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 HM1

Representation ID: 13162

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

Summary:

Support this option. We also support the Councils' recognition that the precise nature of this mix should be determined by the market.

More details about Rep ID: 13162

Representation ID: 12474

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Ms Libby Hindle)

Summary:

We support Option HM1 and the recognition that the Districts' housing mix should accord broadly with the SHMA. We also support the Councils' recognition that the precise nature of this mix should be determined by the market.

More details about Rep ID: 12474

Representation ID: 12319

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

Summary:

We support Option HM1 and the recognition that the Districts' housing mix should accord broadly with the SHMA. We also support the Councils' recognition that the precise nature of this mix should be determined by the market.

More details about Rep ID: 12319

Representation ID: 11925

SUPPORT Pigeon Investmenrt Management (Mr. Andrew Fillmore) represented by Beacon Planning Ltd (Ms Sophie Pain)

Summary:

Pigeon support the approach to housing mix set out under Option HM1, which sets out a broad requirement for the mix of housing in line with the SHMA with more precise details to be determined by the market. We consider this to be a more flexible and appropriate response in comparison to the more prescriptive and inflexible options set out within Options HM2 and HM3.

More details about Rep ID: 11925

Representation ID: 11861

SUPPORT Dedham Vale Society (Mr. David Eking)

Summary:

We support Options HM1, AH1 and RE1.

More details about Rep ID: 11861

Representation ID: 10915

SUPPORT Lady Anne Windsor Charity (Deborah Langstaff)

Summary:

Option HM1 which broadly follows the mix identified in the SHMA is preferred.

More details about Rep ID: 10915

Representation ID: 10535

COMMENT Rentplus represented by Tetlow King Planning (Meghan Rossiter)

Summary:

Option HM1 is considered appropriate and is supported; working in partnership with locally active Registered Providers of affordable housing, Rentplus ensures that the most appropriate mix of affordable housing is brought forward on individual schemes.

More details about Rep ID: 10535

Representation ID: 10263

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Kate Kerrigan)

Summary:

We support Option HM1 and the recognition that the Districts' housing mix should accord broadly with the SHMA. We also support the Councils' recognition that the precise nature of this mix should be determined by the market.

More details about Rep ID: 10263

Representation ID: 9505

OBJECT Cllr John Hinton

Summary:

The SHMA would seek to tip the housing balances into social housing rather than market housing - targets of +25% because of house prices - so should be set aside (HM1).

More details about Rep ID: 9505

Representation ID: 8546

OBJECT Redlingfield parish meeting (Ms Janet Norman-Philips)

Summary:

prefer option HM2

More details about Rep ID: 8546

Representation ID: 8509

SUPPORT SHOTLEY PARISH COUNCIL (Mrs Dina Bedwell)

Summary:

We feel that the results of an up to date Strategic Housing Market Assessment would best reflect the needs of the market at any given time and would therefore facilitate the delivery of appropriate housing, in the correct location and at the right time, of the best type.

More details about Rep ID: 8509

Representation ID: 8091

SUPPORT Mr Watling Michael

Summary:

Developments should be in line with the local identified requirements

More details about Rep ID: 8091

Representation ID: 7795

OBJECT Mr John Foster

Summary:

Housing mix should be in response to individual community requirements.

More details about Rep ID: 7795

Representation ID: 7768

SUPPORT Mr John Ambrose

Summary:

It was agreed that more affordable housing, whether this is lower cost smaller houses for purchase or social housing for rental is required. Also, there is a need for bungalows or other accessible smaller housing that older people can move into and free up family homes. More large houses are not required. There is a general feeling that the village needs to accommodate young people starting out and the elderly.

More details about Rep ID: 7768

Representation ID: 7725

OBJECT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

There will be issues due to market failure.

More details about Rep ID: 7725

Representation ID: 7566

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

This criteria as above appears to have suddenly halfed from the affordable element previously identified as needed even though it identifies significant increases in a demand for rented accommodation, single parent accommodation and retirement provision. It doesn't add up.

More details about Rep ID: 7566

Representation ID: 7289

COMMENT Ms Sharon Maxwell

Summary:

Housing mix should consider need not greatest developer profits.

More details about Rep ID: 7289

Representation ID: 6378

OBJECT MSDC Green Group (Cllr John Matthissen)

Summary:

There is a need for control over the proportions of different sized market homes for example requiring some 2-bed homes in every development of 10+.
See full submission on Housing Types etc

More details about Rep ID: 6378

Representation ID: 6307

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

no comment

More details about Rep ID: 6307

Representation ID: 5625

SUPPORT Mr Graham Moxon

Summary:

Let the market decide what it wants.

More details about Rep ID: 5625

Representation ID: 4328

COMMENT Mrs Louise Baldry

Summary:

National space standards should apply with provision for storage. Housing mix should consider need not greatest developers profits but real needs, ageing population, disabilities, affordable housing

More details about Rep ID: 4328

Representation ID: 4080

SUPPORT Mr Graham Jones

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 4080

Representation ID: 3930

OBJECT Mr John Bellwood

Summary:

Do not let the market determine the mix, this should be done by BDC to meet the needs of residents. Letting the market decide will see houses built for profit not for need.

Given the unaffordability of housing, as identified in the plan, and the growth of private renting (due to unaffordability) the housing mix must meet the needs of the population - affordable, social, an ageing population and a continuing decline in the persons per household.

Given all these factors Babergh does not need more 4/5 bedroom houses.

More details about Rep ID: 3930

Representation ID: 3822

SUPPORT Mr Richard Howard

Summary:

If any houses are required after BREXIT agree with housing mix and nursing homes,

More details about Rep ID: 3822

Representation ID: 3607

OBJECT Mr Simon Oldfield

Summary:

This would give developers virtual carte blanche to build only the most lucrative homes. It's always all about money. The provision of particular housing types such as bungalows and disabled-friendly dwellings must be specified to cater for our progressively ageing population

More details about Rep ID: 3607

Representation ID: 3561

COMMENT Mr Richard Howard

Summary:

National space standards should apply with provision for storage.
Housing mix should consider need not greatest developers profits.

More details about Rep ID: 3561

Representation ID: 2876

SUPPORT Mr Andrew Coxhead

Summary:

Support

More details about Rep ID: 2876

Representation ID: 2781

SUPPORT Felsham Parish Council (Mrs Paula Gladwell)

Summary:

Support

More details about Rep ID: 2781

Representation ID: 2487

SUPPORT Mr Brian HUNT

Summary:

Range of affordable homes to meet all family needs not just for builders profits.

More details about Rep ID: 2487

Representation ID: 2088

SUPPORT Great Finborough Parish Council (Mrs Paula Gladwell)

Summary:

text

More details about Rep ID: 2088

Representation ID: 2048

SUPPORT Mrs Kathie Guthrie

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 2048

Representation ID: 1721

COMMENT Mr. A. Breen

Summary:

Build some houses with sufficient space for owners to add an extension, if required.

Build houses in more remote locations as small estates with a high number of affordable homes. As these might be less attractive to buyers from outside.

More details about Rep ID: 1721

Representation ID: 1651

SUPPORT Winston Parish Council (Mrs Lizzie Taurozevicius)

Summary:

We agree and think there should be affordable houses for young and old.

More details about Rep ID: 1651

Representation ID: 1167

COMMENT Simon Bell

Summary:

The proposal does not adequately reflect the SHMA by following market demand. It should be recognised that those aged under 35 have a particular and acute housing need. Based on MHDC residual housing need of 5,820 units, 20% is required (1,474 units) as private rented for the under 35 age group. Policy should be directed at providing these units in an urban setting as the majority of under 35s are classified as "urbanites".

Similarly, policy around starter homes should be targeted close to key employment sites to encourage job creation and economic development.

More details about Rep ID: 1167

Representation ID: 1139

SUPPORT Mr Graham Shorrock

Summary:

Allowing the market to determine the housing mix is the preferred approach. Prescriptive defining of housing mix should not be necessary and can be detrimental. For example if there is a high percentage of housing that is sold at less than market value this will just increase the cost of all other housing in the development.

More details about Rep ID: 1139

Representation ID: 1125

COMMENT Great Ashfield PC (arthur peake)

Summary:

On the understanding that the housing mix continues to meet the need for affordable and starter homes.

More details about Rep ID: 1125

Representation ID: 942

SUPPORT Mr Roy Barker

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 942

Representation ID: 620

OBJECT Redgrave Parish Council (Mr John Giddings)

Summary:

RPC considers that the mix should vary to reflect the neighbourhood facilities available

More details about Rep ID: 620

Representation ID: 180

OBJECT Mr D C Warren

Summary:

Proportion of housing mix should be biased in favour of affordable housing and council houses.

More details about Rep ID: 180

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

Powered by OpusConsult