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) - Glemsford

Representation ID: 11476

OBJECT Mrs Olive Smith

Summary:

The infrastructure and services such as school and doctors in Glemsford is already overstretched. access is restricted to a number of minor roads and the village is already littered with cars parked along it's one main road. Access to these proposed sites would be almost impossible without dramatic improvement in the infrastructure. Several new houses have been built in Glemsford over the last few years and I do not believe the village is able to take any of the proposed developments.

More details about Rep ID: 11476

Representation ID: 11421

OBJECT Mr Kevin Smith

Summary:

Over the last 25 years all the factories in Glemsford have been demolished and replaced with houses. There have been no corresponding improvement in infrastructure. This has resulted in the one main road through the village being littered with cars creating many dangerous blind spots.
Glemsford is only entered by minor roads which would not be able to take additional traffic and make access through the village almost impossible.

More details about Rep ID: 11421

Representation ID: 11238

OBJECT Anne Hately

Summary:

To build so many more houses in a village that has poor infrastructure, roads that cannot sustain the amount of traffic, a huge problem with parking which is potentially dangerous, no facilities and no employment seems to be very short sited.

The current sewage system will not be able to withstand any more pressure. The local school is full to capacity and the doctors surgery also struggles.

Surely farmland should remain farmland, especially when everybody is constantly talking about our carbon footprint, we should be growing crops etc for our own consumption and importing as little as possible.

More details about Rep ID: 11238

Representation ID: 11093

OBJECT Alan & Angela Poulton

Summary:

Since moving to Glemsford, we have learnt that there are three major new housing sites proposed for this small friendly village.
It is ridiculous that Glemsford, comprising of, only one doctors surgery, one oversubscribed school, restricted roads, with no rail links or major duel carriageway for fifteen miles, could in theory have its population more than double.
There is always an Anglian Water workforce working somewhere in the village. Three more large housing estates will only impact more on the problem.
I hope there will be serious though given to this as it can ruin people's lives.

More details about Rep ID: 11093

Representation ID: 11050

OBJECT Maureen Dobson

Summary:

Development of 3 sites within village detrimental to those living in village.
Present infrastructure is stretched and will soon be at breaking point.
Ludicrous that infrastructure to be put in place post-development.
Only one road goes through village, it is narrow and large parts of it are like a country lane with no pavements or room for installation of pavements.
Further development will make driving through trickier due to increase of cars.

More details about Rep ID: 11050

Representation ID: 10800

OBJECT Susan Smith

Summary:

If all three identified sites were developed that would mean 800-1000 new houses.
Glemsford does not have the infrastructure or facilities to support such a large increase in housing.

More details about Rep ID: 10800

Representation ID: 10563

OBJECT Mr Ian Bareham

Summary:

Glemsford is a large village, almost a town in fact, but hasn't got the facilities/infrastructure to support the population now.

More houses will mean more cars, and with the narrow roads through the village, the problem with clogging of parked cars will only get exponentially worse.

The two main road junctions in and out of the village are busy and quite dangerous. More traffic using the narrow Hobbs Lane will only make the situation more dangerous for everyone.

Glemsford has larger population than Clare but has 50% fewer amenities.

Proposed new developments around Glemsford are inconsiderate, inappropriate and unsustainable.

More details about Rep ID: 10563

Representation ID: 10132

COMMENT Historic England (Katie Parsons)

Summary:

Three large allocations are being considered at Glemsford. The site allocations proposed could result in significant adverse impacts upon this historic village.

More details about Rep ID: 10132

Representation ID: 9007

COMMENT Mrs H North

Summary:

CIL payments per house built sound attractive but only if the villagers can have more of a say as to how it is spent.

More details about Rep ID: 9007

Representation ID: 8882

OBJECT Mrs Sophie Firman

Summary:

Planning Ref :SS0286 SS0226 SS0257 SS0757

Summary:

Roads in Glemsford are narrow and are in a poor state, extra traffic would make this problem worse.

School will not be able to cope with a increase of children.

Sewage system is at breaking point.

The surgery is struggling. Getting a appointment is not easy and this would only get worse with more people.

Public transport is poor.

More details about Rep ID: 8882

Representation ID: 8515

OBJECT Mr Simon Ranson

Summary:

Developing Glemsford further would be detrimental.

With the scale of development over the past 4 years, we have already had our fair share. Yet again Glemsford has become a dumping ground for the area. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

If a site had to be chosen within Glemsford then the site south of Kings Road, west of Park Lane, Planning Ref SS0286, would be the lesser of four evils!

More details about Rep ID: 8515

Representation ID: 8499

OBJECT Toni Ranson

Summary:

Glemsford as a whole is a lovely village. Developing it further would be detrimental and make it more town like. With the scale of development over the past 4 years, we have already had our fair share. Glemsford has become a dumping ground for the area. It seems to be forgotten that people actually care for their village and the future of it. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! If a site had to be chosen within Glemsford then the site south of Kings Road, west of Park Lane, Planning Ref SS0286, would be the lesser of four evils!

More details about Rep ID: 8499

Representation ID: 8229

OBJECT mr Patrick Walsh

Summary:

Infrastructure of the village cannot support the proposed plans.

The school cannot accommodate the existing without many additional children moving into the village.

The Dr's surgery dos not have the capacity to accommodate more village residents.

The roads in an out of village cannot provide adequate access for hundreds of new residents causing dangerous driving conditions in and around the village.

More details about Rep ID: 8229

Representation ID: 8138

OBJECT Mr John Bangs

Summary:

Glemsford wants to remain a rural village, not a convenient place

for wizard planners to give yet more permission for more dormitary

houses to surround the village.

Glemsford has suffered a 9.4% housing increase inpast 4 years.

There has been a massive objection response to all the proposed

Glemsford SHELAA sites.

BaberghDC, ..... my cat says, build a new settlement somewhere, not easy though

More details about Rep ID: 8138

Representation ID: 8102

OBJECT Mrs Debbie Walsh

Summary:

There are already a lack of social facilities. My 3 children have to attend cavendish school as there was no space in glemsford this was also the case for my neighbour. We already have issues with the sewage and drainage systems without adding more onto the infrastructure.I also feel that the roads will not be able to with stand increased traffic generation safely or sucurely.

More details about Rep ID: 8102

Representation ID: 7404

OBJECT Mrs H North

Summary:

More and more responsibility is being asked of the general public to absorb the costs of public services and invest in community assets ( for example libraries, community buses, Neighbourhood Watch, community shops and pubs). The Neighbourhood Plan is yet another example; a weighty piece of legislation that we are being asked to get to grips with and absorb yet more responsibility of local and county councils in the hope that we will have more influence in planning decisions in our area. Please listen to the Glemsford voices and balance build with services, good roads and respect the countryside.

More details about Rep ID: 7404

Representation ID: 7242

COMMENT Andrew French

Summary:

As a large core village Glemsford has already been expanded too much as there is insufficient employment, infrastructure or retail opportunity, especially when compared to other core villages.
Some infill housing would be acceptable on SS0286, subject to road improvements but large/medium scale developments should be located in other areas of Babegh, close to good communications & facilities.
Glemsford should remain a rural village, not be swamped by large scale overbearing developments.

More details about Rep ID: 7242

Representation ID: 7067

OBJECT Mr Ernest Bellamy

Summary:

I do not believe the infrastructure or medical services will support this development.

More details about Rep ID: 7067

Representation ID: 6417

OBJECT Sue Jamil & Neil Sanson

Summary:

We don't have anything specific to add to Rob & Dennis comments their particular comments regarding conservation and geography, which speak on behalf of us.

This part of Glemsford is a conservation area and any development in the vicinity would need to be considered extremely carefully in light of retaining the natural landscape and historic features. We appreciate the need for housing but feel this must be balanced with regards to where it is situated - we are certain there are other sites in and around the village that may lend themselves to less impact on the natural environment and would hope that the necessary village amenities would be looked at in terms of coping with larger residential numbers.

More details about Rep ID: 6417

Representation ID: 6291

OBJECT Mrs Myra Lynes

Summary:

Glemsford is already collapsing with volume of traffic and new build housing being dotted around the village with poor planning consent. Egremont Street already has an horrendous volume of parked cars most on the pavement otherwise moving traffic wouldn't be able to pass. Access from George Lane onto Egremont Street is really dangerous, if the SS022 is considered then no access could be given onto or from that site from there.

Three sites will increase traffic onto roads that cannot be widened they are already dangerous for residents to access basic facilities in the village. If Glemsford is to have 900 houses with an average of 2 cars per household it isn,t rocket science to work out where we are heading.

More details about Rep ID: 6291

Representation ID: 6152

OBJECT MR Raymond DALE-SMITH

Summary:

We strongly object to the proposed application to build 175 + properties on the land to the right of the old Mill in Chequers lane.
GLEMSFORD does not have the infrastructure to provide medical services & schooling to even more residents unless it can be provided
roads are not suited to a vast increase in use.and in poor repair and need constant attention
There is already increased water and sewerage problem resulting from the building the new group of houses at the top of Brook Street..which will increase the kings rd area is better suited

More details about Rep ID: 6152

Representation ID: 5772

OBJECT Mrs Teresa Rush

Summary:

The large scale of the proposals is a cause for concern given Glemsford's roads are already very busy and, in some parts of the village, dangerous as a result.
Bumper-to-bumper parking is commonplace along many roads, often obscuring visibility at junctions and leading to access problems. One need only try and drive along Brook Street when the refuse carts are doing their rounds to witness the problems and the potential danger to road users and pedestrians.
What is more, all approaches to the village are narrow country lanes, already unsuitable for the volume of traffic they are required to carry.

More details about Rep ID: 5772

Representation ID: 3952

OBJECT Valda Marks

Summary:

We had received no notification of this.

In the past we have discovered that Babergh Planning Department do not visit the site of planning applications, and pass them without viewing the local impact. Is this the case here again?

Glemsford is full to bursting with vehicles. Too many planning applications have been passed with insufficient parking.
Water and drainage system will not stand more use.
Local school cannot accommodate the estimated new pupils. Doctors surgery is just about coping. This will be intolerable if more residents register.

There is no employment in the village.

More details about Rep ID: 3952

Representation ID: 3939

OBJECT Mrs Suzanne Sparke

Summary:

My main concern is traffic. All the roads leading into the village are narrow country roads. Parked cars are a danger. Next concern is infrastructure - the school cannot accommodate all the extra children. We don't have enough doctors now for the number of residents so how are they going to take on another 3,000 patients. Parking at the doctors is crazy now.
I feel it will no longer feel like a small village location but a small town not what we want since we have lived here very happy for 30 yrs. Village is already experiencing bad planning decisions.

More details about Rep ID: 3939

Representation ID: 3332

OBJECT Mrs Rhona Jones

Summary:

Infrastructure, interesting word and not one I would associate with Glemsford. I have lived here all my life and have never seen the infrastructure so low! School full, Can only get a doctors appointment if you can predict your future illness and bus service so rare children point at them in astonishment!
Also to want to build on the field by the church and ruin a centuries old route into the village is shocking and goes against British heritage.
Do not build or more house or this village crumble! FACT.

More details about Rep ID: 3332

Representation ID: 3282

OBJECT Miss D Willett

Summary:

Glemsfords physical infrastructure is Victorian and cannot cope with large scale development, Foundry close top of Brook street just 29 homes is proof, ongoing drainage problems, a pump going for a year, nasty smells, sewage overflow into nearby field and homes. Proposed site east of Brook street would compound this problem. School full, doctors down to two with more patients, few jobs within 10 miles radius, bus service just cut, no passes before 11am. Village full of cars parked on pavements. Site ref ss0257 entrance suicidal, nasty bend, no pavements, rural road unfit for large scale traffic.

More details about Rep ID: 3282

Representation ID: 2760

OBJECT Mrs Maureen Burrows

Summary:

I disagree with the building proposals for Glemsford, already the roads are difficult to negotiate with the volume of cars parked in the streets. Two especially dangerous junctions, one near the church and also Frog Street a place often flooded due to the drainage being unable to cope. Already the hard working Doctors are over subscribed with waiting times for appointments getting longer and longer. The School is again at full capacity with already so many houses built and young parents moving in.

More details about Rep ID: 2760

Representation ID: 2510

OBJECT Mrs Pat Graves

Summary:

Planning Ref: SS0286, SS0257 & SS0226
My objection is to the number of houses planned for development in Glemsford.
Lack of suitable roads in and out of Glemsford village.
Parking is restricted in the village due to the roads.
The sewerage system is not adequate to accept any more pressure on it.
The doctors surgery is not large enough to accommodate the houses being anticipated being built.
The school is full already and who would want there five your old to travel by bus to other schools in the area.

More details about Rep ID: 2510

Representation ID: 2332

OBJECT Mr Ian Sanders

Summary:

An additional 800 to 1000 houses in the village would have a hugely negative impact on healthcare provision, school spaces, refuse collection, employment and other facilities which are currently stretched.

Proposed sites will create additional traffic on surrounding roads already struggling, causing danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Additional noise and fumes will impact on residents. Parking in the village will become more of a challenge.

Glemsford will feel less like a rural village and more like a small 'new town'.

I urge the planning community involved in this 'local plan' initiative to stop their considerations of developing these proposed sites and reject any further applications on the grounds that the village of Glemsford will suffer in the many ways I have described.

More details about Rep ID: 2332

Representation ID: 2214

OBJECT Mrs Ann Boon

Summary:

No objections to few houses but village cannot cope with what is proposed. The surgery is already struggling , The school cannot cope with more intake, roads in out of the village are already appalling and crumbling, Skates Hill is so narrow that it is difficult for traffic coming in and out of village. Theres scarce bus service and not everyone has transport to get to town and back in decent time having to wait 2 hours or more. Houses built have not been affordable to buy contrary to what is promised.

More details about Rep ID: 2214

Representation ID: 2134

OBJECT Sally Cain

Summary:

The school is full.
There have already been new buildings e.g. Brook Street, Shepherd Lane and Fairgreen in addition to other houses built as "fill ins" e.g. Broadway
Land is arable. Surely the UK needs all the available arable land to grow much needed crops in the future. With Brexit looming who knows how that will affect our economy and imports of food?
The surgery has to cope with more patients and fewer Doctors.
Bus service has reduced and fares have increased leaving many people feeling isolated and lonely
Family centre has closed
Main roads through the village are already more difficult to negotiate with more traffic, lack of proper parking and lack of speed restrictions. Walking along pavement is dangerous.

More details about Rep ID: 2134

Representation ID: 1877

OBJECT Mr Sean Graves

Summary:

Planning Ref: SS0286, SS0257 & SS0226
My objection is to the sheer number of houses planned for development in Glemsford.
Getting a doctors appointment is difficult now let alone with the extra homes.
The local sewage works are already at breaking point.
The roads into and in the village are crumbling now.
Park lane and Hobbs lane are continually being patched due to the heavy vehicles that are using this lane.
Our local school is running at 100% capacity.
I'm not against development but just the sheer numbers being suggested.

More details about Rep ID: 1877

Representation ID: 1514

OBJECT John & Margret King

Summary:

Impact of the size and mix of population. There is no extra employment in the village, so newcomers would, presumably, have to commute adding still further to traffic congestion. At present public transport is not very good for either locations or time.
Needs a mix of homes to give the possibility of a balanced society i.e. NOT all cheap homes but a mix of starter homes and bigger properties.
Roads are almost at breaking point with traffic congestion.
Doctor's Surgery are having trouble recruiting sufficient number of doctors. The schools, currently full to capacity would be similarly affected.

More details about Rep ID: 1514

Representation ID: 1419

OBJECT Donald Tyler & Jeanne Burgin

Summary:

Wish to express our great concern over many of your proposed plans for building near homes in the local area.
The capacity of drainage + water systems are in no way adequate. There has been a need to call in Anglia Water to clear blockages.
Lack of social facilities is of great concern. The availability of adequate health care, employment, community facility and school space is very much in question. The doctor's surgery is very busy, school places are very limited. The traffic generation will be enormous, our roads are not good. Access via minor roads. Is every new home going to have facilities to park two cars?

More details about Rep ID: 1419

Representation ID: 1310

OBJECT Mr D Sillitoe

Summary:

Having been made recently aware of the proposed developments for Glemsford. I must strongly object to the enormous size of such plans. I could state many reasons for my objections but realistically it comes down to the fact that Glemsford will not be able to cope with the a massive increase in traffic and the capacity of the physical infrastructure will not cope.

More details about Rep ID: 1310

Representation ID: 980

OBJECT D G Cadey

Summary:

Impact on Local Road an Services

More details about Rep ID: 980

Representation ID: 892

OBJECT A F Strickland

Summary:

I am against building on valuable farmland.
The roadways of our village are not built to cope with the increased vehicles
The drainage is not brilliant at the moment, with nasty smells coming from the Anglia Water treatment plan a few yards from my house.
Doctors Surgery is creaking at the moment let alone coping with the increase that all of those extra dwellings would bring.
I understand the school will not be able to cope with several hundred extra pupils.

More details about Rep ID: 892

Representation ID: 888

OBJECT Alan Rollinson

Summary:

I understand that Glemsford is already the largest village in Suffolk, and have to question why anybody would need to make it larger.



Your proposal across all three sites would seem to add an additional 1000 dwellings to the village. That would go a very long way to doubling the population.

This will overwhelm the local infrastructure, which cannot support development of this size. The school and local surgery will be effected greatly.

Local roads would be congested, especially at peak times.

I would urge you to reconsider.

More details about Rep ID: 888

Representation ID: 765

OBJECT Ms G Berry

Summary:

Although l appreciate that there is a need for more housing the scale of these proposed developements is too large for our small village there is no infrastructure or capcity for such a plan roads will become to congested. More housing will cause more noise and vehicle pollution there will be drainage and sewage issues lack of school places

More details about Rep ID: 765

Representation ID: 756

OBJECT Ron & Margaret Speakman

Summary:

The current road network cannot cope with the existing vehicular movements, both directly through and round the village. The main road through the village is virtually single lane due to parked cars,which must lead to problems with access for emergency services.
An increase in population will have a dramatic and serious effect on the availability of the surgery and medical staff to be able to cope.
Glemsford Academy is full with a waiting list, Hartest school has room for only 40 more children.
Drainage and water capacity issues.
Lack of social facilities and retail.

More details about Rep ID: 756

Representation ID: 619

OBJECT Paul Newbold

Summary:

The proposed developments in Glemsford are both ill thought out and poorly communicated to those of us who live and support this village.

As many, many people will say the school, the doctors surgery and the sewage are all at full operating capacity already, as problems with a recent 20+ house development will testify.

Due to the age and layout of the village traffic and parking are major problems and cannot cope with a possible increase of up to 2000 new residents with 2000 cars passing through and trying to park at the doctors, post office, take-a- ways and shops.

More details about Rep ID: 619

Representation ID: 605

OBJECT Louise Ward

Summary:

The village of Glemsford has already been over developed beyond it's capacity to cope with more housing and traffic.
800 new houses will result in around 2000 extra vehicles all trying to find some where to park and add to the existing parking and traffic problems.
Glemsford is situated within the Stour Valley, and is served by well use footpaths for residents to enjoy the Valley and it's beauty. It would be an act of gross devastation to blight this area with massive house building. GLEMSFORD SHOULD REMAIN AS A VILLAGE AND NOT BE TURNED INTO A NEW TOWN!!

More details about Rep ID: 605

Representation ID: 586

OBJECT Joyce Jenkins

Summary:

I have already seen the village grow tremendously even though the school and Doctor's Surgery haven't increased. The bus service has been reduced to one every 2 hours and refuse collections are fortnightly. The roads have deteriorated due to the extra traffic of residents. In Kings Road we have had Anglian Water digging the pavements and road for the past 3 months trying to repair the services for residents as it stands without adding more.

We do not have the facilities i.e. Doctors, school etc to cope with an increased population.

More details about Rep ID: 586

Representation ID: 579

OBJECT Olle Webb

Summary:

Why do you want to bring more families and people with kids to Glemsford when there is nothing for them to do. In glemsford there is 3 parks for younger kids but what is there to do for teenagers. You might say the teenagers get in a lot of trouble in the village but how can't you see it's because we have nothing? Instead of making the village bigger you should think of making it better. I raised £300 towards a new skatepark but has it been used, NO! I would happily put that towards a new shelter or something to occupy us with.

More details about Rep ID: 579

Representation ID: 499

OBJECT Mr Paul Grant

Summary:

The local infrastructure cannot support the amount of dwellings, population of the village now. As there are not enough school places or doctors appointment. Ect

More details about Rep ID: 499

Representation ID: 492

OBJECT Mr Anthony Hughes

Summary:

The village already has numerous issues with flooding and sewage leaks, danger to health.
School is full and doctors surgery struggling to cope at present, takes a week to 10 days for apptments to see doctor and nurse.
Major impact on ecology and wildlife deer, fox, hedgehogs, grass snakes, newts seen in fields as well as affecting nesting and roosting birds.

More details about Rep ID: 492

Representation ID: 485

OBJECT Ms Polly Rodger Brown

Summary:

Glemsford is already undergoing development. Every spare pocket of the village is being filled with new houses. Its infrastructure cannot support more people and especially more cars. The streets are currently hard to park and drive in.

More details about Rep ID: 485

Representation ID: 458

OBJECT Mr Graham King

Summary:

Glemsford is a small village without the infrastructure to support it
* Lack of doctors facilities in the area
* Is there any room for children in the schools
* Poor road infrastructure with narrow lanes in/out of the village and no footpaths
* local transport is poor and looks likely to get worse
There are many local people who used to walk park lane and hobbs lane who no longer do so because there frightened with the traffic through the village, before you build more the roads and pedestrian access must be addressed. I would also like to add what is to become of our wildlife or going by your local plan there will be distinct lack of it due to your building ideas.

More details about Rep ID: 458

Representation ID: 457

OBJECT Miss Emma Smith

Summary:

I am emailing you to make you aware of my objections to between 800 and 1000 new houses in Glemsford.

This is a ridiculous amount that the village cannot cope with currently.

The roads are busy enough as it is, it is nearly impossible to get a doctors appointment and the rubbish collection is more often than not recently having to go over two days. These are just a few issues. I'm sure the School will have problems coping too.

That many new houses is a joke, for Glemsford. I know people need houses but not this many please.

More details about Rep ID: 457

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

Powered by OpusConsult