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) - SS0814 - Land north of Long Thurlow Road

Representation ID: 10196

COMMENT Historic England (Katie Parsons)


There are number designated heritage assets dotted through the small hamlet of
Long Thurlow. The site allocations being considered are concentrated to the west end of the settlement. The presence of these heritage assets and their settings
should be considered carefully as part of the site allocation process.

More details about Rep ID: 10196

Representation ID: 9117



Long Thurlow is an Unsustainable Location, no local facilities. Living would be car based.
Proposed developments are on a much bigger scale than recommended for hamlet in the countryside, not just infill.
Harmful intrusion into the landscape leading to ribbon development - which is discouraged.

More details about Rep ID: 9117

Representation ID: 8863

OBJECT Anthony Pickering


1) Development of up to 10 new properties regarded as an extension of ribbon development.
2) Hamlet lacks all community services and facilities; is remote from shops, schools, railway station, doctors. Virtually non-existent bus service and little footway provision.
3) No adequate broadband coverage.
4) Surface water issues around site area.
5) Loss of wildlife corridor.
6) Loss of valuable arable land.
7) Odour problems from chicken farm.
8) Visual impact on setting of listed building.

More details about Rep ID: 8863

Representation ID: 8350

OBJECT Mr Michael Thomas


The hamlet of Long Thurlow is unsuitable for this size and type of development, due to its total lack of facilities, such as bus service, village hall, school. This would result in yet more people having to use cars.
This is agricultural land and the size of this development is totally out of keeping with the nature of this hamlet and would have a detrimental effect oh the landscape with the inevitable destruction of trees and hedgerows.
The site is also close to a large chicken farm

More details about Rep ID: 8350

Representation ID: 8150

OBJECT Mrs Amanda Beckley


Location is unsuitable. No local facilities - shops, schools, doctor, buses, etc so would add to the number of vehicles on road. Only one narrow pavement and two streetlights
Development is out of scale with countryside hamlet
Impact on and loss of wildlife, trees and hedges
Irretrievable loss of arable land
Harmful intrusion in the landscape, leading to ribbon development
Very close proximity to frequent noxious smells from the chicken farm

More details about Rep ID: 8150

Representation ID: 8113

OBJECT Mr Neil Fleming


This land adjoins a noisy, smelly chicken farm. In addition, Long Thurlow is an "unsustainable location": an isolated ribbon hamlet with poor road connections, no buses, no shops, no school. It has multiple listed buildings and a high water table. Any development would radically change the hamlet's rural character, damage the landscape, and cause unacceptable stress to connecting roads and adjoining hamlets (Badwell Ash or Great Ashfield) connecting to possible workplaces for new residents. It is a 10 minute drive from the A14. The water table issue has caused sewerage and issues for the existing houses in recent years.

More details about Rep ID: 8113

Representation ID: 7949

OBJECT sarah brown


Long Thurlow is a small hamlet with no facilities - no shop, bus, school, community centre etc. There are no safe footpaths even to Badwell Ash. Any development would therefore rely on car-based living.
I worry that the sewerage system would be unable to cope with further development - raw sewage backed up into our garden over Christmas when many people had visitors.
Surface water flooding may be a problem with more land tarmaced over.
The chicken farm is noisy from very early in the morning, and can also be smelly - development should not happen so close to it.

More details about Rep ID: 7949

Representation ID: 5384

OBJECT Dr Berwyn Clarke


Totally out of scope for a hamlet of this size and certainly would cause undue harm to the character of the cluster. This hamlet has no infrastructure or amenities to support any expansion and has rigidly complied with earlier planning applications to be retained within the existing boundary. As indicated in other objections this plan would severely impact on the character of the hamlet, significantly impact wildlife in the area and other nearby grey/brown field sites should be prioritised for new housing.

More details about Rep ID: 5384

Representation ID: 3960

OBJECT Mr John Bird


I object to the proposed plans for the north of Long Thurlow Road because this would be additional ribbon development. The hamlet of Long Thurlow has no key facilities and the route to the nearest shop is not suitable for pedestrians.

More details about Rep ID: 3960

Representation ID: 3635

OBJECT Mr Peter Jenkins


I object to the element of the Joint Local Plan relating to the proposed development in the hamlet of Long Thurlow on the grounds that the proposal is out of line with the JLP statement on Page 41 that "there is potential to include a policy in the Plan which would support appropriate infill development in 'hamlets' (considered to be a nucleus of at least 10 dwellings fronting the highway) which would not cause undue harm to the character of the cluster and would not consolidate settlements or result in ribbon development. " These proposals do.

More details about Rep ID: 3635

Representation ID: 2392

OBJECT Mr Alan Hall


This is green field land that seems to be rather unsuitable on the grounds that it is a buffer from a working chicken fam plant.
I would not think that site is very suitable on these grounds.
Lack of connectivity to main services & public transport to serve any proposed homes.

More details about Rep ID: 2392

Representation ID: 2188

COMMENT Mr Henry Hurn


As commented for SS809 this site is also unsuitable for development due to proximity to the chicken farm. Similarly, the deficiency of facilities here would have to limit the amount of new building

More details about Rep ID: 2188

Representation ID: 1523

OBJECT Mr Michael Beiley


Illogical,not an infill site,inappropriate,disproportionate and wholly out of character with surrounding neighbourhood.What process and criteria were used in the nomination of this land ? Who owns the land and are they potentially conflicted due to other roles in life ?
Unsustainable because : no shops,schools,public transport,employment,100% reliant on cars for access,inadequate street lighting,no pedestrian walkway to nearest shop,no village hall,no broadband,in conflict with local land use which is intense arable farming i.e. frequent large,slow moving heavy agricultural machinery using local roads.
The need for a development here and of this scale has not been demonstrated in the local plan.

More details about Rep ID: 1523

Representation ID: 1322

OBJECT Mrs Diana Chapman


I object to the allocation of site SS0814 (0.45 ha north of Long Thurlow Road , Long Thurlow) for housing development in any future Local Plan proposals documents for the following reasons:

1. Unsustainable location, no local facilities and distance to towns.
2. Would be car based.
3. Not infill in a hamlet in the countryside.
4. Precedent and ribbon development.
5. Impact on heritage assets, in particular setting of Rowan Cottage.
6. Harmful intrusion into the landscape.
7. Impact on surface water flooding.
8. Loss of mature trees, hedgerows and wildlife corridor.
9 Potential for light, noise and odour pollution of abutting agricultural uses and visiting vehicles.

More details about Rep ID: 1322

Representation ID: 482

OBJECT Mr Peter Chappell


Long Thurlow is a hamlet that has no facilities to support the residents. This includes no meaningful public transport, shops / public house or village hall. To support such large increase in housing as is proposed would require such facilities to be guaranteed as part of any development. If any development is proposed this should be limited to no more than an increase of 5 percent in housing to avoid over development.

More details about Rep ID: 482

Representation ID: 444

OBJECT Mr William Kneale


Refer to comments I made on SS0809....essentially same comments apply. Its difficult to see which land SS0814 and SS0809 refer to specifically from the map.

More details about Rep ID: 444

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

Powered by OpusConsult