Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
Search representations
Results for Suffolk Constabulary search
New searchObject
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
DM12
Representation ID: 26109
Received: 01/04/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary
The Council has committed to creating safe and secure communities and this should be reinforced by requiring that all new and refurbished developments must comply with the relevant SBD guide (as opposed to the current statement that consideration be given to it). Section a should be amended thus 'help create safe and secure communities by complying with the relevant Secured By Design guide.' This policy should also highlight the broader elements of designing out crime, beyond lighting and CCTV. See full text for suggested wording as a replacement to paragraph 9.12.
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
DM13
Representation ID: 26110
Received: 01/04/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary
In order to ensure that listed buildings are not allowed to suffer repeated damage or unauthorised access, it is recommended that paragraph 9.13.17 is amended to include the following 'In assessing applications for retrofitting sustainability measures to historic buildings the Council will take into consideration the public benefits gained from the improved energy efficiency and security of those buildings....;
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
DM16
Representation ID: 26111
Received: 01/04/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary
Section d should be amended as follows ' would not adversely affect the residential amenity of occupants of nearby properties, particularly in terms of privacy, light, security or overbearing impact. A further section should also be added — i) it is built in accordance with SBD Homes guidance. Paragraph 9.16.2 refers to extensions being set back from the building line by four metres. There is a danger that this will create blind spots not subject to natural surveillance and this must be taken into consideration
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
DM19
Representation ID: 26112
Received: 01/04/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary
Section e should be amended thus — 'incorporates a secure front door for each unit of accommodation and provides an appropriate standard of residential amenity including secure windows, CCTV coverage of the communal entrances and provision for secure mail delivery.'
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
DM20
Representation ID: 26113
Received: 01/04/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary
The word permeability should be removed from `d' in order to promote security and the following addition made; d. promote pedestrian and cycle accessibility to and within the site, ensuring that any new routes are coherent, clearly segregated for pedestrians and cyclists, overlooked and in accordance with the design principles of policy DM12.
See Scanned Representation.
Object
Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review
DM21
Representation ID: 26114
Received: 01/04/2019
Respondent: Suffolk Constabulary
The presumption must be in favour of in curtilage parking and non-secure under-croft parking must be avoided. Where communal parking is necessary, rear parking courtyards must be avoided and owners should be able to view their vehicles from active rooms within the building. SBD guidance must be followed when providing underground parking to ensure that it is safe and secure.
See Scanned Representation.