Draft Core Strategy and Policies Focused Review

Object

Representation ID: 885

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Paragraph 8.53 should be amended to recognise that not all heritage assets are designated and should read: 'Proposals affecting designated and non-designated Ipswich heritage assets should be informed by the Historic Environment Record for Suffolk maintained by the County Council...' Further explanation of why the area of archaeological importance has been designated could be set out. Features in this area have been internationally recognised and the town's long history, particularly maritime, is important for sustaining the town's identity as well as marketing the town to visitors and businesses.

Support

Representation ID: 886

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

The County Council will continue to support the borough and district councils in considering matters affecting future development in and around Ipswich.

Object

Representation ID: 887

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Greater certainty about growth levels over longer time horizons helps the County Council to better inform decisions and plan for change in services and policies. The most sustainable option for accommodating the housing need for Ipswich and its wider housing market will need to be agreed collectively. It could be through increasing densities in Ipswich or allocating land elsewhere in the housing market area. The evidence base for the housing requirement will need to be informed by updates to national projections. In finalising housing requirements, the County Council will provide evidence on the ageing population and demand for specialised accommodation.

Object

Representation ID: 888

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Notwithstanding the comments on brownfield being clearer in the vision and objectives, and given the emphasis on housing delivery and the significance of the five-year-land-supply, the amendments made to this policy are understandable.

Object

Representation ID: 889

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The flexibility over land release provided by the revised policy is understandable. The specific references to primary road infrastructure, schools and library are welcome and provide a greater degree of weight and, therefore certainty. The triggers for delivery (table 8B) provide a clear framework, particularly for the strategic infrastructure. Whilst the detail is likely to be confirmed while the core strategy is progressed, the County Council has made it clear that a new secondary school would be needed by 2020. The timing of occupation of the 500 dwellings, the trigger for its delivery, will need to be kept under review.

Object

Representation ID: 890

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The policy is based on current economic forecasts and will need to be updated to reflect the economic strategy for the borough and the wider area. Priority should be afforded to employment generating development (principally offices but also leisure uses) in and around the town centre but particularly between the railway station and the town centre to reinforce this connection. Whilst the priority could not apply between different sites, it could express the attention that the council will afford to this area.

Object

Representation ID: 891

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The identification of shuttle bus services would depend on viability. In the case of the Waterfront, the short-term actions would, instead, be to enhance the pedestrian and cyclist experience along the waterfront and provide access to key locations for pick up/ drop off and servicing.