMENT Mr Michael Kiely

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15696

Representation ID: 15674

COMMENT Mrs Patricia Maisey

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15674

Representation ID: 15652

COMMENT Mr John Maisey

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15652

Representation ID: 15630

COMMENT Mrs Dorothy Scrivener

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15630

Representation ID: 15608

COMMENT Mr George Scrivener

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15608

Representation ID: 15586

COMMENT Mrs Linda Dennison

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15586

Representation ID: 15564

COMMENT Mr Ralph W. Godbold

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15564

Representation ID: 15542

COMMENT Mrs Blythe Smith

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15542

Representation ID: 15520

COMMENT Mr Richard Smith

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15520

Representation ID: 15498

COMMENT Mrs G. P. Godbold

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15498

Representation ID: 15476

COMMENT Mr. Giles Godbold

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15476

Representation ID: 15454

COMMENT Mrs Sally Hoskyns

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15454

Representation ID: 15432

COMMENT Mr George Major

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15432

Representation ID: 15410

COMMENT Mrs Audrey Cremer

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15410

Representation ID: 15388

COMMENT Ms. Cindy Hughes

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15388

Representation ID: 15366

COMMENT Mr. Anthony Wickenden

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15366

Representation ID: 15344

COMMENT Mrs Irene Wickenden

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15344

Representation ID: 15322

COMMENT Mrs Jacqueline Cordwell

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15322

Representation ID: 15300

COMMENT Mr Leslie Graham Walter Cremer

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15300

Representation ID: 15278

COMMENT Mr. D.I.O. Johnson

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15278

Representation ID: 15256

COMMENT Mrs D. Johnson

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15256

Representation ID: 15234

COMMENT Anthony & Tracy Keeble

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15234

Representation ID: 15212

COMMENT Mr. John Fensom

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15212

Representation ID: 15190

COMMENT Mr. Alan Cordwell

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15190

Representation ID: 15168

COMMENT Mrs Annette Dovell

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15168

Representation ID: 15146

COMMENT Mr. Martin Hewett

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15146

Representation ID: 15124

COMMENT Ms. Shirley Hewett

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15124

Representation ID: 15102

COMMENT Mrs. Carol Forward

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15102

Representation ID: 15080

COMMENT Mr. Grant Lloyd

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15080

Representation ID: 15058

COMMENT Mrts. Natasha Lloyd

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15058

Representation ID: 15036

COMMENT Mr. John Forward

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15036

Representation ID: 15014

COMMENT Mr. Hoskyns

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 15014

Representation ID: 14992

COMMENT Miss Isabel De Minvielle Devaux

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14992

Representation ID: 14970

COMMENT Mr. Ian East

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14970

Representation ID: 14948

COMMENT Ms. Tracy East

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14948

Representation ID: 14926

COMMENT Ms. Ilona Northall

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14926

Representation ID: 14904

COMMENT Mr. Alex James Richard May

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14904

Representation ID: 14882

COMMENT Mr. Richard John May

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14882

Representation ID: 14860

COMMENT Ms. Kathryn Anne May

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14860

Representation ID: 14838

COMMENT Ms. Olivia Frances Chloe May

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14838

Representation ID: 14816

COMMENT Mr. Charles Hogger

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14816

Representation ID: 14794

COMMENT Ms. Jo-Ann Hogger

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14794

Representation ID: 14772

COMMENT Mr P. L. Ratcliffe

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14772

Representation ID: 14750

COMMENT Miss Tracey Durling

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14750

Representation ID: 14728

COMMENT Mrs Carol Griggs

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 14728

Representation ID: 13227

COMMENT Mr. Artist

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk', it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 13227

Representation ID: 12992

SUPPORT Ipswich Borough Council (

Summary:

We support the option which focuses development around the county town as this recognises Ipswich's key role in providing employment, services and facilities to the wider population in the IHMA and IFEA. This in turn supports the growth and regeneration of the town as identified in your document, which benefits the wider population through the quality and quantity of employment, services and facilities that can be provided together with associated infrastructure.

More details about Rep ID: 12992

Representation ID: 12750

SUPPORT Building Partnerships Ltd. represented by La Ronde Wright Limited (Mrs Nicole Wright)

Summary:

is the only option which properly reflects the geographic and functional relationship between Babergh district and Ipswich. It is the most sustainable of the proposed options in terms of accessibility to employment, public transport, services and facilities, and is supported.

More details about Rep ID: 12750

Representation ID: 12708

COMMENT NHS England - Midlands and East (East) (Ms Kerry Harding)

Summary:

A number of core healthcare services are located in Ipswich; therefore from a primary healthcare perspective this option should enable appropriate mitigation within specific areas, to support NHS England's strategy to promote Primary Healthcare Hubs within strategic locations.

More details about Rep ID: 12708

Representation ID: 12639

COMMENT Environment Agency (Miss Charlie Christensen)

Summary:

options BHD1 and MHS1 offer greater potential to redevelop brownfield land and with that comes the opportunity to improve land and water quality.

More details about Rep ID: 12639

Representation ID: 12498

SUPPORT Stoke by Nayland Parish Council (Mr James Dark)

Summary:

supported

More details about Rep ID: 12498

Representation ID: 12228

OBJECT Marden Homes represented by Strutt & Parker (Ms Laura Dudley-Smith)

Summary:

There is a risk that if development was to be focussed entirely in the Ipswich fringe area, urban areas and market towns (BHD1), then economic investment and local spending may too prioritise these areas and existing facilities and services in core and hinterland villages will suffer. There is a need to support the vitality of rural communities and their existing services and facilities, and encouraging modest growth to maintain local spending and investment, as well as social variety, will play a key role in this.

More details about Rep ID: 12228

Representation ID: 11908

SUPPORT Turley (Mr Gareth Barton)

Summary:

We support 'Option BHD1 - County town focussed'. Given the importance of Ipswich as a regional service centre and to drive its future economic growth, it is entirely logical to direct future growth to this area.
As recognised by the consultation document, growing Ipswich with further sustainable growth provides opportunities to Babergh and Mid Suffolk's growing population to access employment, services and facilities. We therefore support the intention to give focussed consideration to the communities with the strongest functional relationship to Ipswich, supported by further growth at other appropriate Urban Areas, Market Towns and Core Villages.

More details about Rep ID: 11908

Representation ID: 11827

SUPPORT Dedham Vale Society (Mr. David Eking)

Summary:

We prefer BHD1, simply because it imposes the least new building on the Core, Hinterland and Open Countryside of the Dedham Vale.

More details about Rep ID: 11827

Representation ID: 11760

SUPPORT Councillor Frank Lawrenson

Summary:

The amount of development on the board for Sudbury is almost at the limit of what the area can manage. Option 1 is the only solution that would be viable in the eyes of an Inspector, with a proviso that the total allocation for housing within a 5 mile radius of Sudbury not exceed 350 houses, so as to allow for "windfall" developments of up to 150 houses over the term. This should be revised/revert back to an unrestricted Option 1 when a relief road is put in place or a revised local plan is adopted.

More details about Rep ID: 11760

Representation ID: 11411

SUPPORT Stour & Orwell Society (Ms Emma Proctor King)

Summary:

SOS favours BDH1, given the desirability of focussing new growth at locations where the majority of services and facilities are located. The Ipswich Fringe and Urban Areas are more readily able to accommodate growth, with access to healthcare, schools, shops and transport hubs.

More details about Rep ID: 11411

Representation ID: 10907

SUPPORT Lady Anne Windsor Charity (Deborah Langstaff)

Summary:

Is supported

More details about Rep ID: 10907

Representation ID: 10685

OBJECT Thorcross Builders Limited (A. Goodwin) represented by Springfields Planning and Development Limited (Mr Chris Loon)

Summary:

Option BHD1, due to lack of appropriate housing distribution, would be to the detriment of rural areas, threatening rural housing supply, affordability, social vitality and the retention of services and facilities contrary to national policy for rural areas.

More details about Rep ID: 10685

Representation ID: 10249

OBJECT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Kate Kerrigan)

Summary:

Whilst we support the Councils recognition of the benefits of locating development on the outskirts of Ipswich, we consider that a County Town focussed approach, option BHD1 for Babergh and option MHD1 for Mid Suffolk, would be detrimental to the growth of other sustainable settlements in the Districts

More details about Rep ID: 10249

Representation ID: 10090

SUPPORT Glemsford Parish Council (Mrs Deborah George)

Summary:

We strongly favour Option BDH1 - county town focussed.
The Ipswich fringe area and Urban Areas & Market Towns offer the best opportunities for growth in employment. It makes sense to focus most development in those areas. They also have robust infrastructure already in place in terms of roads, transport and social facilities.
Large scale development in Core and Hinterland villages would require a very considerable and costly investment in infrastructure improvements.

More details about Rep ID: 10090

Representation ID: 9928

SUPPORT Mr Frank Lawrenson

Summary:

The council has already stated that necessary infrastructure is of prime importance before any new development is considered, therefore it seems obvious that the bulk of housing should be sited in the Ipswich fringe area or with easy access to the A14 and A12 corridors. Indeed if 'Since 2001, approximately 60% of new housing growth has come forward in 'rural' areas across Babergh and Mid Suffolk' , it seems it is now the time to redress the balance towards the urban areas and protect the rural landscape which is so important for tourism, our largest business.

More details about Rep ID: 9928

Representation ID: 8771

SUPPORT Mr John Bangs

Summary:

I support the' County Town Focussed' Ipswich fringe for housing, because Ipswich has a massive opportunity to create employment...take a leaf out of Cambridge's book and keep building your science parks. The County Town Focussed housing will have ready access to transport infrastructure let alone all the social needs that Ipswich has to offer.

More details about Rep ID: 8771

Representation ID: 8514

OBJECT Redlingfield parish meeting (Ms Janet Norman-Philips)

Summary:

We do not support this approach

More details about Rep ID: 8514

Representation ID: 8488

SUPPORT SHOTLEY PARISH COUNCIL (Mrs Dina Bedwell)

Summary:

Taking into account the expected growth following the completion of the Ganges and Marina developments, and without any definitive guarantees that infrastructure improvements are likely to be in line with projected increases, we feel that 5% would not only support Babergh's overall housing needs but would do so at a locally manageable level.

More details about Rep ID: 8488

Representation ID: 7976

COMMENT Mrs Sarah Knibbs

Summary:

I am also very concerned about a 50% scale of development in the south Ipswich Fringe area, given that all road access into south Ipswich is already highly congested and there is little supporting public transport; in particular from the Shotley peninsula!
All three proposed Orwell crossings state traffic will be increased on Wherstead Rd.
It would be sensible to create a Northern bypass and associated housing that would give better access to the northern and eastern parts of Ipswich spreading the opportunity for employment.

More details about Rep ID: 7976

Representation ID: 7936

OBJECT Mr Adrian Hutchings

Summary:

All access points to Ipswich are congested and it is difficult to see how further traffic could be managed. Adding significant development to hamlets such as Copdock & Washbrook under a fringe designation would swamp the existing villages which do not have adequate services and would create significant traffic congestion. This option appears to be too simplistic and ignores potential problems for the future. A more creative approach such as self contained garden villages or town would be more sustainable in the long run.

More details about Rep ID: 7936

Representation ID: 7762

SUPPORT Mr John Ambrose

Summary:

The options were discussed at a recent public meeting in Holbrook and the consensus of tose present was that this is the favoured option.

More details about Rep ID: 7762

Representation ID: 7737

OBJECT Artisan PPS Ltd (Mr. Leslie Short)

Summary:

consider that a greater proportion of growth should be allocated to core villages say another 5% to match that in Mid Suffolk.

More details about Rep ID: 7737

Representation ID: 7721

OBJECT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

Focus on Ipswich would be detremental as increases time spent in traffic which affects climate change and does not provide sufficient links to towns for recreation or public transport for workers to towns other than Ipswich which is unreliable at rush hour.

More details about Rep ID: 7721

Representation ID: 7638

OBJECT Mrs Gillian West

Summary:

Due to the limited river crossings, narrow roads in/out of Ipswich, cannot agree that focussing 50% of new development around the Ipswich Fringe is viable or desirable. At peak times the Copdock, Wherstead & Nacton junctions off the A14 are a log-jam as few alternative routes exist other than going through Ipswich, further exacerbating the congestion there in the one-way system. This would be intolerable and lead to greater gridlock.

More details about Rep ID: 7638

Representation ID: 7548

COMMENT Mrs Jill Girling

Summary:

It will be to the detriment of the District as a whole to weight development in this way. Local communities should be just that - provision of development across the district so that services and housing can be delivered for people to remain in their local communities rather than having to move due to lack of availability. Copdock and Washbrook cannot be a hinterland village and jump to development of the scale proposed without a) losing it's identity and small village character or b) having major infrastructure planing and investment.

More details about Rep ID: 7548

Representation ID: 7353

OBJECT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

The accumulative impact on Ipswich Fringe areas is unacceptable. At 9% growth over 20 years this is an average of less than one house in ten. There may be some who would object to another house in the village but the same people might be asking another time why their children cant get a home in their community. 9% is pretty well matched to the rate of growth of a small community and there is a shortage of affordable housing in rural areas so why stick everything round Ipswich destroying those villages when rural villages need to accommodate growing families.

More details about Rep ID: 7353

Representation ID: 7337

OBJECT Mr Mark Blackwell

Summary:

This puts too much pressure on one area that is already struggling from infrastructure, and in particular road traffic. A more organic growth over all parts of the county is preferable and will allow those communites to grow, both from local families and those migrating into those communities. New settlements that ease the pressure off Ipswich and other existing large settlements would be good.

More details about Rep ID: 7337

Representation ID: 7202

OBJECT Ms Sharon Maxwell

Summary:

The Ipswich fringe area would potentially grow into the Sproughton area which would then mean Sproughton would become part of Ipswich.

More details about Rep ID: 7202

Representation ID: 7134

SUPPORT Mrs Linda Rushton

Summary:

Although I support this focus, I believe, to discourage future car ownership, the percentages should be:

Ipswich 50%
Market Towns 35%
Core Villages, Hinterland Villages and Rural Land 5% each.

More details about Rep ID: 7134

Representation ID: 6288

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

County town focussed

More details about Rep ID: 6288

Representation ID: 5586

OBJECT Mr Graham Moxon

Summary:

Copdock & Washbrook village cannot accommodate a 50%+ increase in residential properties. 5% is more realistic.

More details about Rep ID: 5586

Representation ID: 5531

OBJECT Mr Simon Gibbs

Summary:

The Future Developments need to be spread out around the county not loaded in the Ipswich fringe.

This will destroy the communities within the villages that haven taken 100's of years to develop.

It will also cause a London centric style thinking within the county as all the money/influence is centred on Ipswich to the detriment of the market towns and villages. this already happens but would be amplified by this plan.

The Villages around the county are in need of more housing but not large scale developments

More details about Rep ID: 5531

Representation ID: 5501

OBJECT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

We disagree.

More details about Rep ID: 5501

Representation ID: 4613

SUPPORT Mrs Claire Osborne

Summary:

This pattern of development is preferred because new houses would be situated close to where people work, were there are good transport links and other infrastructure already in place.
When excessive development takes place in villages, they become towns. Please keep growth in our villages and countryside proportionate to their current size. Nobody wants to see Suffolk villages completely overwhelmed by development. The recently agreed developments at Thurston are just appalling.

More details about Rep ID: 4613

Representation ID: 4453

SUPPORT Neighbourhood Plan Team for Lawshall Parish Council (Mr Ric Edelman)

Summary:

Lawshall Parish Council's full response to the Plan includes support of Lawshall's NP. Additionally, the NP Team considers 3 issues most crucial to maintaining the distinctiveness of Lawshall's character. This being the first issue:

1. Question 13: Spatial Distribution
We support Option BBHD1 - 'county town focussed' option.
If Core Villages are required to absorb more than 10% growth how can they still be classified as villages? Likewise if Hinterland Villages have to absorb more than 5% growth, a village like Lawshall will lose its distinctive and age-old character of small hamlets scattered across ancient farmland.

More details about Rep ID: 4453

Representation ID: 4395

OBJECT Mrs Stella Blackwell

Summary:

The roads into Ipswich simply cannot support this plan. Living in a supposed 'fringe settlement', it takes over 45 minutes to get into the centre of town at the current time. The huge volume of traffic on roads such as Bramford Road, Sproughton Road, Hadleigh Road, London Road and, of course the Copdock Interchange, not to mention the Beagle roundabout and Swan Hill means that these roads from Washbrook, Copdock and Sproughton are at breaking point as it is, they simply cannot support any more traffic.

More details about Rep ID: 4395

Representation ID: 4351

OBJECT Mrs Stacey Achour

Summary:

Copdock and Washbrook is not Ipswich fringe but hinterland and this assessment just helps to support housing plans. it does not have the infrastructure for more housing.

More details about Rep ID: 4351

Representation ID: 4313

OBJECT Mrs Louise Baldry

Summary:

The combined arbitrary criteria for scoring of both Hierarchy and Spatial Distribution chosen by BMSDC for the JLP just appears to promote the site availability that has come forward, effectively a mechanism to justify the sites.
JLP to 2036 gives opportunity for bold, innovative and creative thinking but continuing the urban sprawl / welding / merging communities is not the answer.

More details about Rep ID: 4313

Representation ID: 3989

SUPPORT Sudbury Town Council (Mrs Jacqueline Howells)

Summary:

Option BHD1 allows growth in Sudbury but helps protect the character of the market town and surrounding villages. Ipswich has far greater capacity and infrastructure including services and employment to support further growth.

More details about Rep ID: 3989

Representation ID: 3894

OBJECT Mr John Bellwood

Summary:

Simplistic approach, transferring responsibility for infrastructure and services onto Ipswich.

Shame on you.

The combined arbitrary criteria for scoring of both Hierarchy and Spatial Distribution chosen by BMSDC for the JLP just appears to promote the site availability that has come forward, effectively a mechanism to justify the sites.
JLP to 2036 gives opportunity for bold, innovative and creative thinking but continuing the urban sprawl / welding / merging communities is not the answer.

More details about Rep ID: 3894

Representation ID: 3820

COMMENT Mr Alan Squirrell

Summary:

South Ipswich, from Ostrich Creek (Fox's), in the vicinity of the River Orwell, should NOT be Ipswich fringe. It has a very unique subsoil system, IS part of 'flood plain', and this area WILL INCREASE with rising sea levels. The area supports a valuable habitat for a variety of rare wildlife. To consider a flood barrier for Ipswich, then hurriedly 'cash in' on land that will be left valueless for housing development in the near future is pure deception, criminal negligence. BDC should not leave itself open to lawsuits by letting this area be developed in any way.

More details about Rep ID: 3820

Representation ID: 3745

SUPPORT Mr Jeremy Doncaster

Summary:

Support BHD1 If Sproughton is a Hinterland village the village is nearer to Ipswich, although both Hierarchy and Spatial Distribution chosen by BMSDC seems a tool to fit the sites on offer as a justification.

More details about Rep ID: 3745

Representation ID: 3594

SUPPORT Mr Simon Oldfield

Summary:

Development certainly should be focused on urban areas where the essential infrastructure either already exists or can be expanded easily to cater for development. At least 70% of development should be in urban areas and preferably on Brownfield sites - there are many of these in the two council districts. Greenfield development should be avoided wherever possible.

More details about Rep ID: 3594

Representation ID: 3127

OBJECT Mr Adrian Ward

Summary:

The Ipswich "fringe" includes villages and communities that cannot possibly sustain the level of new housing that is being suggested. The infrastructure is not there to cope.

More details about Rep ID: 3127

Representation ID: 2835

SUPPORT Mr Andrew Coxhead

Summary:

Support

More details about Rep ID: 2835

Representation ID: 2380

SUPPORT Polstead Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

From the Spatial Distribution options set out in the document, the Council believes that Option BHD1 should be adopted as the Local Plan policy. It clearly reflects the reality of where people want to live because of employment opportunities and facilities. Spreading population growth on a thinner and wider basis can only lead to unacceptable impacts on travel and transport infrastructures.

More details about Rep ID: 2380

Representation ID: 2212

SUPPORT Mrs Fiona Loader

Summary:

The strength of East Suffolk lies in a vibrant Greater Ipswich

More details about Rep ID: 2212

Representation ID: 1487

SUPPORT Mr Ron Raisey

Summary:

Hinterland villages cannot support more than 5%

More details about Rep ID: 1487

Representation ID: 1341

OBJECT Mrs helen fawthrop

Summary:

I am very concerned about a 50% scale of development in the south Ipswich Fringe area, given that all road access into south Ipswich is already highly congested and there is little supporting public transport; in particular from the Shotley peninsula! All three proposed Orwell crossings state traffic will be increased on Wherstead Rd. Given the scale of development already planned for North Ipswich and the predicted Northern bypass, this would be a more sensible area for development, as it would spread the opportunity for employment for residents both east and west - not just Ipswich - less congestion

More details about Rep ID: 1341

Representation ID: 1123

OBJECT Mr Graham Shorrock

Summary:

Allocating 50% growth to the Ipswich fringe will have a highly detrimental effect on those villages listed. They will no longer be villages but instead become part of Ipswich. I believe it is essential that the villages are protected from the urban sprawl that would occur if the proposed land allocation is accepted.

More details about Rep ID: 1123

Representation ID: 266

SUPPORT Mr Simon Barrett

Summary:

I agree

More details about Rep ID: 266

Representation ID: 173

SUPPORT Mr D C Warren

Summary:

It would be easier to extend existing local facilities that start from scratch.

More details about Rep ID: 173

Representation ID: 42

SUPPORT Mr &Mrs David and Susan Musselwhite

Summary:

Due to poor transport for those without their own car this seems most suitable.
If it is deemed that the need for development is to be more spread out there will need to be corresponding investment in rural public transport. At present the move is in the opposite direction with reduction of this physical link to services to levels that make living in rural areas without access to a car increasingly service impoverished.

More details about Rep ID: 42

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

Powered by OpusConsult