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) - Q34

Representation ID: 12400

SUPPORT Old Newton Parish Council (Mrs Karen Price)

Summary:

Agree to continue to protect existing employment areas.

More details about Rep ID: 12400

Representation ID: 12351

COMMENT Strutt & Parker Farm Ltd. represented by Strutt & Parker (Ms Laura Dudley-Smith)

Summary:

Whilst we appreciate District-wide objectives for regional scale economic growth and development, it is suggested that the emerging Local Plan has higher regard for the maintenance of growth of the rural business and small business sectors than is had at present. There are examples of small scale sites across the District that accommodate local business and services that serve the surrounding settlements and reduce their reliance and need to travel into the main urban service centres. We consider that these are vital resources in providing a level of sustainability for local villages and small settlements, as well as supporting a valuable rural economy, and should therefore be identified and protected through allocation within the new Local Plan.

More details about Rep ID: 12351

Representation ID: 11788

OBJECT Mr & Mrs Heather & Michael Earey

Summary:

*Commercial brownfield sites should be considered in preference to greenfield for all types of development.

More details about Rep ID: 11788

Representation ID: 11691

COMMENT Lady Valerie Hart

Summary:

Areas which do not have constraints on development or which, if developed, would not have adverse impacts on the environment and/or heritage assets.

More details about Rep ID: 11691

Representation ID: 11049

COMMENT Mr C. Voetmann represented by Savills (Rachael Morey)

Summary:

The logic of such an approach within the existing development plans is sound and should be taken forward in any new joint plan covering both areas. Such an approach recognises the importance of the contribution that existing employment areas can make to the local area and consequently such well established employment areas (such as Mendlesham Industrial Estate) should be the focus for new additional employment allocations given the importance that such sites can make to the local economy.

More details about Rep ID: 11049

Representation ID: 11028

COMMENT Stowmarket Town Council (Ms Michelle Marshall)

Summary:

Stowmarket Town Council believes that all the current designated sites within the town should be protected.

More details about Rep ID: 11028

Representation ID: 10798

COMMENT Mendlesham Parish Council (Mrs Sharon Jones )

Summary:

Existing

More details about Rep ID: 10798

Representation ID: 10722

COMMENT Ms Caroline Powell

Summary:

* Commercial brownfield sites should be considered in preference to greenfield for all types of development.

More details about Rep ID: 10722

Representation ID: 9888

COMMENT Dr Ian Russell

Summary:

In the Sudbury area, those locations supported by the road infrastructure plan.

More details about Rep ID: 9888

Representation ID: 9725

COMMENT Miss R P Baillon

Summary:

I do not know enough about the existing employment areas throughout Mid Suffolk, except that in Debenham the current area, Meadow Works Business Park, should be protected.

More details about Rep ID: 9725

Representation ID: 9591

COMMENT Mrs Mel Seager

Summary:

Commercial brownfield sites should be considered in preference to greenfield for all types of development.

More details about Rep ID: 9591

Representation ID: 9344

COMMENT Nayland with Wissington Parish Council (Mrs D Hattrell)

Summary:

Nayland with Wissington Parish Council recommends that Core Village and Rural sites be a focus and be identified by Parish Councils

More details about Rep ID: 9344

Representation ID: 8419

COMMENT Sproughton Parish Council (Mrs Susan Frankis)

Summary:

Refer to qtn 33.

More details about Rep ID: 8419

Representation ID: 8372

COMMENT Acton Parish Council (Mr Paul MacLachlan)

Summary:

Employment areas (existing and new) should satisfy the Planning Authority's sustainability criteria.

More details about Rep ID: 8372

Representation ID: 8165

COMMENT Botesdale & Rickinghall CAP Group (Mr. William Sargeant)

Summary:

Not applicable to our rural community (Botesdale & Rickinghall).

More details about Rep ID: 8165

Representation ID: 8086

COMMENT Tattingstone Parish Council (mrs Jane Connell-Smith)

Summary:

Ipswich, urban areas and market towns

More details about Rep ID: 8086

Representation ID: 7942

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

* Only those that are strategic to anticipated commercial development over the next 20 years. So much is likely to change in industrial practices in the next 20 years it is quite possible different sites in different areas will be needed before any of the proposed are ever brought forward.

More details about Rep ID: 7942

Representation ID: 7676

COMMENT Chilton Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

Areas which do not have constraints on development or which, if developed, would not have adverse impacts on the environment and/or heritage assets.

More details about Rep ID: 7676

Representation ID: 7523

COMMENT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

Continue to protect all sites designated in Stowmarket.

More details about Rep ID: 7523

Representation ID: 7251

COMMENT Great Waldingfield PC (Mr Cecil Allard)

Summary:

Those with major/suitable access roads.

More details about Rep ID: 7251

Representation ID: 7199

COMMENT Mr Bernard Rushton

Summary:

Good quality farmland should be protected and reserved for farming

More details about Rep ID: 7199

Representation ID: 6601

COMMENT Denham Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

Denham Parish Council believes this should be dependent on local need

More details about Rep ID: 6601

Representation ID: 6523

SUPPORT MSDC Green Group (Cllr John Matthissen)

Summary:

Existing employment uses should be protected, and change permitted where justified on a case by case basis.

More details about Rep ID: 6523

Representation ID: 6495

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

Not relevant to a Hamlet

More details about Rep ID: 6495

Representation ID: 6200

COMMENT Stowmarket Society (Mr Michael Smith)

Summary:

All existing employment sites should be identified for protection unless (a) they are below a certain size threshold or (b) there is a clear advantage in achieving a brownfield redevelopment requiring other uses.

More details about Rep ID: 6200

Representation ID: 5955

COMMENT Little Waldingfield Parish Council (Mr Andy Sheppard)

Summary:

LWPC has no views on this subject.

More details about Rep ID: 5955

Representation ID: 5897

COMMENT Little Cornard Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

Accessible to good transport links.

More details about Rep ID: 5897

Representation ID: 5774

SUPPORT Long Melford Parish Council (Mr Robert Wiliams)

Summary:

Bull Lane and Acton Industrial Estates.

More details about Rep ID: 5774

Representation ID: 5723

COMMENT Mr Carroll Reeve

Summary:

See the answer to Q33 and Lavenham Neighbourhood Development P.lan.

More details about Rep ID: 5723

Representation ID: 5580

COMMENT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

Need more information do not know where they are

More details about Rep ID: 5580

Representation ID: 5345

COMMENT Mrs Louise Baldry

Summary:

Brownfield sites should be considered in preference to greenfield for all types of development.

More details about Rep ID: 5345

Representation ID: 5009

COMMENT Brantham Parish Council (Mrs Sarah Keys)

Summary:

Those with a reasonable expectation of continued or future employment.

More details about Rep ID: 5009

Representation ID: 4712

COMMENT Woolverstone Parish Council (Mr Simon Pearce)

Summary:

Not relevant to a Hamlet - Woolverstone

More details about Rep ID: 4712

Representation ID: 4653

COMMENT Lavenham Parish Council (Carroll Reeve)

Summary:

See the answers to Q33 and LNDP

More details about Rep ID: 4653

Representation ID: 4264

OBJECT Mr John Bellwood

Summary:

So much is likely to change in industrial practices in the next 20 years it is quite possible that we will be looking at an entirely different commercial landscape, with entirely different needs. With so much excess sites coming forward there is little point in protecting them.

More details about Rep ID: 4264

Representation ID: 4221

COMMENT Mrs Rhona Jermyn

Summary:

Protection of existing employment areas and land - currently oversupply by 187 Hectares; need is 12.3. Mostly brownfield. Only strategic sites to be kept for 20 year supply, remainder ideal for new housing thus protecting use of greenfield. Wider use of employment sites should be permitted to fit changing commercial market.

More details about Rep ID: 4221

Representation ID: 4211

COMMENT Mrs Sheila Hurdwell

Summary:

Areas to be identified according to local needs and to maintain support of the local economy

More details about Rep ID: 4211

Representation ID: 3681

COMMENT Mr Neil Lister

Summary:

Commercial brownfield sites should be considered in preference to Greenfield for all types of new employment development.

More details about Rep ID: 3681

Representation ID: 3460

COMMENT Fressingfield Parish Council (Mr Alexander Day)

Summary:

It will come as no surprise to MSDC that the Parish Council felt that core, hinterland and hamlet communities should be protected from additional employment development unless there were existing brown field sites providing a limited number of dwellings proportionate to the community population size. Clearly the views expressed throughout this response document from the Parish Council encourages any Local Plan to concentrate developments around urban communities to reduce travelling and ease of transport, benefiting from existing mature infrastructure and allowing sustainability.

More details about Rep ID: 3460

Representation ID: 3445

COMMENT Mr John Kitson

Summary:

Sites that are strategic in respect of anticipated commercial need. There have been huge changes in industrial practices in recent years and this will undoubtedly be the case going forward. Consequently, it will be difficult to predict need

More details about Rep ID: 3445

Representation ID: 3254

COMMENT Mrs Tania Farrow

Summary:

This would depend on local need.

More details about Rep ID: 3254

Representation ID: 2999

COMMENT Wortham & Burgate Parish Council (mrs Netty Verkroost)

Summary:

Protection of employment in agriculture and horticulture is vital

More details about Rep ID: 2999

Representation ID: 2913

COMMENT Diss & District Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group (Ms Deborah Sarson)

Summary:

The DDNP will have to take into consideration the local economic growth requirement and uses as appropriate not only to the DDNP Area but to the individual settlements within it.

Proposals will be brought forward at the appropriate time and may include measures intended to protect employment within the entire DDNP Area.

More details about Rep ID: 2913

Representation ID: 2632

COMMENT Cockfield Parish Council (Mr Doug Reed)

Summary:

Cockfield Parish Council believes those that continue to remain viable and provide opportunities for local employment.

More details about Rep ID: 2632

Representation ID: 2430

COMMENT Preston St Mary Parish Council (Nicola Smith)

Summary:

Sudbury, Stowmarket, Hadleigh

More details about Rep ID: 2430

Representation ID: 2286

COMMENT Chelmondiston PC (Mrs Rosie Kirkup)

Summary:

Protected employment areas should be those close to towns and areas with good infrastructure.

More details about Rep ID: 2286

Representation ID: 2230

SUPPORT Battisford Parish Council (Mr Chris Knock)

Summary:

Support for existing employment areas, and specifically Combs Tannery

More details about Rep ID: 2230

Representation ID: 1934

COMMENT Palgrave Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

Areas to be identified according to local needs and to maintain support of the local economy. There needs to be a relationship between housing and employment and this will in part depend on the preferred spatial distribution.

More details about Rep ID: 1934

Representation ID: 1831

COMMENT Debenham Parish Council (Mr Richard Blackwell)

Summary:

Areas in core villages. Core villages taking more homes but
jobs and employment sites are being lost.

More details about Rep ID: 1831

Representation ID: 1764

COMMENT Mr Richard Blackwell

Summary:

Areas in core villages. Core villages taking more homes but
jobs and employment sites are being lost.

More details about Rep ID: 1764

Representation ID: 1570

COMMENT Mr Alf Hannan

Summary:

Not applicable

More details about Rep ID: 1570

Representation ID: 1254

COMMENT Raydon Parish Council (Mrs Jane Cryer)

Summary:

Protect Notley Enterprise Park

More details about Rep ID: 1254

Representation ID: 1149

COMMENT Great Ashfield PC (arthur peake)

Summary:

currently in use and currently identified for future use

More details about Rep ID: 1149

Representation ID: 288

COMMENT Mr Simon Barrett

Summary:

Protect area that are in defined 'sites', Chilton etc.

More details about Rep ID: 288

Representation ID: 209

COMMENT Mr D C Warren

Summary:

Around Sudbury, various industrial sites are vacant and there appears to be a lot of land still to be developed

More details about Rep ID: 209

Representation ID: 22

COMMENT Mr Ben Gilligan

Summary:

Churchfield Road, Sudbury.

More details about Rep ID: 22

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

Powered by OpusConsult