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

Object

Representation ID: 26399

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Existing green rim is an asset and should be protected by adding it to CS4, especially as IBC have previously massively reduced its size and are now attempting to reclassify it and destroy it. Not clear what RAMS S106 payments agreed with CBRE and Crest sites as S106 are not publicly available. If no RAMS tariffs included in the S106 agreements this could be in breach of this SPD and policies CS4, CS17 and Policy DM31 of the adopted CS. New CS would be unsound in relation to CS4 CS17 and DM 8 as no means of funding the required.

Object

Representation ID: 26401

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Strongly disagree with the proposed change to replace “green rim” with “green trail”. The existing green rim is an asset and should be protected by adding it to Policy CS4, especially as Ipswich Borough Council have previously massively reduced its size and are now attempting to
reclassify it and hence destroy it. Change in name is misleading and is actually to bring forward land at Humber Doucy Lane for development. Non-compliant with DM8. See appendix 1 for history of the green rim/ corridors. No mention of the green rim/ trail being used in the Ipswich Cycling Strategy.

Object

Representation ID: 26402

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Argued for years that previous homes and employment targets set by IBC were too high, unrealistic and based upon flawed evidence. Now clear that previous Plans
were unsound and were therefore sub-optimal for Ipswich as we argued strongly at the time. Disappointing that IBC has taken so long to accept this. The proposed lower targets are more realistic. Agree with IBC that it has established a 5- year land supply of 5.06 years including a 20% buffer or contingency in the 5-year supply. Potential impact of Sizewell C on IGS and CS has not been assessed (rail freight Ipswich-Westerfield).

Object

Representation ID: 26403

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

This needs to include the following highway schemes that SCC assumes will proceed in Ipswich in its ISPA LOCAL PLAN MODELLING Methodology Report Table 3-2 along with the dates they are required by. Without these being implemented the modelling work, and hence the CS is unsound. See 12 highways schemes listed in attached letter. This list excludes improvements to the Henley Road/Dale Hall Lane junctions with Valley Road which are required to be delivered by Crest Nicholson. Needs to be confirmed whether this infrastructure project has been included and modelled accordingly. Support the inclusion of sewage infrastructure in ISPA2.

Object

Representation ID: 26404

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Sewage infrastructure should be included. No agreed sewage infrastructure. If sewage infrastructure cannot be provided at the right time and right price for the IGS (as a whole) then IGS cannot be delivered in accordance with the Plan. All off-line sewage storage should be provided on-site. Not clear what RAMS S106 payments agreed with CBRE and Crest as S106 not public. If no RAMS tariffs included this could be in breach of SPD and policies CS4, CS17 and DM31 of adopted CS. New CS unsound in relation to CS4 CS17 and DM8 as no means of funding the required.

Object

Representation ID: 26407

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

At the Executive meeting 9th July 2019 Ipswich Borough Council Declared a Climate Emergency and will begin working to become carbon neutral by 2030. This commitment will clearly impact on the CS and needs to be referenced here and in relation to other relevant policies e.g. DM1 and DM2 for the CS to be sound. This would be consistent with the Court of Appeal’s ruling on 27/02/20 that the government's Heathrow's expansion decision was unlawful because it did not take climate commitments into account.

Object

Representation ID: 26408

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

At the Executive meeting 9th July 2019 Ipswich Borough Council Declared a Climate Emergency and will begin working to become carbon neutral by 2030. This commitment will clearly impact on the CS and needs to be referenced here and in relation to other relevant policies e.g. DM1 and DM2 for the CS to be sound. This would be consistent with the Court of Appeal’s ruling on 27/02/20 that the government's Heathrow's expansion decision was unlawful because it did not take climate commitments into account.

Object

Representation ID: 26409

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Existing green rim is an asset and should be protected by adding it to CS4, especially as IBC have previously massively reduced its size and are now attempting to reclassify it and destroy it. Not clear what RAMS S106 payments agreed with CBRE and Crest sites as S106 are not publicly available. If no RAMS tariffs included in the S106 agreements this could be in breach of this SPD and policies CS4, CS17 and Policy DM31 of the adopted CS. New CS would be unsound in relation to CS4 CS17 and DM 8 as no means of funding the required.

Object

Representation ID: 26410

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Not clear what RAMS S106 payments agreed with CBRE and Crest sites as S106 are not publicly available. If no RAMS tariffs included in the S106 agreements this could be in breach of this SPD and policies CS4, CS17 and Policy DM31 of the adopted CS. New CS would be unsound in relation to CS4 CS17 and DM 8 as no means of funding the required.

Object

Representation ID: 26413

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Only two major changes to cycle network since adopted CS. Lack of commitment to maintain existing network and cycle infrastructure poor. Need to evidence initiatives implemented and modal shift achieved. No progress in meeting requirements of CS5. SCC draft local cycling & walking infrastructure plan referenced. Clear that without major improvements there is no chance of modal shift being achieved. Cycling/ walking is unattractive, unsafe, incoherent and uncomfortable. Bus routes just go into town rather than radial. Investment in bus network required. No money allocated over four-year period to improving air quality, delivering modal shift or improving cycle/ pedestrian infrastructure.