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 GT1

Representation ID: 12946

SUPPORT Dr Jonathan Tuppen

Summary:

I support Options GT1 and TS1 but consider the latter sites might be multi purpose, providing some local community benefit when not in use. Could such sites be managed by local parishes and designated for showpeople's priority use but bookable so that parishes could use them to organise events when not required? Could negotiated stopping places also be designed for heavy goods vehicle stopover places when not in use by travellers?

More details about Rep ID: 12946

Representation ID: 11972

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

Summary:

Pigeon supports Option GT1 which includes allocating extensions to existing sites where this can be accommodated

More details about Rep ID: 11972

Representation ID: 11778

COMMENT Councillor Frank Lawrenson

Summary:

No need has been identified in Babergh. Therefore it seems premature to adopt policies in Babergh which allocate additional sites.

More details about Rep ID: 11778

Representation ID: 10302

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Kate Kerrigan)

Summary:

Our preference would be that the Council look to adopt only option GT1.

More details about Rep ID: 10302

Representation ID: 8640

SUPPORT Redlingfield parish meeting (Ms Janet Norman-Philips)

Summary:

With regard to Gypsies and Travellers both permanent and stopping sites should be provided.

More details about Rep ID: 8640

Representation ID: 7740

OBJECT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

Needs to include Babergh and reevaluate why there is supposedly no need in Babergh as there is a serious lack of provision all across Suffolk. The policy that actually provides what is needed in agreement without just redesignating private pitches as public through compulsory purchase is what is needed.

More details about Rep ID: 7740

Representation ID: 6500

SUPPORT MSDC Green Group (Cllr John Matthissen)

Summary:

See comments

More details about Rep ID: 6500

Representation ID: 6349

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

no comment

More details about Rep ID: 6349

Representation ID: 5567

COMMENT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

Agree.

More details about Rep ID: 5567

Representation ID: 5424

COMMENT Mr Andrew Coxhead

Summary:

I cannot understand why there is no need for sites in Babergh?

More details about Rep ID: 5424

Representation ID: 5321

OBJECT Mrs Louise Baldry

Summary:

The number of sites is, in my view, sufficient for the travelling community, and should not be increased. No permissions for any site to become a permanent settlement should be given in preference to permanent housing developments which address the local housing shortages. No site should be considered where this significantly increases the population of Hamlets and Hinterland Villages, if adjacent to or within the boundaries of a permanent settlement.

More details about Rep ID: 5321

Representation ID: 4689

SUPPORT Woolverstone Parish Council (Mr Simon Pearce)

Summary:

Support

More details about Rep ID: 4689

Representation ID: 4298

SUPPORT Mr Jeremy Doncaster

Summary:

Agree to make a provision as and when a there has been an identified requirement, there has not been a requirement in Babergh as a need has not been identified.

More details about Rep ID: 4298

Representation ID: 3931

SUPPORT Mr Derek Fisher

Summary:

Sites to be provided only where/when there is an identifiable need.

More details about Rep ID: 3931

Representation ID: 2991

SUPPORT Cllr Diana Kearsley

Summary:

We have made several abortive attempts to find dedicated sites for G & Ts and this needs to be addressed and suitable sites identified that will not create the known problems but enable this section of the community feel they have something special and are being considered fairly.

More details about Rep ID: 2991

Representation ID: 2544

SUPPORT Mr Terry Corner

Summary:

For genuine Romany travelers.

More details about Rep ID: 2544

Representation ID: 2300

OBJECT Mr Barry Dixon

Summary:

The number of sites is, in my view, sufficient for the travelling community, and should not be increased. No permissions for any site to become a permanent settlement should be given in preference to permanent housing developments which address the local housing shortages. No site should be considered where this significantly increases the population of Hamlets and Hinterland Villages, if adjacent to or within the boundaries of a permanent settlement.

More details about Rep ID: 2300

Representation ID: 1145

SUPPORT Great Ashfield PC (arthur peake)

Summary:

agreed

More details about Rep ID: 1145

Representation ID: 200

SUPPORT Mr D C Warren

Summary:

Better to allocate sites

More details about Rep ID: 200

Representation ID: 47

SUPPORT Mr &Mrs David and Susan Musselwhite

Summary:

This seems reasonable.

More details about Rep ID: 47

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

Powered by OpusConsult