Preferred Options Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) Review

Object

Representation ID: 25661

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

IBC is failing to improve access in Ipswich in breach of Policy CS5. More needs to be done otherwise the modal switch assumptions used in the traffic modelling are too high and unsound.

During the duration of the current Local Plan and despite the agreement of the Cycling SPD, we have seen no improvements to the cycle network. All that has happened is the removal of the cycle lane of Felixstowe Road and the Cornhill works which have blocked a cycle route.

Evidence of improvements since the cycling SPD was adopted should be provided.

Object

Representation ID: 25662

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

The CS should comply with Government advice to use the Standard method annual 2014 (445) figures (Government October 2018 consultation) for housing targets.
The evidence base ignores latest population and employment figures. It fails to consider potential impacts for the Core Strategy of the drop of employed people from 67,300 to 66,500 in the latest NOMIS figures.
The CS gives misleading impressions of continued population growth, when it is currently stagnant. The evidence base needs to consider the impacts of the latest population figure of 138,500 (2017) is the same as 2016, as the fall-off in population growth has implications.

Object

Representation ID: 25663

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

The evidence base ignores latest population and employment figures. It fails to consider the potential impacts of the drop of employment people from 67,300 to 66,500 in the latest NOMIS figures.

Evidence clearly demonstrates that Ipswich employment is considerably exposed to macro-economic events and that it is far too simplistic and incorrect to assume steady straight-line jobs growth, which is more removed from reality. Refinement of the employment modelling is required. The jobs creation numbers are not realistic. "Jobs" needs to be defined and "encourage" changed to "aims to deliver".

Paragraph 41 of the Topic Paper is incorrect.

Object

Representation ID: 25664

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

The proposal to allow development in north-east Ipswich at the northern end of Humber Doucy Lane and Tuddenham Road is unsound. The Settlement Sensitivity Assessment recognises the sensitivity of the open land and in our view this land is too important and sensitive to be built on.

Additional homes should be provided in the empty retail shops and vast allocations in the town centre instead.

Traffic modelling shows that there will be significant over-capacity.

There should be no development here until the completion of the IGS. This needs to be made clear.

Object

Representation ID: 25665

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

New objectives are required to ensure delivery of key aspects of the Core Strategy such as improving transport infrastructure, improving air quality, delivering modal shift and improving accessibility are required. These need to be monitored and reported on.

Object

Representation ID: 25668

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Objective 6.8.6 needs to be amended to include the requirement of a northern route around Ipswich to deliver the Local Plan and for consistency with Policy ISPA2 Strategic Infrastructure Priorities a) Ipswich Northern Routes.

Objective 6.8.7, and the rest of the Core Strategy document, needs to be updated to recognise that a new flood barrier is already in place

Object

Representation ID: 25669

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

The allocations of land at the northern end of Humber Doucy Lane (ISPA 4) is in breach of policies CS16 (Green Rim), DM8 (The Natural Environment), DM10 (Green Corridors) and is also counter to the principles of policy DM11 (Countryside).

This allocation is also in breach of the current Core Strategy in relation to corresponding policies and Diagram 3 (The Ipswich Core Diagram) where it is designated as Green Rim. Insufficient evidence has been provided to justify this change of classification from countryside.

The North East Character Study recognises the benefits of this site as a rural buffer.

Object

Representation ID: 25671

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Support the intention to undertake an update to the Retail and Leisure Study to determine whether the standard floorspace forecasts need to be moderated to accurately reflect recent trends. The study needs to consider whether there is enough demand to maintain the current town centre or whether more of it might be developed for housing instead of Humber Doucy Lane.

We question the need to allocate part of the Westgate Site, the Mint Quarter and extended the Central Shopping Area.

The forecast jobs growth in the retail sector is questioned and needs to be reassessed.

Object

Representation ID: 25672

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

The proposed allocation of land for housing at the northern end of Humber Doucy Lane is in breach of this policy.

Object

Representation ID: 25673

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Concerned that the development of the IGS without adequate new road infrastructure will severely impact on traffic congestion and air quality.

The Transport Assessment indicate that some form of relief road or northern bypass will be required in the north of Ipswich. This is recognised in policy ISPA2. The need for Ipswich Northern Routes to deliver IBC's CS Preferred Options needs to be more strongly reflected in the CS. The implications of the timing or non-delivery of a northern relief road need to be assessed and planned for. It should be added to tables 8A and 8B.