Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Comment

Representation ID: 25020

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

SuDS can have not only a flood risk benefit, but can also be of benefit to biodiversity. All SuDS schemes should be designed with this dual benefit in mind, to maximise the opportunities for wildlife within new developments. Guidance on designing SuDS to benefit wildlife has been produce by the RSPB and WWT1 and provides examples of how their potential can be maximised for people and wildlife.

Comment

Representation ID: 25021

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

High quality design should maximise the ecological value of sites, by retaining and enhancing existing features and creating new ones. This can include the use of green roofs and landscape planting to aid connectivity, permeable boundaries to allow hedgehogs to move through the site, integrated roosting opportunities for bats and integrated nesting opportunities for birds such as swifts.

Comment

Representation ID: 25022

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

The vibrancy of tall buildings could be enhanced through the inclusion of swift nesting opportunities integrated into the fabric of the buildings. Such buildings provide ideal opportunities for swift nest boxes and can play a significant part in swift conservation.

Comment

Representation ID: 25023

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

Street trees should not only be protected, but should also be managed to maximise their biodiversity value in the long term. It should also be ensured that new and replacement trees are planted so that the current target of 22% cover by 2050 (in policy DM10) is met.

Comment

Representation ID: 25025

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

Provided that the standard set is appropriate and achievable, we consider that using a standards based approach is an adequate way of ensuring that sufficient open space is delivered.

Comment

Representation ID: 25026

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

Whilst we acknowledge that a new country park will be provided as part of the Ipswich Garden Suburb, we query whether this will address the existing deficit of accessible natural greenspace in the north of the town given the number of new residents that will result from the development? Opportunities to provide additional new accessible natural greenspace should be explored in order to address the existing deficit.

Comment

Representation ID: 25027

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

Whilst we appreciate that not all development can incorporate on-site open space, all developments can incorporate on-site greenspace. On small sites this can be achieved through the use of features such as green walls, green roofs and well-designed SuDS.

Comment

Representation ID: 25028

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

With regard to maximising the biodiversity value of open spaces, we consider that strategic management as part of the wider network of sites is likely to be most beneficial.

Comment

Representation ID: 25029

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

We consider that it is not possible to put forward a definitive figure for the width of the proposed 'green rim' as this will depend on a number of factors, including existing habitat features, existing land uses and the target habitats and species for the particular areas. The 'green rim' needs to be as wide as possible and also be connected to existing (and any new) green routes that run through the town.

Comment

Representation ID: 25030

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Wildlife Trust

The network needs to explore links into and out of the 'green rim', both into town and out into the surrounding districts. A joined up cross boundary approach should be taken to delivering the network on the edge of town and in Suffolk Coastal DC, Babergh DC and Mid Suffolk DC.