ipswich.gov.uk
Policy DM12 Design and Character
Support
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft
Representation ID: 26220
Received: 21/02/2020
Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG
Designs that have a multi-functional use in a commercial or community building could help provide the flexibility required to deal with future demand whichever form this might evolve. NHS organisations are beginning to design buildings with this multi-functionality in mind so that rooms can be accessed by multiple organisations, each performing a different service. The CCG welcomes the importance attributed to open spaces in the LP and is encouraged to see the health factors being taken into account as well as the environmental benefits.
N/A
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft
Representation ID: 26272
Received: 27/02/2020
Respondent: Habinteg Housing Association
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Strongly support the approach to Part M4(2) accessible and adaptable homes, which ensures that a proportion of new homes will be accessible. However, the plan should use a narrower definition for when the standard may not be applied, which firmly places the burden of proof onto the developer. This will help minimise instances where compliance is argued out during the application process. Ipswich should also set the same requirement for wheelchair user dwellings as the London Plan: 10% of new homes to comply with Part M4(3) Standard (the other 90% to be built to part M4(2) accessible and adaptable standard).
Habinteg believe that all new homes should be built to Part M4(2) accessible and adaptable to help meet the national accessible homes deficit. We believe the 'waiver' language should be firmer, so that there is a narrower definition given for when the standard may not be applied. A definition which firmly places the burden of proof onto the developer which will help minimise instances where compliance with the policy is argued out during the planning permission process. Alongside an increased supply of accessible and adaptable homes it is critical that an adequate number of homes are built to Category M4(3) wheelchair user dwelling standard. We would therefore like to see Ipswich set a similar requirement for wheelchair user dwellings as that set down in the London Plan which requires that, 10% of new homes comply with Part M4(3) Standard (the other 90% required to be built to part M4(2) accessible and adaptable standard).
Support
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft
Representation ID: 26282
Received: 28/02/2020
Respondent: Sport England
We support this policy, as it adds supporting text promoting the use of Sport England’s ‘Active Design’ guidance.
N/A
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft
Representation ID: 26318
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
In Policy DM12, point d. there should be an inclusion of the potential for installation of green roofs and walls as part of the strategy to introduce greener streets and spaces. This would make a more robust argument for the requirement for net gains in biodiversity.
point d. there should be an inclusion of the potential for installation of green roofs and walls as part of the strategy to introduce greener streets and spaces.
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft
Representation ID: 26430
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Persimmon Homes
Agent: Persimmon Homes
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
No justification has been provided on why there is a need for 25% of all housing on major developments to be designed to Part M4(2) standards in policy DM12. Without justification it could be argued that this figure is too high, as there may be possible overlap between the provision of specialist housing and the provision market housing, on the final delivery of M4(2) housing. This policy would not therefore be effective over the plan period. Persimmon also endorse the statements made by the HBF.
Not specified
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft
Representation ID: 26474
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Associated British Ports
Agent: Associated British Ports
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
ABP is supportive of IBC’s desire for all new development to be well designed and sustainable, for 25% of new dwellings to be built to Building Regulations standard M4(2), and for proposals to respect the special character and distinctiveness of Ipswich including ensuring good public realm design. However, this should not be at the expense of development viability and the policy should be applied flexibly in the context of the objective to achieve sustainable regeneration.
Not specified