Object

Representation ID: 647

Received: 07/03/2014

Respondent: Lafarge Tarmac

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The policy lists the defined employment areas, however, the cross reference to Core Strategy policy DM25 reaffirms the deficiencies of not having a specific policy to address established employment activities on port sites.

Object

Representation ID: 648

Received: 07/03/2014

Respondent: Lafarge Tarmac

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The allocation of land for port related uses at the Ash Tip Cliff Quay site (IP262) is supported. The policy should, however, allow suitable flexibility to encourage other suitable industrial uses which may be appropriately situated on the port site. Industrial activity on the port site, including associated HGV movements to and from the port must be appropriately accommodated within wider regeneration proposals.

Object

Representation ID: 649

Received: 07/03/2014

Respondent: Lafarge Tarmac

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

LT are concerned regarding proposals to reduce Star Lane Gyratory to one lane in each direction following provision of the new Wet Dock crossing. This is likely to have implications for through traffic from Ipswich port. The implications of port traffic must, therefore, be appropriately considered in the absence of any other links to the A14.

Object

Representation ID: 650

Received: 07/03/2014

Respondent: Lafarge Tarmac

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

LT have no concerns regarding the use of this site for appropriate low key industrial uses which would befit this transitional location between the port and existing residential areas to the north. However the site is identified for B1 office. LT objects strongly to the proposed allocation for either office and/or residential use. These uses would be entirely inappropriate in this location and are likely to lead to conflict with existing industrial uses to the south including LTs asphalt plant which lawfully operates with unrestricted hours of operation and vehicular movements which are essential to the business.

Object

Representation ID: 651

Received: 07/03/2014

Respondent: Lafarge Tarmac

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

LT have no concerns regarding the use of this site for appropriate low key industrial uses, which would befit this transitional location between the port and existing residential areas to the north. However, the sub-text to this policy also makes specific reference to potentially providing 50% residential use which is inappropriate in this location and would be likely to lead to conflict with existing industrial uses to the south.

Support

Representation ID: 652

Received: 07/03/2014

Respondent: Lafarge Tarmac

This site is identified for 100% employment use, which with appropriate restrictions would be acceptable in this location.