Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Comment

Representation ID: 25060

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

As these authorities appear to be concentrating new developments on the boundaries of Ipswich, placing pressure on Ipswich's infrastructure we believe it is reasonable for some increased development beyond the Ipswich Borough boundary.

Comment

Representation ID: 25061

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

The policy approach of maintaining the physical separation of villages from Ipswich should be continued.

Comment

Representation ID: 25062

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Regardless of the approach taken, improving accessibility between homes and work places must be a priority when developing the Local Plans and assessing infrastructure requirements. A full cross-boundary Transport Assessment of the impact of draft Local Plans is required before they can be finalised.

Comment

Representation ID: 25063

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Yes, a scenario that takes account of BREXIT, including weaker sterling levels, should be assessed. We note that paragraph 5.38 of the SHMA states that a 10 year scenario was ruled out because of the low levels of international migration following the recession. However, this type of scenario is far more likely given BREXIT and the much weaker pound, which have slashed the attractiveness of the UK to EU workers. Growth should go where it is sustainable. The Local Plan growth agenda is unsustainable. A clear and unequivocal determination of wider infrastructure needs, and funding to meet them, is needed.

Comment

Representation ID: 25064

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

No. Ipswich Borough cannot meet its current OAN target. Any increase in homes targets would clearly not deliver any more affordable housing in the Borough due to land constraints. We support IBC building affordable housing on its own land but as it already plans to do this, increasing the homes target will have no effect on numbers delivered. Affordable housing will only be provided in Ipswich Borough by commercial developers if it is viable to do so. Increasing the Ipswich OAN will not result in increased affordable housing outside the Borough as IBC would have little say in planning applications.

Comment

Representation ID: 25065

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Yes, but this question misses the point of addressing the current levels of congestion, which will only increase under the current Local Plan proposals. It is critical for Ipswich that the Local Plan Review addresses the current severe congestion in the local road network, especially through Ipswich, that regularly occurs even without the closure of the Orwell Bridge. A roadworks permit system for Ipswich Borough will help ease congestion.

Comment

Representation ID: 25066

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

All of these need to be provided to meet the current Local Plan targets. It is critical for Ipswich that the Local Plan Review seeks to address the severe congestion in the local road network that regularly occurs even without the closure of the Orwell Bridge. A roadworks permit system for Ipswich Borough is a must-have. A full cross-boundary Transport Assessment for the draft Local Plans is required to determine what additional transport infrastructure is required and where and when. If it cannot be provided then higher targets cannot be set, as it would be unsustainable to do so.

Comment

Representation ID: 25067

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

No. Communities will not accept higher growth targets until such improvements are delivered and are shown to be effective. There are already sizeable new housing developments planned in and around Ipswich. Higher targets should not be set until there is robust evidence that infrastructure can cope with the current planned expansion. E.g. there is major concern on how the road network will cope with the Ipswich Garden Suburb development and the impacts of this need to be monitored and appraised as it is built out before setting higher targets. There are also concerns over sewage and fresh water infrastructure.

Comment

Representation ID: 25068

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Housing Target: Yes. As the Government's White Paper clearly shows, the OAN for Ipswich Borough is too high and should be revised downwards.
Jobs Target: Yes. The EEFM forecast is clearly not "trend-based" and it is extremely misleading to imply that it is. It is too high as evidenced by the Experian figure in the Ipswich SHMA report, which should be used for Ipswich Borough. This is still far higher than historic trends.
We have a number of concerns with the underlying evidence basis for this section. [Please refer to full comments for more detail].

Comment

Representation ID: 25069

Received: 31/10/2017

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

None of these, as they take no account of BREXIT and of the Government's most recent Housing White Paper. A more realistic growth scenario based on the Government's White paper target and the Experian jobs target should be adopted, which we note is far higher than historic trends. We have a number of concerns with the underlying evidence basis for this section in relation to the OAN for the Ipswich Housing Market Area (HMA) and individual local planning authorities which have been assessed through a SHMA report, May 2017. [Please see full comment for more detail].