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) - Option MHD2

Representation ID: 12711

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

Summary:

It should be noted that rural areas generally have less access to primary healthcare facilities, and capacity at those facilities is usually more constrained. Significant new dwellings should not be supported in rural areas unless appropriate mitigation for primary healthcare is implemented.

More details about Rep ID: 12711

Representation ID: 12195

SUPPORT The Greenwich Hospital represented by Strutt & Parker (Mr Paul Sutton)

Summary:

While it is considered that there is no truly 'best' option, as each option represents some form of compromise, we would support Option BHD2/MHD2 - 'market town/rural area balance' - since this option seeks an appropriate balance between urban and rural development and recognises that this pattern of growth has been consistent and successful in recent years. This option would see between 25 and 35% of the total housing requirement being met through site allocations in Core Villages, which we would suggest is both appropriate and sustainable. It would also help to sustain existing services and facilities in these villages.

More details about Rep ID: 12195

Representation ID: 10253

COMMENT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Kate Kerrigan)

Summary:

Options BHD2 and MHD2 recognises the need to allow for a certain quantum of growth within the rural areas, we would raise concerns that there are only a few recognised Market Towns within the Districts, which could have implications of adopting this approach.

More details about Rep ID: 10253

Representation ID: 9429

COMMENT Bacton Parish Council (mrs tina newell)

Summary:

MHD 2 market town/rural area balance. Some rural growth is desirable to sustain or improve existing community infrastructure.

More details about Rep ID: 9429

Representation ID: 8926

COMMENT Mrs Jessica Fleming

Summary:

Support this option with with caveat that a greater proportion of development be allowed for hamlets and countryside development, this could offer opportunities for larger contributions to housing in a rural setting while allowing people more flexibility in where they chose to live.

More details about Rep ID: 8926

Representation ID: 8519

COMMENT Redlingfield parish meeting (Ms Janet Norman-Philips)

Summary:

Of the options on offer this is the best.
New development and housing should be distributed across the district.

More details about Rep ID: 8519

Representation ID: 7720

OBJECT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

Transport corridor focussed is best as this option would provide the most sustainable option by providing development close to the transport network, allowing for people to be less reliant on cars and so applies to the strategic policies of mitigating climate change.

More details about Rep ID: 7720

Representation ID: 5475

OBJECT Mr & Mrs Martin Steele

Summary:

Would like to see development which sits close to employment and infrastructure and maintains the differential between towns and the surrounding villages and hamlets.
Need to protect the varied characters of our rural small villages and hamlets and not forget that tourism contributes to the local economy.

More details about Rep ID: 5475

Representation ID: 5311

COMMENT Mrs Ann Hurst

Summary:

It is difficult to understand this when some areas are falling into more than 1 category

More details about Rep ID: 5311

Representation ID: 5201

SUPPORT Woodbridge Properties Ltd represented by Shallish Associated Limited (Mr A Shallish)

Summary:

MHD2 -Market town/rural area balance is supported as it acknowledges the essentially rural nature of Mid Suffolk and the importance of sustaining rural communities by allowing them to develop. This should help to ensure a sustainable rural community/economy.

More details about Rep ID: 5201

Representation ID: 4523

SUPPORT Barking Parish Council (Mrs Rosemary Cochrane)

Summary:

A fairer distribution of housing growth across the District.

More details about Rep ID: 4523

Representation ID: 2780

SUPPORT Felsham Parish Council (Mrs Paula Gladwell)

Summary:

support

More details about Rep ID: 2780

Representation ID: 1477

OBJECT Barton Willmore Planning P'ship (Mr. Paul Foster)

Summary:

The Mid Suffolk market town/rural area creates an imbalance, with significant levels of development in core villages and hinterlands. This is moving populations to more unsustainable locations, given these settlements are further down the settlement hierarchy. There should be a greater focus upon directing development in the Ipswich Fringe Area, considered top of the settlement hierarchy, and then development levels should proportionately filter down the hierarchy. The policy does not differentiate between Ipswich Fringe and Urban Areas in terms of provision, which suggests the hierarchy is unnecessary.

More details about Rep ID: 1477

Representation ID: 940

SUPPORT Mr Roy Barker

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 940

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

Powered by OpusConsult