Object

Representation ID: 5120

Received: 11/02/2015

Respondent: Lawson Planning Partnership Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

NHS England (NHSE) wishes to re-state the objection raised at the previous consultation stage in respect to this policy. Specifically, NHSE objects to the limitation imposed by the policy on securing the direct provision of infrastructure by developers.
The policy, as currently worded, would preclude the direct provision of infrastructure by developers, as it allows for mitigation to take the form of a commuted sum or CIL payment only.
By introducing a restriction in the way the impacts of development could be mitigated, the policy cannot be considered 'positively prepared', 'justified', 'effective' or 'consistent with national planning policy'.

Object

Representation ID: 5192

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Vicki Liner

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

This policy is unsound as regards development of Ipswich Garden Suburb as mentioned. The Core Strategy seeks to allocate all designated land for development within the plan period before the detailed design and agreement of the supporting infrastructure. Of particular concern is the lack of definition of the required road development. It is unrealistic to build 3500 homes and expect the current Henley/Westerfield/Tuddenham & Colchester road system to accommodate the extra traffic. There will be a huge negative impact on traffic levels in this area on all local residents.

Support

Representation ID: 5209

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Historic England

We welcome the reference to heritage and archaeology as part of cultural and community facilities as a broad category of infrastructure to be secured or financed from new development.

Support

Representation ID: 5315

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: New Anglia LEP for Norfolk and Suffolk

Whereas Central Government funding can be accessed to provide additional school places for natural population change, the Government intends that development should fund additional need arising from housing growth. Therefore, Policy CS17 is essential for the delivery of Policy CS15 and for ensuring that overall strategy represents sustainable development. Without Policy CS17, the County Council would not consider this document sound. Contributions will also be used to expand and improve existing libraries to meet the demands of growth. Therefore the plan is sound regarding library provision in accordance with NPPF Chapter 8.

Object

Representation ID: 5376

Received: 03/03/2015

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Number of people: 323

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There is no evidence of objectively assessed needs for freshwater and foul water infrastructure in the Borough or IPA, no reference to strategic solutions and no listing in infrastructure tables. The catch-all term 'utilities' should not be used as the Core Strategy will fail without strategic wastewater infrastructure including upgrading the sewage treatment works at Cliff Quay, Anglian Water Ipswich Water Reuse project and a solution for Ipswich Garden Suburb which may require a pipeline to Cliff Quay. Concerned the development will severely impact traffic congestion and air quality. A relief road or bypass to north Ipswich is required.

Object

Representation ID: 5420

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Arwel Owen

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

CS17 is confused and contradictory. There is inconsistency and overlap in the presentation of requirements which might emerge through S106, and those that could be delivered by CIL. The Council should present a clear strategy for how it will coordinate infrastructure funding and which mechanisms are to be employed. Policy CS17 should be supported by an Infrastructure Delivery Plan which provides details of the infrastructure, cost and delivery mechanisms required to bring forward development, and should demonstrate that the Duty to Cooperate has been engaged, and that the provisions of paragraphs 162 and 173 of the NPPF have been met.

Object

Representation ID: 5489

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Andrew Fisk

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Transport policy, (CS5, CS17 and CS20) There doesn't seem to be any realistic attempt to deal with the additional traffic that will result from the Northern fringe development.

Object

Representation ID: 5497

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Ipswich Liberal Democrats

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Ipswich needs an up to date traffic assessment of the impact of this plan up until 2031.
The proposed Northern Fringe Development will result in country lanes to the north of Ipswich outside the Borough Boundary being used as rat runs more than they are now with Valley Road at capacity.
The Local Plan proposes a Sports Fields along Tuddenham Road to replace the Ipswich School Sports Fields behind Valley Road. This proposal should be part of the Traffic assessment for the Local Plan. Tuddenham Road has no pavements past the hump bridge.

Support

Representation ID: 5562

Received: 27/02/2015

Respondent: Westerfield Parish Council

Policy CS17 Infrastructure
The policy states that housing growth should not adversely affect the quality of life of existing communities. It also says that growth requirements across the Borough will place additional pressure on existing infrastructure and will therefore require improvements to be made to existing infrastructure, and the provision of new infrastructure.
Westerfield Parish Council supports the strategy to deliver the key infrastructure requirements listed in this policy to ensure existing communities, including Westerfield, can be sustained.

Object

Representation ID: 5566

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Concerned about how infrastructure will cope with growth, including hospitals, schools, GPs, social care, drainage, sewerage, transport. Support the aspiration to identify the infrastructure required to deliver development, but wish to see developer contributions for major "off-site" road infrastructure discussed within this plan and the obligation to mitigate adverse traffic effects reinstated. There is no indication of how necessary infrastructure can be achieved. Requirements are unlikely to be met in a timely, sustainable manner. If the plan cannot demonstrate effective joint working to meet cross-boundary strategic priorities, we fear Quality of Life will be at stake. Endorse NFPG points also.

Object

Representation ID: 5579

Received: 25/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Cyril Eden

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Traffic congestion is a key concern for residents. The CS fails to properly assess development and infrastructure requirements including the cumulative effects on traffic, air pollution, fresh water and wastewater. The plan will not be effective and is unsound. Updated traffic and air quality modelling should be undertaken and development not be permitted unless effective mitigation can be implemented. Fresh/waste water infrastructure needs to be objectively assessed and key infrastructure listed in the CS. The risks to delivery should be identified. There is a lack of sewage pipeline capacity between the Garden Suburb and Cliff Quay treatment works.

Object

Representation ID: 5624

Received: 19/02/2015

Respondent: Mr & Mrs David and Eileen Warren

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There are transport issues and the traffic proposals policies CS5, CS17 and CS20 do not address these.
It seems that the current services in hospitals, schools, GP surgeries and social care are inadequate.
The proposals do not address the infrastructure, services, drainage, flooding and sewerage.

Object

Representation ID: 5629

Received: 21/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Mervyn Sheppard

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The CS fails to properly assess development and infrastructure requirements including the cumulative effect of traffic and air pollution. In particular it fails to demonstrate that the Northern Fringe Development would not increase traffic congestion and traffic on the surrounding roads to unacceptable levels. The absence of new roads or sufficient upgrades of existing routes in North East Ipswich indicates that the Council is not taking the additional traffic that will be generated from the Development seriously.

Object

Representation ID: 5638

Received: 16/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Tony Moran

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

We already have significant and chronic issues relating to infrastructure and surface drainage, flooding and sewerage. The proposals will only add to these and not improve matters. Heavy rainfall and flash flooding are an increasing feature of our weather patterns and this will not improve matters. CS1 CS17 & CS20

Object

Representation ID: 5656

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Jane Catling

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Traffic congestion is a key concern for residents. The CS fails to properly assess development and infrastructure requirements including the cumulative effects on traffic, air pollution, fresh water and wastewater. Updated traffic and air quality modelling should be undertaken and development not permitted unless effective mitigation can be implemented. Fresh/waste water infrastructure needs to be objectively assessed and key infrastructure listed in the CS. The risks to delivery should be identified. There is a lack of sewage pipeline capacity between the Garden Suburb and Cliff Quay treatment works. Concerns over provision of sufficient medical care, surgeries are already at capacity.

Object

Representation ID: 5677

Received: 03/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Bridges

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, will development improve matters?

Object

Representation ID: 5686

Received: 03/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Bridges

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, will development improve matters?

Object

Representation ID: 5709

Received: 04/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Mark Tweedale

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

It would appear that Ipswich Borough Council has omitted the necessary up-front details from the Core Strategy Plan as to how it intends to implement the infrastructure required for the development of the Ipswich Garden Suburb (Northern Fringe), including mitigation of impact due to:
a large number of additional vehicles using the existing local network.
Traffic congestion has always been a key concern for residents. The CS fails to properly assess development and infrastructure requirements including the cumulative effects on traffic

Object

Representation ID: 5750

Received: 03/03/2015

Respondent: D C Norman

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5759

Received: 02/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Brian Pinner

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5769

Received: 25/02/2015

Respondent: Mr Brian Pachent

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, policy CS17 will improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5782

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

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5799

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Yvonne Maynard

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Transport issues and Traffic proposals, Hospitals, Schools and GP surgeries and Social Care Services will not be able to cope, Infrastructure, Drainage, flooding and sewerage issues, there is no need for 13,500 homes.

Object

Representation ID: 5806

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Philip Maynard

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Transport issues, Infrastructure issues with drainage, flooding sewerage, school places, hospital places, GPs and Social Care and there is no need for 13500 homes

Object

Representation ID: 5812

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Creasey

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5818

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Creasey

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5836

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mr John Summers

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5847

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mrs Jennifer Summers

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5858

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Mr Neil Summers

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.

Object

Representation ID: 5869

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Miss Charlotte Miller

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Expect further gridlock and adverse impacts on existing residents and the local economy, which the plan will not remedy. Hospitals, schools and access to GPs and social care are currently inadequate, how will they cope with growth? Infrastructure and services drainage, flooding, sewage proposals - there are already problems in this area, development will not improve matters.