Object
Draft Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document
Representation ID: 79
Received: 22/02/2014
Respondent: Mrs Veronica Hall
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
This policy is badly drafted and illogical. When identifying sites to be found in Ipswich Policy Area for years 6-15, "the existing level of local provision and need for sites" is an important criterion. Why is it not so for years 1-5? IP261, the draft Allocation for years 1-5, ignores the existing level of local provision: the River Hill site put forward, (nominally in Ipswich but adjacent to Bramford), is very close to the existing provision in Ipswich. Ipswich policies to 2031 should be consistent and not vary in principle from year to year.
This policy is badly drafted and illogical. When identifying sites to be found in Ipswich Policy Area for years 6-15, "the existing level of local provision and need for sites" is an important criterion. Why is it not so for years 1-5? IP261, the draft Allocation for years 1-5, ignores the existing level of local provision: the River Hill site put forward, (nominally in Ipswich but adjacent to Bramford), is very close to all 43 other gypsy sites in Ipswich. Ipswich policies to 2031 should be consistent and not vary in principle from year to year.