Draft Core Strategy and Policies Focused Review

Object

Representation ID: 828

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There are data gaps in the SPD which may render the Core Strategy unsustainable, e.g. on hydrology, topography, traffic trends, road adequacy, access and exits, congestion, rat runs, air pollution, drainage and flooding, country park allocation and delivery. Also the Peter Brett report on viability has been rejected by developers.

Object

Representation ID: 829

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

There are policy gaps in the in the CSFR. Transport - IBC should consider reinstating former transport policies from the 2001 draft Local Plan. The SCC traffic reduction strategy needs to be reassessed and IBC should through the CSFR address multiple impacts from new development on transport systems, air quality, road safety and congestion. Flood risk and management - requires a new policy direction at the Council and more awareness of the changing nature of drainage and new legislation and responsibilities.

Object

Representation ID: 830

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

How will IBC control delivery at the Northern Fringe and ensure orderly development? What competence does the Council have to manage such a complex development with reducing resources? The plans are inconsistent with localism. Ipswich must avoid bland and dense development with drainage and subsidence issues like elsewhere. There will also be issues around constructions noise that will need to be addressed.

Object

Representation ID: 831

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The detail of the Northern Fringe should be dealt with through the CSFR not through an SPD. SOCS made this point in 2009 when the Local Development Scheme was changed. Significant changes contained in the CSFR, including multiple starts, will impact adversely on the SPD. The Core Strategy should set out the SPD requirement for development sequencing, and control the number of sites to be operated by any one developer at any one time.

Object

Representation ID: 832

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to the change in wording to CS10 which changes the prerequisite for permission being granted from the adoption of the SPD to its preparation only. It does not strengthen the SPD.

Object

Representation ID: 833

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

SOCS query the viability of the Red House site because of flood risk, high ground water, TPOs, biological features, archaeology and the need to adequately buffer noise from the railway. Any playing pitches would need to be located on flat, well drained land. Also the whole Northern Fringe site involves the loss of best and most versatile agricultural land. SOCS further query the adequacy of Westerfield Road to accommodate the traffic from housing, the secondary school, the district centre and so on. It is unsustainable and may be unsafe.

Object

Representation ID: 843

Received: 10/03/2014

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

SOCS support the NFPG comments on proposed Table 8B. Its inclusion is supported but revisions are needed. SOCS suggest adding a requirement for a railway noise buffer.