ipswich.gov.uk

Question 95:

Showing comments and forms 1 to 4 of 4

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 24829

Received: 20/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Wildlife Group

Representation Summary:

Management of open spaces by local authorities in partnership with specialist organisations such as Suffolk Wildlife Trust is the strategy most likely to maintain the wildlife benefit and provide accountability.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 24913

Received: 27/10/2017

Respondent: The Woodland Trust

Representation Summary:

We recognise that the cost of maintenance of landscapes/open space is a significant issue for councils. We would ask you to consider planting of small areas of woodland on existing areas of grass, where these are less well used, or in new developments to put in woodland before the houses are built. Our report, Trees or Turf shows clearly that woodland gives many more environmental, social and economic benefits than does short mown grass (e.g. carbon sequestration, removal of pollutants from the atmosphere, shading of buildings in summer etc) and can also be managed significantly more cheaply.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 25028

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

Representation Summary:

With regard to maximising the biodiversity value of open spaces, we consider that strategic management as part of the wider network of sites is likely to be most beneficial.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Representation ID: 25356

Received: 26/10/2017

Respondent: Greenways Countryside Project

Agent: Mr James Baker

Representation Summary:

Management of open spaces by local authorities (often in partnership with each other and specialist organisations such as Suffolk Wildlife Trust) is the most likely to maintain the wildlife benefit and provides local accountability and a fair distribution of the costs. Management companies and contractors are less likely to sensitively manage wildlife habitats and are not accountable.