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) - Babergh & Mid Suffolk Profile & Context

Representation ID: 13133

SUPPORT Mr & Mrs Barker Mrs Aitken represented by Savills (Mr William Lusty)


We support the Council for seeking to plan for an appropriate timescale, making allowance for Examination, in accordance with the requirements set out in paragraph 157 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

More details about Rep ID: 13133

Representation ID: 12798

COMMENT East Bergholt Parish Council (Susan Clements)


Tourism and interesting places to visit
Strong local communities
Diverse and small industrial base
Rural district with couple of market town centres
What questions should we ask for the vision to be consulted on, e.g.???
Farming income % of S Suffolk

Brexit causes fall in London house prices so less demand for commuting houses
Infrastructure poor- inadequate (and to support growth ) both road and rail
What Brownfield / grade 4 land available to prevent loss of good farming land?

Neighbours in Manningtree & Colchester not recognised, nor London weighting impact on our residential development.

Geographically a long way from big industrial areas - what knock on effect of Felixstowe that will reduce this business?

More details about Rep ID: 12798

Representation ID: 12557

COMMENT Fressingfield Housing Working Group (Mr Paul Woodward)


Local Housing Needs Survey should be undertaken by MSDC in every parish, to capture local intelligence - this would inform planning ahead of Neighbourhood Development Plans

More details about Rep ID: 12557

Representation ID: 11746

OBJECT Councillor Frank Lawrenson


The information contained misses some key points:
* Levels of unemployment are very low
* No reference is made to The Suffolk Growth Strategy
* The need for employment section should be strengthened to reflect the differing requirements in different areas (this has been achieved in the Suffolk Growth Strategy).
More information on this can also be found in the Growth Consultancy report commissioned by Babergh/Mid Suffolk in 2014. There is a strong emphasis on micro-business. These represent 90% of all businesses in Suffolk. This emphasises the need for further improvement in areas like Broadband.

More details about Rep ID: 11746

Representation ID: 10229

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Kate Kerrigan)


We agree with the Council's Key Social Issues, particularly, their recognition of the Districts' growing population.

More details about Rep ID: 10229

Representation ID: 9491

OBJECT Cllr John Hinton


Suffolk Strategic Planning an Infrastructure Framework is not yet updated so should we not wait and see how this influences location of employment and housing growth? Also should it not include reference to and consideration of the Highways England Route Based Strategies as they influence commuting and economic movement in our trunk road system?

More details about Rep ID: 9491

Representation ID: 9490

OBJECT Cllr John Hinton


As the ONS (Page 9 of the document does not include the latest ONS figures), has identified Suffolk and particularly Babergh and Ipswich as areas with very low population growth:- where does the OAN obtain its growth figures from as they are some 300% bigger than the more recent and Nationally recognised ONS figures?

More details about Rep ID: 9490

Representation ID: 7845

COMMENT Essex County Council (Matthew Jericho)


ECC thanks Babergh and Mid Suffolk DCs (BMS) for consulting ECC on their Joint Local Plan. Key issues for ECC are to inform and shape future spatial development strategies and policies delivered by adjoining LPAs to Essex, which could:
a. influence/affect provision of services/infrastructure for which ECC responsible;
b. identify impacts/opportunities for economic growth/development throughout Essex;
c. use best endeavours to assist cross-boundary matters under DtC, including engagement/co-operation with other organisations for relevant issues.
ECC will contribute cooperatively to this consultation and will continue to work with BMS through DtC, on the on-going preparation of the new Joint Local Plan.

More details about Rep ID: 7845

Representation ID: 7793

COMMENT Dr Ian Russell


Better road infrastructure in the Sudbury area will provide better access to Babergh from the west, support economic growth, and preserve environmental assets and landscape.

More details about Rep ID: 7793

Representation ID: 6595

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell


The JLP only talks about growth, I am struggling to find policies that actually promote growth, just a build it and they will come attitude. And do we need growth anyway? Surely Growth is only needed at the natural rate of community Growth and that appears to be grossly overstated due to out of date data.
In relation to the District Sproughton bears the brunt of traffic from East Babergh commuting to Ipswich but no real strategy exists to deal with any increase from growth.

More details about Rep ID: 6595

Representation ID: 5684

OBJECT Ms Helen Davies


Looking to work together to achieve economies of scale and increase effectivenenss is a reasonable objective. However the views of those living within each district should be taken into account. The referendum clearly stated that people did not want to merge - yet a merger seems to be happening ignoring the previous result without holding another referendum to establish if people now have a different view

More details about Rep ID: 5684

Representation ID: 3731

COMMENT Mr Jeremy Doncaster


Sproughton Village is a well-known short cut to avoid the A12/A14 Copdock intersection, any future development will need drastic improvements to the road infrastructure supporting the village and surrounding area to avoid total traffic congestion. This needs to be but in place first to support schools, medical centre and environmental friendly transport, including walkways and cycle paths. Planning needs to be encouraged to appeal in appearance and enhance the village character offering with open spaces also affordable housing to local residents.

More details about Rep ID: 3731

Representation ID: 3375

SUPPORT Mr Adrian James


A local plan is needed to restrict future development to places where it will not be detrimental to the existing population.

More details about Rep ID: 3375

Representation ID: 3101

COMMENT Iain Pocock


It should be noted that the current infrastructure links also present a constraint - in particular the A12/A!4 intersection is anticipated to reach capacity in the next few years and there are currently no plans of funding to address this. Planning therefore needs to consider how to achieve some dispersion if population to both enable access to urban areas, without unduly creating specific pressure points at key communication routs

More details about Rep ID: 3101

Representation ID: 2818

SUPPORT Mr Andrew Coxhead


A local plan is needed to shape future development

More details about Rep ID: 2818

Representation ID: 917

COMMENT Mr David Brown


I attended to consultation (if that is what it was) at the Blackbourne in Elmswell. With regard to the importance of the Local Plan, the material available to study and the display were wholly inadequate. There were also insufficient personnel from the District Councils. There should have been larger more detailed plans showing the likely extent of the development, not just the land that had been made available by landowners. These matters will have a significant effect on the lives of local people, and should be dealt with in a more competent, sympathetic and professional manner.

More details about Rep ID: 917

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

Powered by OpusConsult