ipswich.gov.uk
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Search representations
Results for Environment Agency search
New searchObject
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
g:
Representation ID: 5193
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Environment Agency
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Support but require changes. We support this approach of dispersing green open space through the town and providing an ecological network of green corridors. When incorporated into developments, these areas can have other functions, such providing space for SuDS features, which help to both reduce flood risk and protect water quality. We consider it would be beneficial to include these benefits within the text of this policy.
We support this approach of dispersing green open space through the town and providing an ecological network of green corridors. When incorporated into developments, these areas can have other functions, such providing space for SuDS features, which help to both reduce flood risk and protect water quality. We consider it would be beneficial to include these benefits within the text of this policy.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
8.45
Representation ID: 5194
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Environment Agency
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Support but require changes. We support this reference to the legislation and policy protecting natural assets. However, we consider that the Water Framework Directive should be included in list, as an important piece of legislation for the protection of waterbodies, which can have an indirect impact on EU Habitats Directive and Ramsar sites.
We support this reference to the legislation and policy protecting natural assets. However, we consider that the Water Framework Directive should be included in list, as an important piece of legislation for the protection of waterbodies, which can have an indirect impact on EU Habitats Directive and Ramsar sites.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
8.50
Representation ID: 5195
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Environment Agency
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Support but require changes. We support the inclusion of this paragraph, which discusses the importance of ecological networks in conserving important habitats and helping to provide resilience to pressures such as climate change. We are pleased to note that the Council recognises its biodiversity responsibility under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 and recommend that the Council's responsibilities under the Water Framework Directive are also recognised in this section.
We support the inclusion of this paragraph, which discusses the importance of ecological networks in conserving important habitats and helping to provide resilience to pressures such as climate change. We are pleased to note that the Council recognises its biodiversity responsibility under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 and recommend that the Council's responsibilities under the Water Framework Directive are also recognised in this section.
Support
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
8.186
Representation ID: 5196
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Environment Agency
We support Policy CS18, which demonstrates the Council's intention to work with partners, such as ourselves, to implement the Ipswich Flood Defence Strategy. We would suggest that the wording in this paragraph is amended to read - 'the tidal surge barrier is unlikely to be in place until the end of 2017'. This amendment should be reflected in other areas of the Local Plan where the completion date is given.
We support Policy CS18, which demonstrates the Council's intention to work with partners, such as ourselves, to implement the Ipswich Flood Defence Strategy. We would suggest that the wording in this paragraph is amended to read - 'the tidal surge barrier is unlikely to be in place until the end of 2017'. This amendment should be reflected in other areas of the Local Plan where the completion date is given.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
DM4 - Development and Flood Risk
Representation ID: 5197
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Environment Agency
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
We are very supportive of Policy DM4 We are pleased to note that the policy ensures that new development does not increase flood risk overall from any form of flooding. We consider that the policy could mention that the benefits of using SuDS include both flood risk and water quality.
Given the future of Suffolk County Council, as Lead Local Flood Authority, in surface water management, we would recommend you ensure that the County Council have been consulted on the wording of this policy.
We are very supportive of Policy DM4 We are pleased to note that the policy ensures that new development does not increase flood risk overall from any form of flooding. We consider that the policy could mention that the benefits of using SuDS include both flood risk and water quality.
Given the future of Suffolk County Council, as Lead Local Flood Authority, in surface water management, we would recommend you ensure that the County Council have been consulted on the wording of this policy.
Support
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
9.29
Representation ID: 5198
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Environment Agency
We are pleased that Table 7 includes the recommendation that 'layout should be designed so that the most vulnerable uses are restricted to higher ground at lower risk of flooding, with more flood-compatible development (parking, open space etc.) in the highest risk areas'.
We are pleased that Table 7 includes the recommendation that 'layout should be designed so that the most vulnerable uses are restricted to higher ground at lower risk of flooding, with more flood-compatible development (parking, open space etc.) in the highest risk areas'.
