Object

Representation ID: 126

Received: 06/03/2014

Respondent: Kesgrave Covenant Ltd

Agent: Mersea Homes Limited

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

This Policy relates to joint working in the wider Ipswich Policy Area. References that seek to defer decisions on locations for growth required within the Plan period to a future review of the Core Strategy should be deleted in favour of those locations being identified as part of this Core Strategy.

Comment

Representation ID: 385

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Merchant Projects (Ipswich)

It is considered that the Duty to Co-operate in the NPPF establishes a more stringent test of the co-working of local authorities than is evidenced in the review. It appears that Mid-Suffolk and Babergh districts have difficulty fulfilling their own housing need and a strong relationship is required to deliver the houses required. There should be an audit trail of co-operation in order to assess the housing strategy.

Object

Representation ID: 577

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Mersea Homes Limited

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The Borough's boundary means that there are few areas of undeveloped land able to accommodate strategic development except the Northern Fringe. The Council acknowledges that it will have to rely on neighbours to accommodate the town's continuing growth, therefore demonstrating that the duty to cooperate has been fully engaged will be critical to the plan's success. The Duty involves more than discussions; for authorities which are reliant on neighbours it establishes a higher burden of proof. Changes to CS6 (and CS7) offer limited reassurance that the Duty has been effectively engaged. Refer to the Inspector's tests used in Mid Sussex.

Object

Representation ID: 629

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Babergh District Council & Midsuffolk District Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Must make clear that a joint DPD requires agreement with the districts.
Policy CS6 and CS7 must be realistic about what can be delivered especially regards constraints and the resources available to prescribed bodies.

Object

Representation ID: 849

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Number of people: 323

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The IPA Board should be an important body, given the duty to cooperate, and it should meet more frequently than once a year. Greater co-operation and working together between authorities is required to identify and deliver the best employment and housing sites across the area - joint plans may be appropriate. This should have happened before this consultation on the CS. To be sustainable the location of new homes must be near to the location of new jobs. The CS6 policy and text need to commit to closer working with neighbouring authorities e.g. to align jobs forecasts.

Support

Representation ID: 886

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

The County Council will continue to support the borough and district councils in considering matters affecting future development in and around Ipswich.