Question 4:
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24652
Received: 16/10/2017
Respondent: Alice Martin
More well paid jobs brought into the area. Expand on the success of the University of Suffolk. Create a safe and vibrant night-time economy.
More well paid jobs brought into the area. Expand on the success of the University of Suffolk. Create a safe and vibrant night-time economy.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24696
Received: 24/10/2017
Respondent: Suffolk Preservation Society
Focus on the historic environment as a key driver for regeneration of the town's economy
Focus on the historic environment as a key driver for regeneration of the town's economy
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24717
Received: 26/10/2017
Respondent: Mr Christopher Wrathall
My priorities for the area where I live (St Nicholas Street): safer roads for vulnerable road users (pedestrians, cyclists, wheelchair users etc.), better air quality.
My priorities for the area where I live (St Nicholas Street): safer roads for vulnerable road users (pedestrians, cyclists, wheelchair users etc.), better air quality.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24743
Received: 27/10/2017
Respondent: Mr Peter Sutters
Infrastructure.
Infrastructure.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24767
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Mr Andrew Hunter
The one way traffic system needs serious attention. I am not convinced replacing roundabouts, which allow a degree of free movement, with traffic signals, such as on Princess Street, actually contributes to any improvement in traffic movement. Rather the reverse.
The one way traffic system needs serious attention. I am not convinced replacing roundabouts, which allow a degree of free movement, with traffic signals, such as on Princess Street, actually contributes to any improvement in traffic movement. Rather the reverse.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24783
Received: 23/09/2017
Respondent: Mr Philip Pethybridge
2 priorities for Ipswich. A) Redevelop the cycle network to make it easier for people to cycle, e.g. a direct route into town from the east. Encourage people to cycle from a to b instead of drive by giving them a serious credible option: a proper lane that is smooth, flat and separate from traffic. B) Re-evaluate the supply/demand for the main town. People go to the town centre for an experience and that has to be unique rather than replicating all other towns. Develop spaces for small retail, boutique businesses and specialist start-ups to thrive in.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24842
Received: 24/10/2017
Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary
Designing Out Crime standards to be compulsory for all new developments and redevelopments, at the earliest opportunity and in any sector.
Action taken to protect/enhance public open spaces such as parks and churchyards to deter criminal/anti-social behaviour.
Action taken to prevent buildings being out of use for extended periods (ie former pubs/shops etc)
See attached
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 24957
Received: 25/10/2017
Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group
Infrastructure, infrastructure and infrastructure. In particular, road improvements to ease congestion and measures to improve air quality. It is clear that existing infrastructure - especially the transport network - is already failing. It is also important to deliver high quality jobs thereby increasing the average wage of Ipswich residents and to protect the decreasing green areas in Ipswich Borough. All these measures have an important role to play in improving the health and well-being of Ipswich residents. Further expansion of Ipswich must be accompanied by infrastructure improvements.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25003
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust
In relation to the top priorities identified for Ipswich Borough we recommend that a definition of 'sustainable' is included in the document. In relation to the environment, this should include the priority to create a thriving, enhanced natural environment for the benefit of people and wildlife.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25036
Received: 31/10/2017
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
SOCS feel the entire thrust of the Local Plan growth and expansion agenda is inherently unsustainable. A clear and unequivocal determination of the wider infrastructure needs together with a reliable identified funding stream to meet these needs has to be determined and established first.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25097
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: AquiGen
In order to achieve the level of consistency required, we recommend that any development targets identified in the SEP are aligned with the Evidence Base and eventual set of targets selected for the Local Plan. This will clearly need to be the subject of review and consideration as the Local Plan evolves.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25177
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Environment Agency
We would wish to see Local Plans for Ipswich and Suffolk Coastal that take a holistic approach to sustainable development that benefits people, the environment and the economy. Open landscape is recognised in this plan as an opportunity to create habitat and reduce flood risk, but the provision of multifunctional open space also has the potential to improve a community's physical health and mental wellbeing, and increase the monetary value of new development. The wider benefits of ecosystem services should be recognised, and the Plan should seek to both protect and enhance the natural environment.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25220
Received: 27/11/2017
Respondent: Bloor Homes
Working collaboratively with neighbouring authorities on cross-boundary issues, including in relation to meet housing needs, should be a key priority for Ipswich Borough Council, particularly given the constraints of existing administrative boundaries. We note the collaborative approach being undertaken by Suffolk Coastal District Council and Ipswich Borough Council in seeking to address housing need, and commend such an approach. Clearly, there is a strong functional relationship between Ipswich and Suffolk Coastal District and it is entirely appropriate (as per the NPPF) for the authorities to work together to ensure development needs are met sustainably.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25246
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Ipswich Community Media CIC
An exciting cultural offer that comes from the grass roots
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25257
Received: 30/12/2017
Respondent: Ipswich Limited
Two tier local government doesn't work. The entire south east area of Suffolk deeply relies on each other, however, infrastructure, public transport and joined-up planning is appalling or non-existent. Many places have got out of this mess through a unitary authority.
Ipswich desperately needs serious road infrastructure upgrades. Unfortunately the only proposal on the table - an Upper Orwell Crossing - is not suitable.
Ipswich needs to establish its own science park and/or tech park. Emphasis should be against retail parks and light industrial estates. Suffolk should exceed as being a county with its own highly successful tech cluster county-wide. With developments of a film studio at Bentwaters in the
pipework, Suffolk can soon become the Suffolk Powerhouse it should be.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25447
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Under Questions 4 and 5, the Borough Council should be aware of the County Council's Corporate Priorities set out in 'Our Priorities, 2017-21'. They are consistent with the NPPF and of direct relevance to this Plan. The SCC priorities are inclusive growth, health, care and well being and efficient and effective public services. The priorities are relevant to NPPF statements.
See attached.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25495
Received: 05/10/2017
Respondent: Orwell Ahead
New Anglia LEP Board representation for Ipswich & Felixstowe area should never fall below 30% (or below our zone's percentage of GVA for Norfolk & Suffolk).
There should be a permanent New Anglia LEP board position for the Felixstowe Port Users Association or the Port of Felixstowe.
Ipswich Borough Council should re-join the Haven Gateway.
New Anglia LEP should be working in greater partnership, or association, with Haven Gateway.
All parties should make it a priority to lobby for a Greater Ipswich Orbital (Northern Bypass) in the next government spending round.
We are urgently calling for a business and academic led member group dedicated to the successful growth of Greater Ipswich & Orwell.
Ipswich Policy Area must have permanent and proportionate representation at SCC cabinet (or Committee) level.
See attached
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25500
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Ms Jeanette Mott
Make Ipswich a place where people want to be. Areas of Ipswich are rundown with no community spirt, no local amenities or places to meet.
Please think carefully and consult with residents first. Advertise better, I didn't realise this was going on. Make Ipswich a place where people want to be. Areas of Ipswich are rundown with no community spirit to local amenities or places to meet.
No more high rise buildings. More music venues needed for youngsters. Something for youngsters to do in Ipswich would be good. No local sports facilities or anything in Stoke Park.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25503
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Ms Charlotte Goff
Invest in the marina so it becomes a vibrant place to go for all ages;
Far less congestion
Invest in the high street
More focus on reducing crime, Ipswich feels far too unsafe after 6pm.
Invest in the mariner so it becomes a vibrant place to go for all ages
Far less congestion
Invest in the high street
More focus on reducing crime, Ipswich feels far too unsafe after 6pm.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25520
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Mr Jake Foxford
Greater areas for pedestrians in the town centre.
Expansion of the shuttle bus service to all leisure centres and commercial services.
Greater areas for pedestrians in the town centre.
Expansion of the shuttle bus service to all leisure centres and commercial services.
Greater areas for pedestrians in the town centre.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25521
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Mr Simon Lanning
Link the Waterfront to the town centre.
Improve the leisure offering in the town.
Solve the inner ring road traffic
Promote cycle routes.
Link the Waterfront to the town centre.
Improve the leisure offering in the town.
Solve the inner ring road traffic
Promote cycle routes.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25527
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Charlotte Prodger
Install posts next to the grass verges in roads in and out of the town centre to stop people parking and ruining the verge, it gives a poor impression to visitors.
Don't forget about Broomhill. Install posts next to the grass verges in roads in and out of the town centre to stop people parking and ruining the verge, it gives a poor impression to visitors.
I think the town would also benefit from more free parking, it is far too expensive at the moment. Pay and display car parks are also a bad idea, they discourage people from staying, shopping and eating in Ipswich, as they are always rushing back to the car to avoid a ticket.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25530
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Mr Anthony Dooley
In 2036 I would like Ipswich to have celebrated several years of the roads being cycle safe with designated lanes separated from electric vehicles, primarily public transport and essential services.
In 2036 I would like Ipswich to have celebrated several years of the roads being cycle safe with designated lanes separated from electric vehicles, primarily public transport and essential services.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25531
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Mr Joe McSorley
Have a cycle track and footpath from Stowmarket to Ipswich waterfront.
See attached
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25532
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Sarah Ellis
Less traffic congestion and better road and rail links. Roads within the town and on the approaching roads eg. A12 and Copdock Interchange are heavily congested at busy times due to roadworks and closure of the Orwell Bridge.
Have less traffic congestion and better road and rail links. Roads within the town and on the approaching roads eg. A12 and Copdock Interchange are heavily congested at busy times due to roadworks and closure of the Orwell Bridge.
Comment
Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review
Representation ID: 25533
Received: 30/10/2017
Respondent: Sue Catt
Stop reducing light to existing residents by doing away with high-rise. Sunlight helps all.
Stop reducing light to existing residents by doing away with high-rise. Sunlight helps all.
Why don't IBC planners understand the local area? My concerns are the planning department are antiquated in thoughts and if it doesn't affect them personally they are not bothered. Offer strange advice which makes me feel they do not understand the local area or community.
IBC need to engage directly with the community. Do we need to infill every spare bit of land with housing? No. There are so many empty buildings and half built things in Ipswich and these should be looked at first.
There is nothing for the people of Ipswich to make them stay.