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 CF2

Representation ID: 12771

SUPPORT Mr Gary Clark

Summary:

In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 12771

Representation ID: 12691

COMMENT Mr Bryan Fawcett

Summary:

In the case of Policy CF2 whilst supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 12691

Representation ID: 11983

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

Summary:

Pigeon would support the Councils approach to community facilities as set out in Option CF2.

More details about Rep ID: 11983

Representation ID: 11885

SUPPORT Mrs Julie Clark

Summary:

* -In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 11885

Representation ID: 11844

COMMENT Mr & Mrs Heather & Michael Earey

Summary:

In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 11844

Representation ID: 11733

SUPPORT Lady Valerie Hart

Summary:

I also support option CF2.

More details about Rep ID: 11733

Representation ID: 10960

SUPPORT Mrs Carol Marshall

Summary:

In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 10960

Representation ID: 9671

COMMENT Mr Chris Marshall

Summary:

* -In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 9671

Representation ID: 9359

SUPPORT Nayland with Wissington Parish Council (Mrs D Hattrell)

Summary:

Nayland with Wissington Parish Council supports the adoption of Consultation Policy CF2. Through CF2, your preferred policy, the provision of new community facilities would be supported and existing facilities would be protected against loss unless it can be demonstrated that they are surplus to requirements or that development outweighs the loss of the facilities and alternative provision can be made elsewhere.

More details about Rep ID: 9359

Representation ID: 9221

COMMENT Mr Ken Seager

Summary:

In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 9221

Representation ID: 8901

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

This appears to be too wooly and unnecessary. It doesn't really offer any more than CF1 but offers options out.

More details about Rep ID: 8901

Representation ID: 8688

SUPPORT Redlingfield parish meeting (Ms Janet Norman-Philips)

Summary:

agreed

More details about Rep ID: 8688

Representation ID: 8687

SUPPORT Redlingfield parish meeting (Ms Janet Norman-Philips)

Summary:

agreed

More details about Rep ID: 8687

Representation ID: 7808

OBJECT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

Once established there are all sorts of transport and time issues which means there would be few cases where things could be moved elsewhere as an improvement. Also would need to not increase need to drive.

More details about Rep ID: 7808

Representation ID: 6623

SUPPORT MSDC Green Group (Cllr John Matthissen)

Summary:

support

More details about Rep ID: 6623

Representation ID: 6457

SUPPORT Mrs Rhona Jermyn

Summary:

Poor policy, the facility exists because there is a clear need for it, it should not be moved to make way for other uses. An example of this - allotments in Sproughton - fully used by the community, should not be used for housing.
In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 6457

Representation ID: 6201

SUPPORT Neil Fuller

Summary:

In the case of Policy CF2 whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 6201

Representation ID: 5702

SUPPORT The Theatres Trust (Mrs. Ross Anthony)

Summary:

The Trust agrees with this option and the inclusion of a policy to protect and promote community and cultural facilities.

Paragraph 70 of the NPPF states that in 'promoting healthy communities', planning decisions should 'plan positively for cultural buildings' and 'guard against the loss of cultural facilities and services.'

More details about Rep ID: 5702

Representation ID: 5661

COMMENT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

Yes

More details about Rep ID: 5661

Representation ID: 5493

COMMENT Mrs Louise Baldry

Summary:

Poor policy, the facility exists because there is a clear need for it, it should not be moved to make way for other uses. An example of this - allotments in Sproughton - fully used by the community, should not be used for housing.

More details about Rep ID: 5493

Representation ID: 4933

COMMENT Mr Jeff Cribb

Summary:

It would be good to feel that community facilities were protected. However, with development sites identified which include our cherished local allotments I wonder what real consideration is given to such issues?

More details about Rep ID: 4933

Representation ID: 4673

SUPPORT Barking Parish Council (Mrs Rosemary Cochrane)

Summary:

Please refer to Barking Parish Plan 2011 which identifies the new services needed and existing ones to be preserved.

Barking Parish Plan to be adopted into the new Local Plan as it is in the existing Plan.

More details about Rep ID: 4673

Representation ID: 4142

OBJECT Mr John Bellwood

Summary:

Poor policy, the facility exists because there is a clear need for it, it should not be moved to make way for other uses. An example of this - allotments in Sproughton - fully used by the community, should not be used for housing.

More details about Rep ID: 4142

Representation ID: 4078

COMMENT Mr Vic Durrant

Summary:

whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 4078

Representation ID: 4055

SUPPORT Sudbury Town Council (Mrs Jacqueline Howells)

Summary:

Sudbury Town Council supports policy CF2

More details about Rep ID: 4055

Representation ID: 3862

COMMENT Mrs June Durrant

Summary:

whilst fully supporting this, it is considered essential that any proposals to remove existing community facilities is supported by an appropriate formal assessment carried out in conjunction with the local community.

More details about Rep ID: 3862

Representation ID: 2798

SUPPORT Felsham Parish Council (Mrs Paula Gladwell)

Summary:

Support

More details about Rep ID: 2798

Representation ID: 2267

SUPPORT Battisford Parish Council (Mr Chris Knock)

Summary:

More details about Rep ID: 2267

Representation ID: 1686

SUPPORT Hoxne Parish Council (Mrs Sara Foote)

Summary:

Hoxne Parish Council supports Option CF2

More details about Rep ID: 1686

Representation ID: 1178

COMMENT Great Ashfield PC (arthur peake)

Summary:

provides protection so preferred

More details about Rep ID: 1178

Representation ID: 1072

COMMENT Mr Roy Barker

Summary:

prefer CF2

More details about Rep ID: 1072

Representation ID: 690

SUPPORT Redgrave Parish Council (Mr John Giddings)

Summary:

RPC considers this should provide adequate protection for existing facilities.

More details about Rep ID: 690

Representation ID: 330

COMMENT Mr Simon Barrett

Summary:

Village pubs? If two let one go to ensure one is viable

More details about Rep ID: 330

Representation ID: 243

SUPPORT Mr D C Warren

Summary:

Any new development should have an obligation to support and enhance the local community

More details about Rep ID: 243

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

Powered by OpusConsult