Home > Planning > Planning Policy

PLEASE NOTE: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

If you haven't got an account you can register now.
If you have forgotten your password you can request a new password.

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) - Q48

Representation ID: 13185

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Mr. James Bailey)

Summary:

We agree with the proposed thresholds relating to the mix of uses within the Primary Shopping Frontage, as this relates to ground floor level only. Uses for the first floor and above within the Primary Shopping Frontage must be amenable to residential use. This use plays a vital part in the vitality of these areas and therefore this must be stated within this threshold policy for Primary Shopping Frontages.

More details about Rep ID: 13185

Representation ID: 12503

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Ms Libby Hindle)

Summary:

We agree with the proposed thresholds relating to the mix of uses within the Primary Shopping Frontage, as this relates to ground floor level only. Uses for the first floor and above within the Primary Shopping Frontage must be amenable to residential use. This use plays a vital part in the vitality of these areas and therefore this must be stated within this threshold policy for Primary Shopping Frontages.

More details about Rep ID: 12503

Representation ID: 12345

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Mr. James Bailey)

Summary:

We agree with the proposed thresholds relating to the mix of uses within the Primary Shopping Frontage, as this relates to ground floor level only. Uses for the first floor and above within the Primary Shopping Frontage must be amenable to residential use. This use plays a vital part in the vitality of these areas and therefore this must be stated within this threshold policy for Primary Shopping Frontages.

More details about Rep ID: 12345

Representation ID: 11054

SUPPORT Stowmarket Town Council (Ms Michelle Marshall)

Summary:

Stowmarket Town Council agrees with the proposed thresholds relating to the mix of uses within Primary Shopping Frontage.

More details about Rep ID: 11054

Representation ID: 10812

SUPPORT Mendlesham Parish Council (Mrs Sharon Jones )

Summary:

Yes

More details about Rep ID: 10812

Representation ID: 10328

SUPPORT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Kate Kerrigan)

Summary:

We agree with the proposed thresholds relating to the mix of uses within the Primary
Shopping Frontage, as this relates to ground floor level only. Uses for the first floor and above within the Primary Shopping Frontage must be amenable to residential use. This use plays a vital part in the vitality of these areas and therefore this must be stated within this threshold policy for Primary Shopping Frontages.

More details about Rep ID: 10328

Representation ID: 10075

COMMENT Historic England (Katie Parsons)

Summary:

Both of the Districts' town centres incorporate a rich and varied historic environment
with many heritage assets. Efforts to retain and enhance the vitality and viability of
the town centres should therefore be linked to the conservation and enhancement of
its historic environment. Policies should encourage the enhancement of local
character and the public realm.

More details about Rep ID: 10075

Representation ID: 9742

OBJECT Miss R P Baillon

Summary:

Thresholds have been given but there is no reasoning behind the suggested percentages. Explanation is required for an answer to this question.

More details about Rep ID: 9742

Representation ID: 8465

COMMENT Sproughton Parish Council (Mrs Susan Frankis)

Summary:

Town centres lose business to a range of out of town enterprises from farm shops to rural retail developments. Flexible mixed use allocations seems essential if the vitality of our local centres is to be preserved. Parking and access remain a critical issue with older segments of the population also having significant disposal income. Maintaining good transport links and appropriate access is increasingly important.

More details about Rep ID: 8465

Representation ID: 8240

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

Summary:

Agreed

More details about Rep ID: 8240

Representation ID: 8056

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

Where there is a demand for retail space in town centres D1-D2 may be better located edge of centre.

More details about Rep ID: 8056

Representation ID: 7286

COMMENT Great Waldingfield PC (Mr Cecil Allard)

Summary:

All ready agreed in principle.

More details about Rep ID: 7286

Representation ID: 6731

SUPPORT Yaxley Parish Council (Mr Philip Freeman)

Summary:

yes, agree

More details about Rep ID: 6731

Representation ID: 6546

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

No comment

More details about Rep ID: 6546

Representation ID: 5985

SUPPORT Little Waldingfield Parish Council (Mr Andy Sheppard)

Summary:

Yes

More details about Rep ID: 5985

Representation ID: 5610

COMMENT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 5610

Representation ID: 4756

COMMENT Woolverstone Parish Council (Mr Simon Pearce)

Summary:

No comment

More details about Rep ID: 4756

Representation ID: 4684

SUPPORT Lavenham Parish Council (Carroll Reeve)

Summary:

Yes. Our preference is to follow Option OC1, TC1, PS1 and RIA2.

More details about Rep ID: 4684

Representation ID: 4580

SUPPORT Barking Parish Council (Mrs Rosemary Cochrane)

Summary:

support

More details about Rep ID: 4580

Representation ID: 3698

COMMENT Mr Neil Lister

Summary:

Seems too prescriptive.

More details about Rep ID: 3698

Representation ID: 3485

COMMENT Fressingfield Parish Council (Mr Alexander Day)

Summary:

The Parish does not wish to offer a comment to this question and would expect those with urban communities experience to provide a more detailed response.

More details about Rep ID: 3485

Representation ID: 3467

COMMENT Mr John Kitson

Summary:

D1-D2 activities would probably be better grouped outside the main retail centres of towns to create Leisure park areas etc

More details about Rep ID: 3467

Representation ID: 3270

COMMENT Mrs Tania Farrow

Summary:

No comment

More details about Rep ID: 3270

Representation ID: 2938

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

Summary:

Yes.

More details about Rep ID: 2938

Representation ID: 2650

COMMENT Cockfield Parish Council (Mr Doug Reed)

Summary:

Cockfield Parish Council believes that this has no direct impact upon or relevance to the village and so offers no response.

More details about Rep ID: 2650

Representation ID: 2243

SUPPORT Battisford Parish Council (Mr Chris Knock)

Summary:

More details about Rep ID: 2243

Representation ID: 2067

SUPPORT Mrs Kathie Guthrie

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 2067

Representation ID: 1845

COMMENT Debenham Parish Council (Mr Richard Blackwell)

Summary:

Agree with this proposal.

More details about Rep ID: 1845

Representation ID: 1769

SUPPORT Mr Richard Blackwell

Summary:

Support this proposal

More details about Rep ID: 1769

Representation ID: 1584

COMMENT Mr Alf Hannan

Summary:

Yes

More details about Rep ID: 1584

Representation ID: 1008

SUPPORT Mr Roy Barker

Summary:

agree

More details about Rep ID: 1008

Representation ID: 550

OBJECT Cllr Clive Chopping

Summary:

I am not convinced that this takes adequate consideration of the continued decline of physical retail premises and the inexorable rise of internet shopping. More flexibility required here I feel.

More details about Rep ID: 550

Representation ID: 304

OBJECT Mr Simon Barrett

Summary:

Disagree (Not Flexible Enough)

More details about Rep ID: 304

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

Powered by OpusConsult