Infrastructure
Support
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
Representation ID: 25590
Received: 07/03/2019
Respondent: Department for Education (DfE)
The DfE welcomes reference within the plan to support the development of appropriate social and community infrastructure, not least schools, in policy ISPA2, including references to ensuring infrastructure provision meets needs, timely delivery of infrastructure alongside development and requirements for developer contributions.
See scanned representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
Representation ID: 25614
Received: 08/03/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust
We consider that policy ISPA2 should also include delivery of strategic green infrastructure alongside the other types of infrastructure listed.
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
Representation ID: 25687
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Anglian Water
Anglian Water is generally supportive of Policy ISPA2 which identifies strategic priorities for infrastructure provision within the Borough and collaboration with utility companies including Anglian Water to its delivery.
Reference is made to both the water supply network and sewage treatment but not the foul sewerage network.
It is therefore proposed that Policy ISPA2 is amended as follows:
'i) improvements to water supply, foul sewerage and sewage treatment capacity'
Anglian Water is generally supportive of Policy ISPA2 which identifies strategic priorities for infrastructure provision within the Borough and collaboration with utility companies including Anglian Water to its delivery.
Reference is made to both the water supply network and sewage treatment but not the foul sewerage network.
It is therefore proposed that Policy ISPA2 is amended as follows:
'i) improvements to water supply, foul sewerage and sewage treatment capacity'
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
Representation ID: 25748
Received: 12/03/2019
Respondent: Natural England
Increased traffic, the construction of new roads and the upgrading of existing roads can negatively affect designated sites due to air quality impacts. We recommend that potential impacts to vulnerable sites are assessed using traffic projections and the 200m distance criterion followed by local Air Quality modelling where required.
Large infrastructure opportunities to secure net gains for biodiversity and wider
environmental gains (HRA, page 9), please include within the supportive text of the
policy. Policy requirements for large infrastructure projects to deliver measurable biodiversity net gain, in accordance with NPPF and Defra 25 YEP, should be included with relevant policies.
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
Representation ID: 26065
Received: 12/03/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Coastal and Waveney District Councils (East Suffolk)
The Council supports this policy, however would like to highlight that the equivalent policy in the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan (Policy SCLP2.2) also includes reference to police, community safety and cohesion provision and green infrastructure and suitable alternative natural greenspace. It is suggested that policy ISPA2 should also include reference to these strategic infrastructure priorities.
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
Representation ID: 26144
Received: 13/03/2019
Respondent: Clean Air Ipswich
It is proposed that during the 12 year build of Sizewell C there will be up to 1,500 HGV daily arrivals at the site. 85% of these are to come from the south, over the Orwell Bridge. This means that when the Orwell bridge closes, such as on windy days there will be 1,275 HGVs going north through Ipswich and 1,275 HGVs coming south through Ipswich.
In the information about traffic provided by EDF for the Stage 3 Sizewell C consultation there are inconsistencies. In addition there is a lack of supporting evidence such as the traffic models used.
See scanned representation