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) - Shimpling

Representation ID: 10550

OBJECT Mrs Penelope Lawrence

Summary:

Gent's Lane is a lane not a road and not suitable for more traffic. The village does not have facilities - school, medical, bus etc.

More details about Rep ID: 10550

Representation ID: 10549

OBJECT Ms Penny Vinson

Summary:

I object to the proposed inclusion within the village outline of land immediately to east of Gents Lane inevitably leading to development, in turn leading to increased vehicle traffic on this narrow, attractive lane which is very popular with walkers.

More details about Rep ID: 10549

Representation ID: 9790

OBJECT Mr Colin Johnston

Summary:

3. In the village in which I live, Shimpling, I take issue with the desktop exercise which redrew the village boundary. This failed to recognise that the meadow (casually now included inside the BUAB) was the subject of some discussion last year when planning was allowed next to it. There is now a TPO on a splendid oak tree in this meadow which is a precious green asset. Would you now put the BUAB line back where it was please?

More details about Rep ID: 9790

Representation ID: 9300

OBJECT Shimpling Parish Council (Mrs Linda Goodban)

Summary:

The proposed addition to the planning envelope in Gents Lane is incorrect. According to representatives at the open event it was only intended to increase the envelope to include the approved development of 2dwellings currently being built.

More details about Rep ID: 9300

Representation ID: 8917

OBJECT Mrs Sue Salmon

Summary:

There have been a significant number of developments within this parish during the past few years. There are very limited or non existent facilities within the parish and further development would therefore be unsustainable.

More details about Rep ID: 8917

Representation ID: 8915

OBJECT mr nigel west

Summary:

I am disappointed by the lack of transparency here. I have just noticed that the BUAB has shifted and has incorporated a beautiful meadow with a splendid oak with a TPO. I can only think that this was done by someone with no knowledge of the meadow and what it means to the residents of this lane and to residents in general. I can only think that it has come on the back of a contentious planning application last year; when planning was granted it was not stated that the village boundary would be changed!

More details about Rep ID: 8915

Representation ID: 8779

OBJECT Shimpling Parish Council (Mrs Linda Goodban)

Summary:

* Designated land currently occupied by playground
* Inadequate village facilities
* Too much development already in the pipeline for the village through approved sites, and sites being considered now.
* Previous Local Plan concluded that land behind village sign was unsuitable
* Extension to boundary of Gents Lane is inaccurate and does not reflect the approved site.

More details about Rep ID: 8779

Representation ID: 8709

OBJECT Ms Pandora Butterfield

Summary:

I am very unhappy at the 'slight of hand' redrawing of the BUAB for Shimpling. It may be just a desktop exercise but it smacks of heavy handedness. This redrawing includes 2 fields, one of which was granted planning permission after a campaign which resulted in the proposal going to Planning Committee. The granting of this planning permission seems to have been the catalyst for the incorporation of the field to the east inside the 'new' boundary. I would like this changed back to the original position.

More details about Rep ID: 8709

Representation ID: 8663

OBJECT Mr Colin Johnston

Summary:

If Babergh really is embracing the idea of sustainable living as opposed to paying lip service to it, it would recognise that a major proposed development in a 'non-sustainable' presently 'hinterland' soon to be 'hamlets and countryside' settlement simply does not make sense. The village has also in the last month seen two multiple dwelling planning applications with another one imminent. Isn't it obvious that we need our planning authority to step in and help us stop this?

More details about Rep ID: 8663

Representation ID: 8639

OBJECT Mr Colin Johnston

Summary:

I have answered a number of the questions on the interactive consultation and I have submitted a separate 2 page letter on a) aspects of the draft plan b) the issues affecting the smallest category of settlement c) issues relating to Shimpling. I assume this will be published somewhere in this process. I object to the desktop exercise of 'boundary flexing' which has extended the village boundary to incorporate a meadow containing a recently designated TPO. The boundary should stay where it is as this meadow is a precious green asset with restricted access.

More details about Rep ID: 8639

Representation ID: 6797

OBJECT Mr Colin Johnston

Summary:

I live in Shimpling and object to the arbitrary redrawing of the village boundary. This redrawing is particularly significant as it follows on from a bitter dispute involving the approval of development outside the BUAB. As a result, you, the planning team, have seen fit to fulfil the prophesy made at the time, that planning approval for that development would lead to further pressure on the adjacent meadow. You have now redrawn the boundary to include this meadow and make it ripe for development.

More details about Rep ID: 6797

Representation ID: 4462

OBJECT Mr Gerry Shrimpton

Summary:

The proposed draft new settlement boundary is I am led to believe incorrect. It was intended to include just the 2 new dwellings currently being constructed on the eastern edge of the proposed area.
With the number of current planning applications(13) plus 18 included in the draft plan any additional land allocated would only put further strain on already inadequate facilities. I there fore respectfully suggest this proposed draft new settlement boundary be amended to remove this parcel of land

More details about Rep ID: 4462

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

Powered by OpusConsult