East Suffolk Council
Petitions received
| Petition - received 8 May 2025 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition Change Southwold Beach Dog Ban to 1 May Currently Dogs are banned on Southwold beach from 1 April each year, whereas every other beach in Suffolk is 1 May. If you would like to see the ban brought in line with every other beach in Suffolk to 1 May, please sign this petition, as next week on 6 May it is up for review with the Council. Why should Southwold be any different from the rest of the county? Let's extend our dogs walkies by 1 month a year! Please sign and share. We need more signatures, please share with all your contact lists and let's get this on the councils agenda. As at 6 May 2025 – 500 signatures received. |
| Petition - received 18 February 2025 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition STOP East Suffolk council from parking charges increase East Suffolk District Council's decision to raise parking charges over 100% has led to a number of residents and businesses, particularly those reliant on the visitor economy, worrying about the impact on their viability. A two-hour stay near the beach will rise from £1.50 to £4.00, a four-hour stay will go from £3.00 to £6.00, and an all-day stay will increase from £4.00 to £8.00. I recognise the huge financial pressures faced by the District Council, but it’s frustrating that there was no consultation with local businesses and residents to understand how to mitigate the impact of these changes. I have started this petition to show the council what impact it has on businesses and residents and reconsider Number of signatures: As at 18 February 2025 – 2,149 signatures received. This petition will be considered at the Full Council meeting on 19 March 2025. Meeting papers for the Full Council meeting on 19 March 2025 |
| Petition - received 28 May 2024 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition Save the Grove Eastward Ho Playing Fields and the Surrounding Area According to your latest plan proposals for the North Felixstowe Development, apart from building around Grove Woodlands as well as on adjacent farmlands, Eastward Ho playing fields are going to be redeveloped to allow 125 homes to be built there (this is the proposed building on stable land and Eastward Ho only). Your lead mission statement says "leisure led development comprising green infrastructure, community facilities". I can't help thinking that this is marketing speak for destroying what is already a well-known location that is leisure led, comprising green infrastructure. What Eastward Ho desperately needs is improved changing rooms for teams, and improved facilities for groundsman. Improved drainage (something that new building rarely helps with). The neglected children's play area also needs renovating. These are factors that should be looked at before destroying local green space. Eastward Ho doesn’t need making smaller when the town is growing (two new developments already built and a third underway) - the town needs to keep its large open areas for families and public to meet and play without having to prebook or spend money to access playing fields. We all are regular users of the Eastward Ho playing fields for kickabouts, kite flying, games, picnics, and using the play area and outdoor gym. Surely any development should focus on brownfield and then private land / farmland before destroying one of the towns few public access playing fields with full size football pitches and other leisure offerings. SAVE OUR PLAYING FIELDS FROM ANY DEVELOPMENT!! As at 8 June 2024 - 4,261 signatures received. This petition will be considered at the Full Council meeting on 24 July 2024. |
| Petition - received 28 January 2024 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition Please Save Our Trees We ask for an Emergency Tree Protection Order to be placed on these trees to stop the trees on Trinity Green, Kesgrave from being cut down. We ask that a Management Plan is agreed to ensure these trees are properly looked after on a regular basis – for the benefit of residents and wildlife. We value these trees because they:
In the current climate / nature crisis its important to do all that we can to support nature. Every little thing helps. As at 28 January 2024 – 67 signatures received. |
| Petition - received 23 January 2023 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition Give permission to Prestige Escape Rooms to reinstate their fascia signs We have had our planning application and appeal to keep our fascia signs denied by East Suffolk Council. Our signs are incredibly important to our business so that people are able to find us and so we can advertise our services to those passing-by. We bring thousands of people into the local area to visit our escape rooms which results in more income being brought into the town. We are also rated #1 on Tripadvisor for Things To Do in Lowestoft. We provide something new and exciting for people to do in their own town without having to travel to other bigger cities. We have received so many comments and messages from people saying how unhappy they are that we have been made to remove our signs and have been encouraged by the local residents to fight this decision, hence this petition! Our goal is to reach over 1200 signatures so the petition will get seen by the Full Council! We would like the council to grant us permission to reinstate our fascia signs on the front of our business. We note that they previously had an issue with the slight angle of the signs, so we propose that we will lay them flush with the brickwork above the sash windows. We also want this granted without further cost to us. As at 26 January 2023 – 714 signatures received. |
| Petition - received 24 March 2022 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition "The beach has disappeared in front of the spa pavilion beach huts rather than find an acceptable resolution the council have terminated our licences. The beach huts have been in the same position for over 100 years and are oldest beach huts in the UK. Normally for 6 months of the year the huts spend the winter on the promenade, now apparently due to supposed complaints we cannot stay on the prom. There are many unanswered questions firstly why has nothing being done to rectify why the beach has washed away after £10 million was spent on groin works to hold the Beach in place. Please support our plight in keeping part of our National Heritage otherwise 44 huts will be removed forever." Number of signatures:
This petition was discussed at the Annual Full Council meeting, which took place on 25 May 2022. A link to the meeting papers and minutes can be found here. |
| Petition - received 29 September 2020 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition Grundisburgh and Culpho Parish Council objects in the strongest possible terms to the two application (DC/20/3284/FUL and DC/20/3362/FUL) submitted for the same site by Hopkins Homes. "We ask councillors of the newly formed East Suffolk District Council to say no to any development on Chapel Field". |
| Petition - received 18 September 2020 |
|---|
|
Subject of petition "What independent verification has East Suffolk obtained with regard to EDF Energy’s claims outlined at 1. and 2. below (upon which East Suffolk has relied in your draft Relevant Representation as benefits) that the potential development of Sizewell C twin reactor nuclear power station will: 1. Generate “a £100m pa investment boost to the regional economy during construction and £40m pa during operation” Given the uncertainty of what share East Suffolk may have from this regional investment and the learning from the NNLAG report published December 2019 where predicted levels of investment were not met and the value of ‘local’ contracts could not be adequately confirmed - at what level of investment would East Suffolk agree that the disbenefits of the project outweighed the benefits, and will East Suffolk Cabinet change this section of the Relevant Representation to reflect this? and 2. Meet the government’s criteria of “IROPI” with respect of contributing to the UK’s net zero target? Given that “IROPI” is described in the NPS as the ‘urgent need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in order to avoid significant, long-term adverse environmental, social and economic consequences, whilst maintaining security of energy supply and preserving public safety and public health, the Government believes that nuclear generation needs to be part of the future low carbon electricity generation mix’ - does East Suffolk Council not regard it as significant that EDF’s own documents reveal Sizewell C will not be positively contributing to net zero targets until 2040, and will East Suffolk Cabinet change this section of the Relevant Representation accordingly?” Number of signatures:
|