Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Back to document

Search representations

Results for Ravenswood Environmental Group search

New search

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Chapter 1 - Introduction

Representation ID: 26331

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The plan is poorly prepared and presented and is very difficult to read. It lacks justification and its policies are neither useful to developers or decisionmakers. It is the most poorly presented plan in the region. It needs to demonstrate cross boundary working as happens in Greater Norwich and Greater Cambridge and it needs criteria based policies so that it can be held to account by the public and used successfully by developers. It is vague and the environmental impacts are not justified.

Change suggested by respondent:

The plan needs to be rewritten following a proper cooperation with the public and neighbouring Councils.

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Policy SP2 - Land Allocated for Housing

Representation ID: 26332

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Not justified

Change suggested by respondent:

Plan needs to be rewritten to justify sites with criteria based policies which deal with the mitigation of development impacts.

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Chapter 1 - Introduction

Representation ID: 26333

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The plan has not been positively prepared and is poorly presented in an illogical way. There is no cooperation between local authorities such as has happened around Cambridge or Norwich. The plan contains disjointed lists of sites and does nothing to assist decision makers to establish what is or is not acceptable or how various constraints would be overcome.

Change suggested by respondent:

Rewrite the plan. Cooperate properly with the public and cross border authorities.

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

IP150a – Ravenswood S & T (Adjacent Fen Bright Circle)

Representation ID: 26334

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The Online consultation refers to this as being sites Sand T but these were built out prior to April 2019, The correct reference should be sites U, V, W. It is questioned whether these can be stated as having planning permission as they relate to an historic Outline Planning Permission which is no longer extant.

Change suggested by respondent:

The plan should contain a policy which explains what is proposed for sites U, V , W given that the sites no longer have planning consent and it would be unreasonable to rely on an old planning permission to guide what would be proposed. The site has been removed from the plan without justification.

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Policy SP7 – Land Allocated for Leisure Uses or Community Facilities

Representation ID: 26335

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The Sports Park proposal is vague and unjustified. The plan does not explain what a sports park is or how the ecological impacts of its development would be mitigated

Change suggested by respondent:

Delete the proposed sports park from the plan Site IP150b

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Policy SP5 – Land Allocated for Employment Use

Representation ID: 26336

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The Ravenswood employment sites should be planned so as to mitigate traffic impacts and be masterplanned with residential development

Change suggested by respondent:

The whole area should be masterplanned so that environmental impacts are considered.

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Policy SP2 - Land Allocated for Housing

Representation ID: 26337

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The Policy is supported by site sheets in an appendix. The appendix should make it clear that the site sheets are or are not part of the plan. The plan is vague and unjustified. Site IP150 e is adjacent to other sites such as IP150c and IP150e and IP150d. These are geographically related but they are separate in the plan. There is no justification for this piecemeal approach. The plan highlights serious traffic, air-quality, ecology, amenity and heritage constraints but does nothing to resolve these and does not insist upon materplanning and effective mitigation.

Change suggested by respondent:

Propose a new policy to present all of the plans for Ravenswood so that the various sites can be effectively masterplanned and environmental mitigation proposed. It is unacceptable to propose development only with a list of issues whilst not inviting or suggesting how these would be resolved.

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Site Ref: IP150d (Policy SP2) Land south of Ravenswood

Representation ID: 26338

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Site IP150d is proposed for 34 homes but its contrived and unjustified shape demonstrates that it cannot accommodate 34 homes as frontage development. The site is of considerable ecological value and is used as Public Open Space. If it is to be developed then it should be masterplanned with other sites as part of one mixed use criteria based policy

Change suggested by respondent:

Delete site 150d

Object

Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Policy SP5 – Land Allocated for Employment Use

Representation ID: 26339

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The plan is proposes site IP152 and site IP150c for a total of 30,000 sqm of business and industry and sui generis uses. There is absolutely no justification for this significant development and no explanation of how it will relate to site IP150b and IP150e when traffic, air quality, noise, heritage and ecological constraints must be resolved comprehensively. The plan does nothing to justify or mitigate its impacts and does not insist upon a new major access to this development area. It merely implies that impacts need to be looked at. Masterplanning and EIA must be insisted upon

Change suggested by respondent:

Rewrite the plan to provide a criteria based policy which only proposes development upon evidence that the impacts can be mitigated on a comprehensive basis