Home > Planning > Planning Policy

Niobe

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) - Woolpit

Representation ID: 13095

COMMENT Suffolk County Council (Mr. Robert Feakes)

Summary:

Growth around Woolpit, Thurston and Elmswell also requires a cumulative approach (re transport). As well as improvements to Junction 47, the county is aware of the need to address Elmswell's level crossing.

More details about Rep ID: 13095

Representation ID: 11291

OBJECT Suffolk Wildlife Trust (Mr James Meyer)

Summary:

Site SS0032 - this site borders Wortham Long Green CWS, further assessment is therefore required prior to any allocation to determine whether development of these sites is likely to result in any adverse impact on the CWS.

More details about Rep ID: 11291

Representation ID: 11290

OBJECT Suffolk Wildlife Trust (Mr James Meyer)

Summary:

Sites SS0070, SS0093, SS0326, SS0328, SS0458, SS0547, SS0566, SS0670, SS0673, SS0773, SS0783, SS0787 and SS0958 - these sites represent blocks of land which are likely to contain species and/or habitats of nature conservation interest. Further assessment is therefore required to determine whether development in this location is likely to result in any adverse ecological impacts.

More details about Rep ID: 11290

Representation ID: 11081

COMMENT R A Edmondson

Summary:

I am appalled at your future plans. Number of planned houses is out of proportion. There is no justification that we should be told to take more than are fair share of what the Govt. dictates. By increasing the load now it will mean that in 15-20? years to come that the village will be expected to have a still higher proportion. Why have you penalized our village, like Thurston and Elmswell. Little/no allowance has been made about infrastructure. Build the infrastructure first including the A14. For each person who dies before due to accidents or stress will I hope sue the Councillors for conspiring to destroy village life.

More details about Rep ID: 11081

Representation ID: 10354

COMMENT Historic England (Katie Parsons)

Summary:

A large number of sites are being considered for allocation around Woolpit which will
result in the substantial expansion of the existing settlement. Woolpit has a number
of highly significant designated heritage assets including the Grade I listed Church of
St Mary and Lady's Well scheduled monument, the historic core of the town also
benefits from conservation area designation. The presence of
these heritage assets and their settings should therefore be considered carefully as
part of the site allocation process.

More details about Rep ID: 10354

Representation ID: 9911

OBJECT Professor Robert Turner & Mrs J.M. Turner

Summary:

The fragile nature of many of the buildings in the conservation area was not adequately taken into account. The heavier the traffic the greater the risk of their limited foundations being destroyed. The hub of the village is within a conservation area which is truly such and will be destroyed by uninformed over development.

More details about Rep ID: 9911

Representation ID: 9836

OBJECT Woolpit Business Park (Mr Tim Baker)

Summary:

Proposed settlement boundary for Woolpit does not encompass the current extent of buildings and serviced land at Woolpit Business Park. Attached map shows the full extent of the modern business park.

More details about Rep ID: 9836

Representation ID: 8711

SUPPORT Artisan PPS Ltd (Mr. Leslie Short)

Summary:

support in principle the sustainable growth of this village in which context this additional site (attached) of the Bury Road is proposed for development.

More details about Rep ID: 8711

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

Powered by OpusConsult