CS10: Ipswich Garden Suburb
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5688
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: Mrs Chris Wall
Number of people: 2
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to Garden Suburbs on grounds of design, traffic congestion, air quality and drainage
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5698
Received: 02/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Julian Mason
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The garden suburb proposals do not sufficiently consider the additional infrastructure requirements that a large development of this type would demand. Traffic is the obvious issue — the suburb would necessitate a Northern bypass to accommodate the huge rise in vehicular traffic. Other considerations would be health, schools, pollution and waste-water.
See attached
Support
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5742
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Mick Wright
I welcome the fact that there will be a small country park built into the design of the Northern Fringe development.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5746
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: D C Norman
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5756
Received: 02/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Brian Pinner
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5767
Received: 04/03/2015
Respondent: Tuddenham St Martin Parish Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Object to inward-looking focus regarding traffic infrastructure for Ipswich Garden Village, ignoring anything outside the Borough boundary. The Parish Council have severe reservations about the predicted peak hour traffic generation, which is based on surveyed traffic for similar housing areas. Suffolk Constabulary measured traffic through Tuddenham St Martin: 30,000 vehicles travelled through the village in one week, last November. This brings in to disrepute the traffic modelling work using old census data. This concern has been raised before with Ipswich Borough Council and Suffolk County Council but no reply has been received. Concerned about the plan's impacts on the village.
See attached.
Support
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5772
Received: 25/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Brian Pachent
The plan will deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has listened to local opinion.
See attached
Support
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5774
Received: 25/02/2015
Respondent: Mr Brian Pachent
CS10 is sustainable development and the public are being listened to in regard of the garden suburb proposal.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5779
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: Mr & Mrs David and Pamela McCartney
Number of people: 2
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attachment
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5804
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Yvonne Maynard
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Country Park Plans are unacceptable
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5808
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Philip Maynard
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The Country Park Plan is unacceptable
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5817
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Creasey
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Question the effectiveness of the plan which allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See atttached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5833
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr John Summers
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5844
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Summers
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5855
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Neil Summers
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5866
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Miss Charlotte Miller
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5879
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Roy Bush
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
It is unsound to allocate the entire Northern Fringe when its delivery may not be viable over the plan timescales. To lower this risk the CS should include a plan based on co-operating more closely with neighbouring LAs to deliver homes growth. The CS cannot guarantee delivery of the Country Park in a timely manner and so demonstrate it will not adversely affect the integrity of a European designated habitat. For soundness, policy CS10 and Infrastructure Table 8B need to be revised. Allocating the entire Northern Fringe for immediate development through multi-site starts is a high risk strategy that will result in severe traffic congestion for both North Ipswich and the town centre and will damage the future attractiveness and prosperity of town. With so few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will have to commute by car to jobs growth sites. The effectiveness of the Core Strategy to deliver the Ipswich Garden Suburb is doubtful without additional road improvements. In response to a planning application by Mersea Homes /CBRE Global Investors for the first phase of the Ipswich Garden Suburb, Suffolk County Council stated with regard to traffic '... the development has a severe impact on network performance and travel time.' IBC has been pinning their hopes on getting people out of their cars and onto public transport but with so few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will mainly have to commute by car to jobs growth sites. The effectiveness of the Core Strategy to deliver the Ipswich Garden Suburb is doubtful without additional road improvements and capacity such as a northern bypass or link road. New measures will also be required to ensure air quality does not deteriorate.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5887
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr James Collins
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
It is unsound to allocate the entire Northern Fringe when its delivery may not be viable over the plan timescales. To lower this risk the CS should include a plan based on co-operating more closely with neighbouring LAs to deliver homes growth. The CS cannot guarantee delivery of the Country Park in a timely manner and so demonstrate it will not adversely affect the integrity of a European designated habitat. For soundness, policy CS10 and Infrastructure Table 8B need to be revised. Allocating the entire Northern Fringe for immediate development through multi-site starts is a high risk strategy that will result in severe traffic congestion for both North Ipswich and the town centre and will damage the future attractiveness and prosperity of town. With so few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will have to commute by car to jobs growth sites. The effectiveness of the Core Strategy to deliver the Ipswich Garden Suburb is doubtful without additional road improvements. In response to a planning application by Mersea Homes /CBRE Global Investors for the first phase of the Ipswich Garden Suburb, Suffolk County Council stated with regard to traffic '... the development has a severe impact on network performance and travel time.' IBC has been pinning their hopes on getting people out of their cars and onto public transport but with so few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will mainly have to commute by car to jobs growth sites. The effectiveness of the Core Strategy to deliver the Ipswich Garden Suburb is doubtful without additional road improvements and capacity such as a northern bypass or link road. New measures will also be required to ensure air quality does not deteriorate.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5893
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: T Holden
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The CS cannot guarantee delivery of the Country Park in a timely manner and so demonstrate it will not harm the integrity of a European designated habitat. CS10 and table 8B need to be revised.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5899
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: F A Leeder
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The CS cannot guarantee delivery of the Country Park in a timely manner and so demonstrate it will not harm the integrity of a European designated habitat. CS10 and table 8B need to be revised.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5906
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: A W Parkin
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5926
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mrs A Snook
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5934
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: D Roberts
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5947
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Robert and Rosemary Free
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5956
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Mr & Mrs Robert and Rosemary Free
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5968
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Jill Page
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 5969
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Frank Seal
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
It's unsound to allocate the entire Northern Fringe when its delivery may not be viable over plan timescales. How will infrastructure be provided? The CS should be based on co-operating more closely with neighbouring LAs to deliver homes growth. The CS cannot guarantee delivery of the Country Park in a timely manner and so demonstrate it will not harm a European designated habitat. Allowing multi-site starts will result in severe congestion and damage the attractiveness and prosperity of Ipswich. With few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will have to commute by car to jobs growth sites.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 15014
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: Mr Michael Keats
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
It's unsound to allocate the entire Northern Fringe when its delivery may not be viable over plan timescales. How will infrastructure be provided? The CS should be based on co-operating more closely with neighbouring LAs to deliver homes growth. The CS cannot guarantee delivery of the Country Park in a timely manner and so demonstrate it will not harm a European designated habitat. Allowing multi-site starts will result in severe congestion and damage the attractiveness and prosperity of Ipswich. With few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will have to commute by car to jobs growth sites.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 15024
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: Mrs Cantwell
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The plan allocates the whole of the Garden Suburb for approximately 3,500 new dwellings, plus 10,000 homes in other parts of Ipswich. How will infrastructure be provided? Country Park delivery unlikely until at least 2025 with multi start development before 2021 and immediate removal of trees, hedgerows, habitats, farm land. This is not acceptable. The plan will not deliver the park successfully and in a timely fashion. The Council has not listened to local opinion.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Representation ID: 15034
Received: 03/03/2015
Respondent: Mrs Anne Saggers
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
It is unsound to allocate the entire Northern Fringe when its delivery may not be viable over the plan timescales. To lower this risk the CS should include a plan based on co-operating more closely with neighbouring LAs to deliver homes growth. The CS cannot guarantee delivery of the Country Park in a timely manner and so demonstrate it will not adversely affect the integrity of a European designated habitat. For soundness, policy CS10 and Infrastructure Table 8B need to be revised. Allocating the entire Northern Fringe for immediate development through multi-site starts is a high risk strategy that will result in severe traffic congestion for both North Ipswich and the town centre and will damage the future attractiveness and prosperity of town. With so few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will have to commute by car to jobs growth sites. The effectiveness of the Core Strategy to deliver the Ipswich Garden Suburb is doubtful without additional road improvements. In response to a planning application by Mersea Homes /CBRE Global Investors for the first phase of the Ipswich Garden Suburb, Suffolk County Council stated with regard to traffic '... the development has a severe impact on network performance and travel time.' IBC has been pinning their hopes on getting people out of their cars and onto public transport but with so few new jobs being created in the town centre, residents will mainly have to commute by car to jobs growth sites. The effectiveness of the Core Strategy to deliver the Ipswich Garden Suburb is doubtful without additional road improvements and capacity such as a northern bypass or link road. New measures will also be required to ensure air quality does not deteriorate.
See attached.