Object

Representation ID: 26390

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Would like to highlight that the equivalent policy in the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan includes reference to police, community safety and cohesion provision and green infrastructure and suitable alternative natural green space. Suggested that policy ISPA2 should also reference these strategic priorities. This would align the policy with the Statement of Common Ground between ISPA authorities which specifically references these points. IBC will be aware that following the publication of the Ipswich Local Plan Review Final Draft, there have been recent announcements relating to ceasing the Ipswich Northern Routes project.

Support

Representation ID: 26391

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

The Council is supportive of the commitment to address the issue of recreational impact avoidance and mitigation through continued joint working. This policy reflects the equivalent policy within the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan (Policy SCLP2.3) and is considered by the council to be sound.

Support

Representation ID: 26392

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

Supportive of general principles regarding the development of land at Humber Doucy Lane. Approach is complementary of the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan policy for land at Humber Doucy Lane, and along with other policies and allocations in Ipswich Local Plan Final Draft, contributes towards the outcome outlined in the Statement of Common Ground of each local planning authority meeting housing need within their own area.

In particular, the Council supports the 30% affordable housing requirement for ISPA4 which complements the affordable housing policy in the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 26393

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Suggested that policy for development at northern end of Humber Doucy Lane references maintenance of separation between Ipswich and surrounding settlements, for consistency with DM11. Noted that ISPA4 infers that SANGs will be required on both sides of Borough boundary. For clarity and to enable provision for SANGs to be considered through project level Habitats Regulations Assessment, and to be reflective of plan level HRA, policy could provide appropriate level of flexibility by not specifying that SANGs be located on both sides of boundary. Suitable Accessible Natural Greenspaces should be changed to Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspaces to reflect term SANGs.

Support

Representation ID: 26394

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

The Council welcomes the protection of physical separation between Ipswich and Westerfield village. This accords with Policy SCLP10.5 of the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan which aims to prevent the development of land that leads to urbanising effects between settlements.

CS10 also facilitates a country park towards the north of the Ipswich Garden Suburb and the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan carries forward the allocation of land as part of the country park (Policy SCLP12.23).

This approach is considered by the Council to be sound.

Object

Representation ID: 26397

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Supportive of Plan seeking to identify land within Borough for permanent Gypsy and Traveller pitches to meet identified need. Statement of Common Ground states that each local authority's plan will meet its own need and address delivery. Where capacity cannot be met within the authority's boundary, comprehensive re-assessment of deliverability will be undertaken. ISPA board will consider how unmet need can be met within the ISPA. Noted that CS11 includes reference to developing short stay site between Ipswich and Felixstowe - policy should apply flexibility in meeting short stay needs to be consistent with approach in Statement of Common Ground.

Support

Representation ID: 26400

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

The Council supports and welcomes the approach of working with partners in respect of the Recreational Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy and a new country park with the Ipswich Garden Suburb. Both of the aforementioned aspects of this policy are reflective of the joint working being undertaken by the Council and IBC.

The Council also supports joint working with IBC and other neighbouring authorities to deliver strategic green infrastructure. In particular, the establishment of a green trail around Ipswich is reflected in Policy SCLP12.24 in the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan.

Object

Representation ID: 26405

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Categories detailed in CS17 broadly in line with infrastructure commitments in SCLP2.2 of the Suffolk Coastal Final Draft Local Plan. Requirement for cross-boundary cooperation identified in Statement of Common Ground. Noted that CS17 refers to infrastructure to be secured from new development including early years provision. However, not clear in Table 8A of the plan whether early years provision in north east Ipswich is identified as an infrastructure priority, consistent with the Statement of Common Ground. Council has included criterion within SCLP12.24 for provision of early years setting on site, if needed. Recommend that this is replicated in ISPA4.

Support

Representation ID: 26412

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

The Council is supportive of IBC's positive commitment to the delivery and funding of mitigation through a transport mitigation strategy as part of collaborative working through the ISPA board. This is consistent with the ISPA Statement of Common Ground which sets out a commitment to produce a mitigation and funding strategy to mitigate the highways impact of growth across the ISPA authorities. The potential measures outlined in Policy CS20 are consistent with the potential measures outlined in the Suffolk County Council's Transport Mitigtaion Strategy.

Support

Representation ID: 26421

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: East Suffolk Council

Agent: East Suffolk Council

The Council notes IBC's air quality screening study, as part of the new evidence base documents for the IBC Local Plan Review. The air quality screening has considered growth across the ISPA and the Council would note that there are potential linkages with the mitigation outlined to deliver modal shift through an ISPA transport mitigation strategy.