Object

Representation ID: 25981

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Detailed comments on archaeological constraints have, in the past, been included on the site sheets. The County Council would appreciate a discussion about reflecting detailed archaeological requirements as site-specific policy, as has become standard practice in other parts of the county.

See Appendix 4 for site-specific comments in respect of public rights of way.

Object

Representation ID: 25982

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

The reference to the scheduled monuments in the Development Principles section could be extended to say 'Development to address Scheduled Monuments and archaeology, including conservation principles and, where relevant, mitigation for impacts on archaeological remains and enhancement of public understanding'

Object

Representation ID: 25983

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Ancillary routes should acknowledge historic routes and features as appropriate (in order to aid public understanding and appreciation of heritage).

Object

Representation ID: 25984

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Ancillary routes should acknowledge historic routes and features as appropriate (in order to aid public understanding and appreciation of heritage).

Object

Representation ID: 25996

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

The Waste Core Strategy and SMWLP protect permitted and proposed waste facilities from being prejudiced by development within their proximity. This is defined as 250m from the boundary of the waste site. Table 1 (Appendix 3) shows the proposed Ipswich allocations that fall within this. At planning application stage the developer of these sites should demonstrate that development does not prevent the facility from operating, and that the users of the development are protected.

It is recommended that this requirement is included in the text for these sites. This also applies to minerals facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 25999

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

The majority of the allocations in Ipswich are within the Minerals Consultation Area (MCA), meaning that the County Council would normally seek to protect the resources on these sites. However most of these are too small to trigger policy MP10 in the SMWLP. Sites larger than five hectares within the MCA are shown in table 3 (Appendix 3). The table also identifies the predicted area of actual mineral in the site.

It is recommended that text is added to the plan explaining that use of minerals on site may be required by the County Council, as stated in the SMWLP.

Object

Representation ID: 26001

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

County will discuss these measures specifically with IBC, as part of work to determine a package of measures to promote healthy and sustainable travel, and ensure the Plan is deliverable. Pedestrianisation of some roads in the town centre may be desirable, but this would need to be tested for impacts on other modes (such buses) and for wider highway impacts.
Should be more specifically linked to public rights of way opportunities and should include wording to the effect of:
Linkages and enhancements to the public rights of way network beyond Ipswich.
Comments on specific sites are included in Appendix 4.

Object

Representation ID: 26002

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

The County Council does not support the allocation of site IP129 for housing. A bid has been submitted to the Department for Education to establish a Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Free School on this site. The site is currently owned by the DfE. A high-level feasibility has been undertaken which indicates that a 60-place school could be accommodated on the site in a two-storey building. As such the County Council asks that a policy framework be established to support the delivery of a school on this site.

Object

Representation ID: 26022

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

County would welcome the opportunity, as part of a broader discussion to promote sustainable transport, to discuss these proposed measures such as Park and Ride sites and improved sustainable links such as pedestrian/cycle bridges as means of developing a holistic package of improvements.

Object

Representation ID: 26023

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

The cancellation of TUOC will necessitate an amendment to this policy in respect of IP037. The County Council has committed £10.8m to contribute towards delivering crossings at Felaw Street (formerly known as Crossing B) and another at the Prince Phillip Lock (formerly known as Crossing C) to help enable the delivery of the Island site.