Object

Representation ID: 24374

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Number of people: 100

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Travel Ipswich needs to meet its 15% target in order for the Local plan to be delivered in a sustainable and effective manner. Evidence indicates that the expected modal shift of Travel Ipswich has not materialised. It calls into question the validity of the traffic modelling to mirror real life experience. Traffic assessments underpinning the local plan should be subject to independent examination. IBC and the Highways Authority should implement additional measures to mitigate the impact on traffic caused by growth. The SA fails to take into account the risk of non¬delivery of the 15% target. Revised text is proposed.

Object

Representation ID: 24376

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Number of people: 100

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

The proposed change would allow development that creates "significant adverse impact" and would 'significantly' increase the risk of road traffic injuries. This is not sustainable and should not be permitted. The road network in Ipswich is already experiencing significant adverse impact. This change will not deliver the infrastructure requirements that are needed to meet other CS policies e.g.for jobs and the town centre as well as detrimentally affecting public health due to poor air quality. Traffic congestion is already a major concern to existing town centre business and a barrier to new businesses moving to the town centre.

Object

Representation ID: 24377

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Number of people: 100

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

We are concerned that the IGS infrastructure triggers have been removed from the Local Plan and are now assumed to form part of an IGS Infrastructure Delivery Plan. Our concern is that by removing the triggers from the Local Plan they will carry less weight, there is no certainty of community groups being consulted/involved in the formulation of the Infrastructure delivery plan and there is an increased risk of the infrastructure not being delivered or watered down as a consequence