Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Search representations
Results for Suffolk County Council search
New searchObject
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: IP010a (Policy SP2, SP7 & SP9) Co-Op Depot Felixstowe Road
Representation ID: 26595
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Site Sheet for Site IP010a - This part of the plan is not sound because it is not effective. The County Council welcome that the need to expand the school has been recognised within the plan, however feasibility work which has been undertaken since the preferred options consultation of the plan show that the area of land needed to expand the school is 0.8ha.
The area of land needed to expand the school is 0.8ha.
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: IP048a (Policy SP2, SP6 & SP17) Mint Quarter/ Cox Lane East Regeration Area
Representation ID: 26598
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Site Sheet for Site IP048a - This part of the plan is not sound because it is not effective. Included among the uses of this site should be an early years setting to accompany the new primary school. The 60 place early years setting, which is necessary on this site to mitigate impacts of plan growth, is accounted for in Table 8a of the Core Strategy document. However, this should also be included on the site sheet in order to provide certainty in delivering an early years setting on this site.
The 60 place early years setting, which is necessary on this site to mitigate impacts of plan growth, is accounted for in Table 8a of the Core Strategy document. However, this should also be included on the site sheet in order to provide certainty in delivering an early years setting on this site.
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: 26600
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Table 1 of the Site Allocations Policies document - this part of the plan is not sound because it is not effective. The entry for site IP048a and IP037 on this table should include an early years setting, to provide certainty in delivering an early years setting on this site, in order to mitigate the impacts of growth on the provision of early education.
The entry for site IP048a and IP037 on this table should include an early years setting, to provide certainty in delivering an early years setting on this site, in order to mitigate the impacts of growth on the provision of early education.
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: IP028b (Policy SP4) Jewsons, Greyfriars Road
Representation ID: 26604
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The text refers to Archaeological Character Zone 2, but the site lies within Archaeological Character Zone 1b, for the Historic Core, and is therefore of a higher sensitivity than indicated on the site sheet. This text should be corrected to ensure that heritage assets are appropriately identified and approached by development. New text is proposed at the start of the paragraph after the heading 'Development Constraints' and existing text should be amended as follows: delete sentence 'This site likely lies in ...' and sentence 'Stratigraphy may be expected to be particularly deep ....' in their entirety.
Add after Development Constraints heading: "The site lies on the edge of the River Gipping, within the likely former extent of the precinct of the medieval Fransciscan friary (Greyfriars). There is potential for archaeological remains relating to the friary to survive on the site, as well as earlier occupation on the edge of lower lying marshy land. Within the western part of the site, marsh deposits have been identified, but human remains were recorded during construction of the eastern side of the existing buildings on the site. Detailed early pre-application discussions with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service would be required to agree the scope of required assessment and to inform design (e.g. to allow for preservation in-situ of deposits or appropriate programmes of work)." Also delete 'This site likely lies in the former extent of the town marsh' and 'Stratigraphy may be expected to be particularly deep in former streams and watercourses and waterlogged features are recorded in the Urban Archaeological Database.'
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: IP011c (Policy SP2) Smart Street/ Foundation Street (North)
Representation ID: 26609
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Amend for clarity: ‘The site lies… close to the grade II* St Mary at Quay Church, (delete: contains two scheduled monuments) and lies within an area of archaeological importance.’ Also amend: ‘There is also limited potential for nationally important archaeological remains outside of the (insert: scheduled and previously scheduled) areas. (Delete: This is because much of the site has already been excavated in the past. Detailed early) Pre-application discussion with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service (add: is advised.) (Delete: and Historic England would be required to agree the scope of required assessment, the principle of development and to inform design.’)
Amend for clarity: ‘The site lies… close to the grade II* St Mary at Quay Church, (delete: contains two scheduled monuments) and lies within an area of archaeological importance.’ Also amend: ‘There is also limited potential for nationally important archaeological remains outside of the (insert: scheduled and previously scheduled) areas. (Delete: This is because much of the site has already been excavated in the past. Detailed early) Pre-application discussion with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service (add: is advised.) (Delete: and Historic England would be required to agree the scope of required assessment, the principle of development and to inform design.’)
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: IP354 (Policy SP2) 72 (Old Boatyard) Cullingham Road
Representation ID: 26612
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
IP354, the following information could be added:
'The site lies in the vicinity of Roman remains, likely on reclaimed land. The site lies across Archaeological Character Zones 1d and 2a as set out in the Archaeology and Development SPD. It is likely that archaeological considerations could be managed through conditions on consent, although early consultation with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service is advised.'
IP354, the following information could be added:
'The site lies in the vicinity of Roman remains, likely on reclaimed land. The site lies across Archaeological Character Zones 1d and 2a as set out in the Archaeology and Development SPD. It is likely that archaeological considerations could be managed through conditions on consent, although early consultation with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service is advised.'
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: IP355 (Policy SP2) Cullingham Road
Representation ID: 26615
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
IP355 site sheet - the following information could be added: 'The site lies in the vicinity of Roman remains, likely on reclaimed land. The site lies across Archaeological Character Zones 1d and 2a as set out in the Archaeology and Development SPD. It is likely that archaeological considerations could be managed through conditions on consent, although early consultation with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service is advised.'
IP355, the following information could be added:
'The site lies in the vicinity of Roman remains, likely on reclaimed land. The site lies across Archaeological Character Zones 1d and 2a as set out in the Archaeology and Development SPD. It is likely that archaeological considerations could be managed through conditions on consent, although early consultation with Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service is advised.'
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: ISPA 4.1 (Policy SP2 & ISPA4) Northern End of Humber Doucy Lane
Representation ID: 26616
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Site sheet for ISPA 4.1, the following information could be added: 'These large greenfield areas have not been previously systematically investigated for archaeological remains. Archaeological evaluation should be undertaken to inform planning applications, comprising a combination of desk-based assessment, geophysical survey and an appropriate level of trial trenched archaeological evaluation (see character zone 2c in Archaeology and Development SPD).'
Site sheet for ISPA 4.1, the following information could be added: 'These large greenfield areas have not been previously systematically investigated for archaeological remains. Archaeological evaluation should be undertaken to inform planning applications, comprising a combination of desk-based assessment, geophysical survey and an appropriate level of trial trenched archaeological evaluation (see character zone 2c in Archaeology and Development SPD).'
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Site Ref: IP089 (Policy SP2) Waterworks Street
Representation ID: 26618
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Correction needed to site sheet: 'This site is a large area (delete: in) (insert: on the edge of the) Anglo-Saxon and Medieval core and within the Area of Archaeological Importance (IPS 413).'
Correction needed to site sheet: 'This site is a large area (delete: in) (insert: on the edge of the) Anglo-Saxon and Medieval core and within the Area of Archaeological Importance (IPS 413).'
Object
Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft
Policy SP17 – Town Centre Car Parking
Representation ID: 26640
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Suffolk County Council
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
IBC's 2019 WYG parking report assumes a lower rate of traffic growth than that forecast by the Local Plan modelling, even accounting for modal shift. Greater clarity is needed on how the spatial strategy responds to the WYG finding that care is needed to ensure that the proposed level of parking does not inadvertently encourage car use. The “like for like” replacement approach at sites IP051 and IP015 needs clarification to avoid undermining restraint on long-stay provision. Policy needs to shorten any period of additional provision between a multi-storey being opened and a site redeveloped, to support sustainable travel efforts.
Clarify how the spatial strategy responds to the WYG finding that care is needed to ensure that the proposed level of parking does not inadvertently encourage car use. Clarify the “like for like” replacement approach at sites IP051 and IP015, to avoid undermining restraint on long-stay provision. Include in policy a mechanism to shorten any period of additional provision between a multi-storey being opened and a site redeveloped.
