Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Search representations

Results for Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG search

New search New search

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Chapter 6 - Vision and Objectives

Representation ID: 26205

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

IBC healthcare provision equals 13 GP's, 2 branch surgeries, 36 pharmacists, 26 dental surgeries, 20 opticians, 1 Acute hospital and 6 clinics. The CCG, Local Authorities and local stakeholders has started addressing Primary Care capacity issues. These projects will deliver additional capacity to meet previously identified growth. Upon review some existing health infrastructure will require further investment/ improvement to meet the needs of growth in this LP. Growth would have an impact on healthcare provision which, if unmitigated, may not be sustainable. Provision needed to address development impact on health infrastructure and ensure timely cost-effective delivery of necessary infrastructure improvements.

Change suggested by respondent:

Implement recommendations set out in letter dated 18/02/2020.

Attachments:

Support

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy ISPA2 Strategic Infrastructure Priorities

Representation ID: 26206

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Representation Summary:

The CCG is very happy to see that health provision is identified as key infrastructure and will work with the council and alliance partners in providing holistic healthcare for the residents of Ipswich.

Change suggested by respondent:

N/A

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy ISPA4 Cross Boundary Working to Deliver Sites

Representation ID: 26207

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The agreement to work with ESC supported. Development near Humber Doucy Lane is within the catchment of Two Rivers Medical Centre and primary care provision would likely be prescribed here. However, the possibility of issues arising from developments near to local authority boundaries regarding healthcare provision is prevalent. The developments of IGS, continued development of Ravenswood and Whitton are examples of possible cross-boundary developments. Communication/ cooperation will be vital in making sure that appropriate stakeholders are aware and mitigation is sought in a timely manner. Make sure that the land North of Ipswich is accounted for in mitigating health.

Change suggested by respondent:

Not specified

Attachments:

Support

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy CS2 The Location and Nature of Development

Representation ID: 26208

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Representation Summary:

Designing developments in such a way that encourages the use of more sustainable modes of transport to get to community infrastructure is welcome and will help in the NHS preventative aspirations being obtained.

Change suggested by respondent:

N/A

Attachments:

Support

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy CS5 Improving Accessibility

Representation ID: 26209

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Representation Summary:

The accessibility of infrastructure is a key factor in designing a development that is aimed at meeting environmental and health objectives. Despite the desire to have all community infrastructure within easily accessible locations, it might not always be possible for health but this does not mean that community space could not be accessible to provide community healthcare services on an ad hoc basis.

Change suggested by respondent:

N/A

Attachments:

Support

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy CS8 Housing Type and Tenure

Representation ID: 26210

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Representation Summary:

The CCG and Alliance partners are willing to be involved in any discussions involving assisted living and residential care homes. This area of development puts strain on all healthcare providers and being involved in discussions from the earliest stage possible will help primary, secondary, community and mental health care mitigate the impact.

The provision of assisted living developments and residential care homes, although a necessary feature of care provision and welcomed, can pose significant impacts on local primary care provision and it is important that planners and developers engage early with the CCG, to plan and implement suitable mitigations.

Change suggested by respondent:

N/A

Attachments:

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy CS10 Ipswich Garden Suburb

Representation ID: 26211

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

NHS England are not dispensing new primary care contracts currently so the opportunities of establishing a new health centre in the Ipswich Garden Suburb are severely reduced. Despite the relatively large size of the garden suburb development, primary care will be provided for the new patients at both Two Rivers Medical Centre and the new health centre proposed at the Tooks Bakery site. Community health services might be provided closer to the development but discussions would need to be had with the Alliance partners.

Change suggested by respondent:

Remove "healthcare provision" from policy wording for the district centre element and update to reflect the absorption of capacity at Tooks/ Two Rivers Medical Centres.

Attachments:

Support

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy CS11 Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation

Representation ID: 26212

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Representation Summary:

The CCG will be happy to be involved in any proposed gypsy and traveller site discussions to ensure that the residents will be able to access primary care.

Change suggested by respondent:

N/A

Attachments:

Support

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy CS16 Green Infrastructure, Sport and Recreation

Representation ID: 26213

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Representation Summary:

The CCG welcomes the importance attributed to open spaces in the LP and is encouraged to see the health factors being taken into account as well as the environmental benefits.

Change suggested by respondent:

N/A

Attachments:

Support

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Review - Final Draft

Policy CS17 Delivering Infrastructure

Representation ID: 26214

Received: 21/02/2020

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Representation Summary:

S106 is very important when providing health infrastructure and up until recent this has just been accessible to primary care providers through the CCG. NHS England has now provided instructions that all health providers should be looking to request mitigation through S106 or CIL as part of the planning application response process. As part of this process, developments over 250 dwellings will automatically go to the Alliance partners in health for them to make representation and request mitigation. The inclusion of GP surgeries and health centres as key strategic infrastructure is to be commended as this will allow the CCG to strategically plan ahead with the understanding that providing the business case is sustainable it will more likely get approval.

Change suggested by respondent:

N/A

Attachments:

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.