Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
Search representations
Results for Save Our Country Spaces search
New searchObject
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
CS13: Planning for Jobs Growth
Representation ID: 5587
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The target of 12,500 jobs to be delivered 2011-2031 is unrealistic and undeliverable as to date there has been no real jobs growth since 2001 and public sector jobs are set to reduce. This is unsustainable and non compliant with the NPPF. SOCS support the aspiration but believe that according to our research and evaluation over time, since 2001, that there is no indication as to how this can or will be achieved. Endorse the Northern Fringe Protection Group's points also.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
CS14: Retail Development and Main Town Centre Uses
Representation ID: 5591
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Will the proposed retail and shopping centre plan be achievable and make Ipswich a better place? SOCS endorse the Northern Fringe Protection Group's points also.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
CS2: The Location and Nature of Development
Representation ID: 5617
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
For improved effectiveness and soundness it is recommended a target be reinstated for the use of brownfield land with priority given to regenerating these sites in preference to developing the Northern Fringe greenfield site. [SOCS endorse Northern Fringe Protection Group points also].
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
4.2
Representation ID: 5691
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
SOCS endorse NFPG points. Until recently there has been little public evidence of around engaging and reaching agreement with neighbouring authorities on housing, economy and infrastructure despite the IPA Board. Ipswich was not involved in the commissioning of the 2012 Strategic Housing Market Assessment. Welcome the more recent increased frequency of meetings an transparency of the Board. There is no evidence of strategic policy outcomes from the IPA. There are no published joint topic papers. Individual jobs targets for Ipswich and neighbouring authorities are unrealistic when compared with the January 2015 East of England Forecasting Model forecasts.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
CS9: Previously Developed Land
Representation ID: 5692
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
SOCS endorse Northern Fringe Protection Group points. The proposed removal of the 60% target for development on brownfield land is a negative step.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
10: Table 8A
Representation ID: 5693
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
SOCS endorse Northern Fringe Protection Group points. There is no evidence of objectively assessed needs for freshwater and foul water infrastructure or to strategic solutions, and no listing in the infrastructure tables.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
8.205
Representation ID: 5695
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
SOCS endorse the Northern Fringe Protection Group's points. Air quality issues, which are likely to be made worse by increasing traffic congestion, may also impact on the effectiveness of the Core Strategy. The 2014 Air Quality Annual Report (July 2014) shows exceedances of nitrogen dioxide at locations within and outside of the Air Quality Management Areas. The Council needs to provide evidence that air pollution will not breach legal limits.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
CS12: Affordable Housing
Representation ID: 5697
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
SOCS endorse the Northern Fringe Protections Group's points. The Ipswich Viability Report showed that 'the indicative scheme average equated to 31.6% affordable housing provision by number and 28.4% by floor space, alongside the full provision of infrastructure.' It is therefore unsound to set a target of 35%. Since the Garden suburb infrastructure costs were developed other costs have arisen due to wastewater infrastructure.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
6.7 The Vision
Representation ID: 5699
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
SSOCS endorse the NFPG's points. Support the vision but consider the strategy will not deliver it. The development of the Garden Suburb will result in severe congestion in north Ipswich and the town centre. Proposals to increase opportunities for buses, walking and cycling to the town centre are flawed as evidence challenges the viability of job creation in the town centre. Homes growth without jobs and sustainable transport will result in more commuting. This will harm prospects for investment. Updated traffic modelling and air quality modelling must be undertaken.
See attached.
Object
Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review
8.21
Representation ID: 5700
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
SOCS endorse the NFPG's points. The Core Strategy fails to take sufficient account of the waste water issues arising from proposed expansion of Ipswich. The Draft Strategic Economic Plan identified the scale and cost of new connections as inhibiting development of some strategic sites. The Water Cycle Study shows that significant upgrading is required to wastewater treatment capacity. The pipeline from north Ipswich to Cliff Quay is at capacity and no viable solutions for the Garden Suburb have been proposed. This could seriously undermine the delivery of the Core Strategy.
See attached.