ipswich.gov.uk

Chapter 10 - Implementation

Showing comments and forms 1 to 9 of 9

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26189

Received: 11/02/2020

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Fred Lewis

Number of people: 2

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Table 8B: Held up for over 20 minutes on our walk at the northern section of the so called Fonnereau Way while a lorry was unloading. This road is not safe for pedestrians. This is contrary to the Design and Access Statement which states uses must be compatible with each other. Figure 1 does not take into account moving lorries and vehicles. Figure 2 (orange line) however indicates the new position for this so called Fonnereau Way which will avoid potential danger.

Change suggested by respondent:

Not specified

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26223

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Table 8B: "District & Local Centres including community buildings with integrated library facilities & police office (where required) alongside new health centre & reserved sites for community use."

NHS England are not dispensing new primary care contracts currently so the opportunities of establishing a new health centre in the Ipswich Garden Suburb are severely reduced. Mitigation for the increase in patients from the proposed Ipswich Garden Suburb will be spread between Two Rivers Medical Practice and the new healthcare facility at Tooks.

Change suggested by respondent:

Replace row in table 8B with recommendation.

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26249

Received: 27/02/2020

Respondent: Mrs D Wiseman

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Table 8B: Unclear whether infrastructure improvements to Fonnereau Way relate to exiting route currently defined or amended route within country park.

Change suggested by respondent:

Not specified

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26250

Received: 27/02/2020

Respondent: Mrs D Wiseman

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Table 8B: Comments below relate only to section cutting through the dwelling (Broadacres). NPPF paragraphs 58 and 69 and Section 18 of Crime and Disorder Act 1998 quoted. In the SPD, planned enhancement to northern end of Fonnereau Way wouldn't meet these acts/ policies. The existing way at Broadacres doesn't meet these acts and promotes anti-social behaviour. Suffolk Constabulary letter to IBC (August 2016) quoted. SPD an opportunity to phase out Broadacres route and eradicate threat of crime, vandalism and anti-social behaviour by keeping route within country park.

Change suggested by respondent:

The route through Broadacres should be phased out through the enhancements to the northern end of Fonnereau Way. The route should be confined to the country park.

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26261

Received: 28/02/2020

Respondent: Mr Paul Gilbert

Number of people: 2

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Table 8B: There is a need for a safer pedestrian and cycle track other than Broad Acres Farm entrance at northern end of Fonnereau Way. Council has failed to assess the needs as current footpath access is unsuitable for a cycle track. We had to negotiate 2 moving cars and a horse being moved on this access. There is no value enjoyment or country feel about walking through someones home. We were told recently that a new pedestrian way and cycle track would be opening on Lower Road, avoiding the farm, using country park. This is a much safer solution.

Change suggested by respondent:

Plan must be altered to show the new safer route through the country park.

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26266

Received: 26/02/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust (ESNEFT)

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

It is noted that health and emergency services are again referred to, although there is no specific reference to acute hospital facilities. Therefore, amendments requested.

Change suggested by respondent:

Page 203 – list of strategic infrastructure facilities. Under ‘Community facilities’ add the following to the description of facilities
"improved acute and general healthcare provision at Heath Road Hospital"

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26379

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

No firm proposals for new sewage infrastructure required for the IGS and the wider Ipswich area, which need to be consulted upon and included in the Infrastructure Tables. The 13 transport projects need to be included in the Infrastructure Tables. If any of projects aren't delivered by the required dates (which need to be identified) then the traffic modelling will be flawed as traffic flows will not have been properly assessed and the CS unsound. Evidence needed showing funding is in place for these schemes compatible with required delivery dates. Bramford Road/ Sproughton Road link road must be included.

Change suggested by respondent:

Include firm proposals for new sewage infrastructure in tables. Include 13 transport projects and dates for completion to deliver transport mitigation programme. Include Bramford Road/ Sproughton Road link Road (IP029).

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26506

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

No firm proposals for new sewage infrastructure required for the IGS and the wider Ipswich area, which need to be consulted upon and included in the Infrastructure Tables. The 13 transport projects need to be included in the Infrastructure Tables. If any of projects aren't delivered by the required dates (which need to be identified) then the traffic modelling will be flawed as traffic flows will not have been properly assessed and the CS unsound. Evidence needed showing funding is in place for these schemes compatible with required delivery dates. Bramford Road/ Sproughton Road link road must be included.

Change suggested by respondent:

Include firm proposals for new sewage infrastructure in tables. Include 13 transport projects and dates for completion to deliver transport mitigation programme. Include Bramford Road/ Sproughton Road link Road (IP029).

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Representation ID: 26573

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Table 8a is not in line with NPPF p.34 which explains that plans should set out the contributions expected from development. The plan needs updating to meet this requirement. Early Years: regarding demand in Gipping Ward, the table states that a new setting (e.g. a day nursery) is required, but no site is stated. IP279 would be the County Council’s preference. Primary provision: Cliff Lane Primary should be added to Table 8a for expansion. Secondary provision: Stoke High School and Chantry Academy are identified for expansion. SCC has reassessed and now considers that only Stoke High School needs to expand.

Change suggested by respondent:

The County Council will work with the Borough in reviewing the wording and costs in the table and will agree matters through a Statement of Common Ground. Early Years: IP279 would be the County Council’s preferred choice for a setting in Gipping Ward. The site sheet and entry in Table 1 of the Site Allocation Policies document should also be updated in line with this amendment. Primary provision: Cliff Lane Primary should be added to Table 8a (for expansion). Secondary provision: depending on the rate of delivery within Ipswich Garden Suburb, the Council considers that now only Stoke High School needs to expand.

Attachments: