Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 1 I Wedd 0 0 0 Green Space The parks provision is good, but new dev should also be served by new parks. Waterfront needs a green space even if only small to allow views onto the water and parks should be linked by a walk/cycleway. Churchman Way is good. 183 A Fuller 1 3 1 Vision We must move forward ASAP otherwise we shall be left behind as people will go elsewhere.
193 John Ireland 1 4 1 The Vision for To ensure that development in Ipswich happens in a sustainable manner and that the amenities enjoyed Ipswich by local residents are not harmed. 223 R Mudhar 1 4 1 The Vision for To ensure that development in Ipswich happens in a sustainable manner and that the amenities enjoyed Ipswich by local residents are not harmed. 288 Mrs J Seaton 1 4 1 Vision for Ipswich 447 B C Pinner 1 4 1 Vision 458 S Speight 1 4 1 Vision 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 1 4 1 Vision Option 4 Wildlife Trust
490 A C Raworth 1 4 1 Vision 491 Mrs V Andrews 1 4 1 Vision 504 C Dawson Planning PRUPIM & 1 2,3 1 Vision 2 and 3 make a clear commitment to improving provision within the town and delivering it promptly and Potential Hartfield efficiently. Development s 507 T Beaven 1 1 1 Vision Option 1 508 R Paddison Babergh 1 4 1 Vision Option 4. District Council 513 P Miller 1 4 1 Vision 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 1 4 1 Vision L 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 1 3 1 Vision To enable the quick planned growth of Ipswich would enable the redevelopment of appropriate sites and as a result improve the environment at these areas. It would also enable developer contributions to be made where appropraite to education, public open space and transport for example which would benefit the wider community. Therefore to enable the quick planned growth of Ipswich would allow for a more attractive place to live, work and play and improve the quality of life for all. Option 3 enables a practical delivery method to meet the aspirations of improving the quality of life for all in Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 537 C Brown Boyer Persimmon 1 3 1 Vision Planning Ltd Homes (Essex) Ltd 537 C Brown Boyer Persimmon 1 1 Vision It is of fundamental importance to meet the growth requirements of RSS14 in view of the towns growth Planning Ltd Homes aspirations within the context of the likely Haven Gateway Growth Point.The supply of adequate housing (Essex) Ltd is crucial to meeting the projected housing needs of the area, in addition to the specific affordable housing need in the Borough, in line with the findings of the Barker Report.
539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 1 2 1 Vision Malyan 928 541 Julian Dowding 1 4 1 Vision 541 Bev Dowding 1 4 1 Vision 543 Tom Clayton 1 4 1 Vision 558 P R Richards 1 4 1 Vision 559 G Thomas 1 2 1 Vision Option 2 takes a more balanced approach to ensuring all land uses are addressed. Option 1 is a bland statement without direction, whilst option 3 places too much emphasis on phasing the pace of change. Option 2 is not easy - will require a lot of pro-active work to draw in resources to meet the required land use components. 567 R Gape 1 4 1 Vision 568 C Miller 1 4 1 Vision Option 4 - to ensure that development happens in a sustainable manner hat protects the quality of life of existing residents. I am opposed to Options 3 & 4 both of which imply a primary commitment to growth, regardless of the impact on quality of life within the town. 577 Michael Brain 1 2 1 578 L Jenkins Suffolk 1 1 & 4 1 Vision Constabulary
579 R Henderson RSPB 1 4 1 Vision 610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 1 1 1 Vision for S Group Ipswich
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 1 3 1 Vision Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 1 1 Vision for None. Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 625 Mrs B Robinson 1 4 1 Vision 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 1 3 1 Vision Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 1 4 1 Vision 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 1 4 1 Vision Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 1 4 1 Vision 773 K Oliver 1 4 1 Vision 901 V Duncan 1 4 1 Vision Option 4: for growth to be sustainable. 904 N Hine 1 1 1 Vision Quality of life would be harmed by loss of countryside. 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 1 2 1 Vision Malyan Planning 931 D C Harper 1 4 1 Vision 952 Mr S Bretherton 1 3 1 Vision 957 A Fenton 1 1,4 1 Vision 971 Mr D Kidney English 1 4 1 Vision Nature 972 N Cenci IBC 1 2 1 Vision Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 1 1 1 Vision C Group 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 1 4 1 Vision Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 1 2 1 Vision Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 1 4 1 Vision Preservation Society
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 608 M Norden Suffolk 1 4 1 Vision for Biodiversity Ipswich Partnership 105 W Last 1 4 2 Vision Option 4 is best- improvements must be made in a regulated manner to avoid harm to the well being of residents 107 P Horne 1 4 2 Vision 4 Vision is preferred because it looks to build on the good things Ipswich has. 193 John Ireland 1 2 The Vision for Harm to local amenities could be irreversible and so should be minimised. Ipswich 223 R Mudhar 1 2 The Vision for As a current resident it is important to me that the existing quality of life in the town is retained. Ipswich is Ipswich a pleasant and manageable size. It can probably manage the proposed increases and the extra resources and wealth may well make the town a better place but increasing the town's population by 10% should be done without reducing the long-term enjoyment of the facilities of the 90% of the final population that are already living here. 288 Mrs J Seaton 1 2 Vision for Because I am a resident and do not wish my amenities to deteriorate. Ipswich 458 S Speight 1 2 Vision Ipswich needs to develop and grow but it must be sustainable - all factors must be taken into account when proposing new developments so that they are improved at the same rate. Therefore the increase in new housing must be matched by actual increase in employment and actual improvements in infrastructure and services. 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 1 2 Vision Development in Ipswich must be taken forward in a sustainable way, with equal weight given to Wildlife Trust economic, social and environmental issues, including biodiversity. Due regard should be given to priority habitats and BAP species, and to opportunities to enhance Ipswich's ecological network. The open spaces of Ipswich deliver many benefits, to local people and wildlife, and these should not be impacted on by development. Many such spaces are designated for their wildlife value and these areas must be protected from the impacts of development in accordance with RSS.
490 A C Raworth 1 2 Vision It is more democratic that the majority of the population have their interests protected. The scale of the expansion will have serious effects on transport and other social amenities. 491 Mrs V Andrews 1 2 Vision Too much building and not enough thought about car parking and the extra traffic generated by the new developments. 507 T Beaven 1 2 Vision We contribute financially and in others ways to Ipswich and want all to benefit. 508 R Paddison Babergh 1 2 Vision It is important that development takes place in a sustainable manner. District Council 513 P Miller 1 2 Vision All cities and towns including Ipswich need to reduce pollution, waste, resource use and CO2 emissions to continue to be viable.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 1 2 Vision Means devs will be well thought out, env sustainable and infrastructure in place L 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 1 2 Vision The key to creating a sustainable community is to ensure that residents choose to live, work and play Malyan 928 within the town. This provides a virtuous circle of business and social investment. 541 Julian Dowding 1 2 Vision I would have chosen Option 1 but a basic understanding has to be grasped that quality of life cannot improve without regard to sustainability, biodiversity and the environment. On reading the options, it can almost seem that sustainability (Option 4) precludes improvement (Option 1). The two are seen almost in opposition. This should not be the case because improvement can happen with sustainability. Moreover, if we take seriously our commitments to sustainability and improving our natural and built environment, then improvements will follow. So often in the past, the opposite has happened and we have ended up with concrete jungles and no go areas.
543 Tom Clayton 1 2 Vision As an existing resident, I don't wish to see either my family or other residents disadvantaged by development. This should be a fundamental question to ask when considering any options. More specifically we should look at both disadvantages and benefits, and accept that some losses may be outweighed by other gains. The end result should be, in ideal world, a bled of 1,2 & 4
567 R Gape 1 2 Vision The key word is sustainability. Further there is no pint introducing new residents if the amenities already on offer are going to suffer. 577 Michael Brain 1 2 Vision Living, working, learning and playing cover the four key requirements from one's community, and Option 2 spells these out. Specifically, in just a single generation, we have moved from having people live in one place, take children to school in a second, work in a third, and find entertainment in any numbe of other places, all potentially miles apart, all thanks to mass mobility enabled by cheap motoring. The result is increased traffic congestion in towns, yet the private car is arguably an essential element in rural Suffolk, and the development of Ipswich must also take account of the needs of its rural hinterland. Given the projected growth in population and jobs, therefore, I suggest that development must indeed focus on providing infrastructure for these four key elements, but with the important addition of viable options for a transport infrastructure to allow for the necessary movement of people between these elements, whether by car, on foot, by bicycle , or by public transport.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 1 2 Vision A combination of 1 & 4 should help in assuring a sustainable approach to growth. Taking into Constabulary consideration existing quality of life issues and looking to build on these.
579 R Henderson RSPB 1 2 Vision Sustainable dev should be at the core of the LDF and therefore its inclusion in the vision is vital.
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 1 2 Vision for It is a clear and concise vision which does not unnecessarily limit any key objectives S Group Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 1 2 Vision Option 3 would ensure that the most suitable development occurs on sites already identified. Growth Green would be concentrated in areas which would serve as a catalyst to neighbouring sites in a planned and Properties sustainable manner. Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 1 2 Vision for Equal value - do not have to conflict. Ipswich 625 Mrs B Robinson 1 2 Vision Stability and sustainability. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 1 2 Vision Option 3 would ensure that the most suitable development occurs on sites already identified. Growth Development would be concentrated in areas which would serve as a catalyst to neighbouring sites in a planned and s Ltd sustainable manner. 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 1 2 Vision Development should only take place if it does not detract from the quality of life already enjoyed by Ipswich residents. The RSS target to stabilise car traffic levels at 1999 levels is in direct contradiction to the house building target. Ipswich is already over congested and parking is difficult. No matter how good public transport is, more houses means more cars. There is no space for wider roads. Traffic noise, congestion and poor air quality is not what I want for the vision of future Ipswich. Also, how will the water supply cope? 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 1 2 Vision We do not want to lose what we already have and we also want to see improvements to amenities. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 1 2 Vision Ipswich is a pleasant place to live at the moment. It is important we do not increase traffic as congestion is already a problem. Building new roads generally doesn't help as more houses means more cars and you can't keep up. Also much of the countryside and green space is destroyed.
773 K Oliver 1 2 Vision Given that options 1,2, and 3 impact on one another, it seems sensible that any development should take account of the residents who have lived in Ipswich longest and presumably enjoy their quality of life already. 820 A Bumstead 1 4 2 Vision Option 4: better to take time rather than act precipitately, as does option 3. 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 1 2 Vision The key to creating a sustainable community is to ensure that residents choose to live and work and play Malyan in the same town. This provides a virtuous circle of business and social investment. Planning 931 D C Harper 1 2 Vision It's the least objectionable. 952 Mr S Bretherton 1 2 Vision It sends out a positive message to developers, residents, potential employers, and government funding agencies that the town is serious about growth.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 957 A Fenton 1 2 Vision I prefer a combination of the two as I believe it should provide most gain or maintenance for most people. There is always a cause and effect and option 1 is very idealistic and not completely attainable. Therefore to improve the quality for as many residents as possible but maintaining the conditions for the rest may be achievable. 971 Mr D Kidney English 1 2 Vision Option 4 is the only option which explicitly incorporates the concept of sustainable development, which is Nature a core principle underpinning the planning process. (Please refer to PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development ) 972 N Cenci IBC 1 2 Vision It is more specific than option 1 and covers the remaining options. Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 1 2 Vision Inclusive; can be interpreted to mean we look closely at how to improve the lives of the most deprived C Group residents/areas of town. Progressive since it looks at how to improve the town. 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 1 2 Vision Because it allows good development whilst retaining the option of rapid response. Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 1 2 Vision seeks to achieve a good balanced approach to the future Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 1 2 Vision Because it balances development with sustainability which is critical, given the conflicting demands and Preservation issues in the town. Society 608 M Norden Suffolk 1 2 Vision for Sustainability should be at the core of this vision. This needs to include Suffolk BAP targets, protection of Biodiversity Ipswich existing designated sites for nature conservation (statutory and non-statutory) and opportunities for Partnership enhancement of the ecological network. 77 I Maitumbi EERA 1 3 Vision for It would be better to merge the options together- so sustainable development, quality of life and delivery Ipswich are seen as a whole. Enhance assets and respecting biodiversity are expressed in the RSS and could also be included. Aspirations for growth need to captured in the vision.
107 P Horne 1 3 Vision Option 3 looks to be set for rash/poor decisions in the future. 109 J Welsh Green Living 1 3 Vision for Disagree with Option 3- this can be delivered in a haphazard manner. Centre Ipswich
139 S. Ion Councillor for 1 3 Vision for Option 3 would put housing before necessary infrastructure is ready. Rushmere Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 223 R Mudhar 1 3 3 The Vision for I believe that this would be against the interests of everybody living in the town, the existing residents and Ipswich the new ones. The only people who would benefit from this are people whose pay and bonuses are attached to statistical targets, a practice that I deplore since it leads to short-termism and a blindness to the consequences of actions that people must live with for decades. Please do not rush this work.
264 D. Seaton 1 3 Vision for Councillors should resist central government dictates. Ipswich 284 M. Bowen 1 3 Vision for Option 3 is probably impractical. Ipswich 288 Mrs J Seaton 1 3 Vision for Yes especially not option 3. The first responsibility is to the residents. Ipswich 447 B C Pinner 1 3 Vision I see no reason for development to be "rushed". 458 S Speight 1 3 Vision Disagree with option 3 - this is substantial growth which needs to have time to be absorbed into the local communities so that the character of the area is not lost and that services etc. have time to grow with the proposed population increase. 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 1 3 3 Vision Disagree with option 3, because rapid growth is unlikely to conform to the principles of sustainable Wildlife Trust development.
490 A C Raworth 1 3 Vision Disagree with option 3. Draft RSS looks to 2021 - there is no need to develop faster especially as the proposed job increase seems very optimistic. 491 Mrs V Andrews 1 3 Vision Disagree with option 3. Act in haste, repent at leisure. A mess has been made of Ipswich town centre by pulling down the old and rebuilding. 507 T Beaven 1 3 Vision Option 3. Plans are based on assumptions which can easily be wrong, so it is better to phase changes and then review the success or otherwise of what has happened, and then move on again. This avoids the kind of costly mistakes that government is fond of. 513 P Miller 1 3 Vision Option 3 is likely to lead to many intractable problems for the future. 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 1 3 3 Vision Option 3 rushed and lacks infrastructure L 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 1 3 Vision Option 3. Whilst delivering growth in social , economic and residential infrastructure is important it should Malyan 928 not be at the cost of sound planning. Speed of delivery should be set within the context of well-planned development that can add value.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 540 L Adkemir 1 3 Vision Where is the research necessary too justify the Councils vision?The vision is not one held by the people of Ipswich. There is no justification for increasing the population of Ipswich as we are alreay experiencing overload for health, schools and the transport infrastructure. A period of stability is needed to give the services a chance to cope with the expansion. Stability is not the same as stagnation. Improving the quality of life for Ipswich people will not be achieved by building more houses that Ipswich people cannot afford and increasing the population. When asked about the job figures of 18,000 new jobs, as the Northgate consultation meeting the council had no answer. We should encourage jobs to Ipswich for those who are now unemplyed. The prosperity generated by more jobs should then lead to a consideration on whether we should expand Ipswich to meet the demand for employees. We have lost 3000 white collar jobs and there is no way that 18,000 jobs can be created quickly. The Council seems to rely on the statements made by BT that there are companies that would like to move to the region so that they can be near BT. No evidence has been forthcoming to show this. BT has recently terminated hundred
543 Tom Clayton 1 3 Vision Option 3 - rushing the job is unlikely to achieve a balanced result. 567 R Gape 1 3 Vision Option 3 will depress the quality of life for all concerned: existing residents, new residents, non-residents who use the facilities of Ipswich. Growth should be holistic, not devil-take-the-hindmost.
577 Michael Brain 1 3 Vision I don't disagree with Option 1, I would simply say that "Quality of Life" would need to be defined. For me, for instance, this would suggest living in a neighbourhood which was free from kerbcrawlers, prostitutes, pimps, drug dealers and related criminal elements, in a town where anti-social behaviour and binge- drinking were not the norm, in short in an environment which is physically safe and secure, where people are tolerant and supportive of each other, where the local authorities listen and actively pursue the aspirations of its residents, and where there are adequate facilities for personal development and recreation, both physical and intellectual, to suit all tastes. But other people may value other aspects of Quality of Life; and many of these aspects may be beyond the scope of this Development Plan.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 1 3 3 Vision Option 3 could lead to decision being made without the appropriate consultation with key community Constabulary stakeholders. This could mean policing and community issues being dealt with retrospectively and at a greater cost. 579 R Henderson RSPB 1 3 3 Vision Option 3 - any dev should be controlled in order to ensure it is appropriate, necessary and sustainable.
595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 1 (1 & 2) 3 Vision for Options 1 and 3 are too general. Salter Ipswich 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 1 (1 & 2) 3 Vision for Options 1 and 2 are too general. Option 4 does not seek to provide greater opportunities for residents Campus Ipswich and for the town to prosper. Suffolk
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 1 (1 & 2) 3 Vision for Options 1 and 2 are too general. Option 4 does not seek to provide greater opportunities for residents Woodrow Ipswich and for the town to prosper. Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 1 (1 & 2) 3 Vision for Options 1 and 2 are too general. Option 4 does not seek to provide greater opportunities for residents British Ports Ipswich and for the town to prosper.
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 1 (1 & 2) 3 Vision for Options 1 and 2 are too general. Option 4 does not seek to provide greater opportunities for residents Ipswich and for the town to prosper. 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 1 3 Vision Options 1 and 2 are too general and would not achieve the goals of the RSS within the specified period. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 1 3 Vision for No. Ipswich 625 Mrs B Robinson 1 3 Vision Option 1 will be harmed by proposals, as will option 2. Option 3 will be a disaster. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 1 3 Vision Options 1 and 2 are too general and would not achieve the goals of the RSS within the specified period. Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 1 3 Vision Option 1 sounds good only if improvement really is that. Encouraging population increase will not improve quality of life for all in Ipswich. Option 3 puts targets before people and will not produce a considered plan. 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 1 3 3 Vision Object to Option 3, because growth means houses for commuters with no services to supply them. New Residents' homes are causing shortages of water because new reservoirs are not being built. Association 740 H Kembery 1 3 3 Vision Object to Option 3 - rushing the work sounds like bad news. 773 K Oliver 1 3 3 Vision Option 3 focuses on growth targets alone without any consideration of the elements contained in options 1,2 and 4. Ipswich is still suffering from the effects of poor planning carried out in haste in the 1960s.
782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 1 3 3 Vision disagree with option 3- why the speed? International
783 E Phillips 1 3 Vision Disagree with option 3- would cause too much disruption and inconvenience, it would allow development without sufficient attention to the town's needs. 820 A Bumstead 1 3 3 Vision Opposes option 3.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 856 J. Jones 1 3 Vision Against Option 3. Growth must be sustainable and supported by jobs and infrastructure. Questions ability to achieve 18,000 jobs target. Options 1 and 2 are too subjective. 857 A. Jones 1 3 Vision Against Option 3. Growth must be sustainable and supported by jobs and infrastructure. Questions ability to achieve 18,000 jobs target. Options 1 and 2 are too subjective. 858 M. Gray 1 3 Vision Against Option 3 narrowly chasing targets would not benefit existing residents. 899 G Duncan 1 3 Vision Opposes 3- foolish to rush in. 900 R Duncan 1 3 Vision Opposes 3- foolish to rush in. 901 V Duncan 1 3 Vision Opposes 3- no need for greenfield development. 902 S Duncan 1 3 Vision Opposes 3- risky. 906 P Birdsall 1 3 Vision Opposes Option 3: development cannot be undone. 912 Mrs R J Southworth 1 3 3 Vision Option 3 - why rush? Situations can change and some alternatives may turn out to be unnecessary.
927 Mr M Wright 1 3 Vision There is a complete lack of all round vision. What there is economically driven. The vision should address the needs of ordinary local people. 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 1 3 3 Vision Opposed to option 3. Whilst delivering growth in social, economic and residential infrastructure is Malyan important it should not be at the cost of sound planning. Speed of delivery should be set within the Planning context of well planned development that can add value. 931 D C Harper 1 3 3 Vision Opposed to option 3. Most likely to ignore the infrastructure requirements to restore Ipswich to about 1960 standards. 952 Mr S Bretherton 1 3 Vision No. 957 A Fenton 1 3 3 Vision Option 3 concerns me as speed could result in disaster if planning is not properly thought out and Ipswich could be spoilt for ever. 972 N Cenci IBC 1 3 3 Vision Option 3. It doesn't set out benefits. Councillor 1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 1 3 Vision Option 1 is too vague Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 1 3 Vision Option 3 - in that it is not a sustainable way forward and will not deliver the needs of the entire Preservation community. Society 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 1 3 Vision Opposes 2: too narrow- aesthetics only. Opposes 3: too focuses on speed, failing to consider wider Countryside issues. Project
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 1 3 Vision for The impact of Option 1 is unclear and elements seem to be outside of the scope of planning. Option 3: County Ipswich there is no need to extend growth beyond that already set out in the RSS. Council 55 Mrs Buckle 1 4 Plan objectives Think green and what future generations will think. Health and the environment should be foremost considerations. 61 N Blaken EEDA 1 4 Suggested LDF should tackle deprivation and exclusion. Promote sustainable development and urban renaissance principles to and provide high quality housing including affordable, balanced with provision for employment. It should include in Core complement and enhance the position of London as a world city. Strategy
61 N Blaken EEDA 1 4 Developing The Core Strategy should develop the economic potential of major settlements through workspace economic creation and re-use potential 62 J Offord 1 4 Look at the Need to look at long term. Ipswich should compete with development in Norwich & Cambridge with new broader development in East London, Ipswich should compliment this with providing housing etc., context when planning development.
62 J Offord 1 4 Growth of Opportunities for residents need to be provided alongside housing growth. Amenities, transport, Ipswich employment prospects and links to elsewhere in East Anglia and beyond are needed. Ipswich should become a vibrant, prosperous place to live in the future. 103 L Cunningham 1 4 New residents Need to attract people who want to work towards the greater good of the community- not create a sink estate. 107 P Horne 1 4 Alternative Keep the town centre alive, encourage people to live in town and shop locally. vision 118 D Harper 1 4 Alternative Need to think more about provision of suitable housing and less towards commuters. vision 128 T. Tyrell 1 4 Vision As well as housing, jobs, leisure, jobs, etc- wealth needs to be created. 243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 1 4 Vision for Much more gradual development. Against haste that would lead to irreparable mistakes being made. the Earth, Ipswich Suffolk Wildlife Trust
264 D. Seaton 1 4 Vision for Maximise use of brownfield land and encourage residential use of vacant properties, including above Ipswich commercial outlets. 288 Mrs J Seaton 1 4 Vision for No building in the green belt. Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 458 S Speight 1 4 Vision Yes - to maintain the quality of life for all in Ipswich. 490 A C Raworth 1 4 Vision No. 507 T Beaven 1 4 Vision Natural organic growth from within Suffolk rather than enforced national policy. 513 P Miller 1 4 Vision No. 567 R Gape 1 4 Vision A mix of options 4 & 2 with a determined and focussed improvement to public transport such that car traffic levels may be returned to their lesser 1999 levels, in spite of the increase in the permanent and transient population of Ipswich. This would also address access to Ipswich Waterfront & Port (para 2.2)
577 Michael Brain 1 4 Vision I would amend option 2 to read "To make Ipswich a more attractive place to live, work, learn, and play, with the provision of practical, sustainable, and attractive means of travelling between these activities." I would prefer a vision which does not project Ipswich as a static infrastructure. People already enjoy a great deal of freedom of movement, probably more than is environmentally sustainable, yet we live in a dispersed rural environment where public transport alone could not satisfy all present requirements. There are therefore equations to address concerning the timescale on which we may need to re-order our patterns for living and to change our habits.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 1 4 Vision A vision that fully supports community cohesion and quality of life for all. Constabulary
579 R Henderson RSPB 1 4 Vision The RSPB believes that the vision for Ipswich should be a sustainable one, in which protection and enhancement of biological diversity is integral to social and economic dev and contributes fully to the prosperity and well-being of the inhabitants. It will have a healthy and functioning environment that can adapt to climate change, where priority habitats are protected restored and created to provide places for wildlife and people to enjoy and contribute to rural and urban regeneration.
584 T & S Groot- 1 4 Vision Question homes target. Long-term sustainability and attractiveness are most important for new Wassink developments. Future development should maintain/support a sense of ownership of property and community among residents. 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 1 4 Vision for All 4 options have appealing elements. It is important that Ipswich defines itself as a regional centre. Campus Ipswich Suffolk 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 1 4 Vision for All 4 options have appealing elements. It is important that Ipswich defines itself as a regional centre. Woodrow Ipswich Development s Ltd.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 1 4 Vision for All 4 options have appealing elements. It is important that Ipswich defines itself as a regional centre. British Ports Ipswich There should be an emphasis on employment and wealth opportunities, and promotion of Ipswich as a sustainable location for developing port facilities. 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 1 4 Vision for All 4 options have appealing elements. It is important that Ipswich defines itself as a regional centre. Ipswich There should be an emphasis on employment and wealth opportunities, and promotion of Ipswich as a sustainable location for developing port facilities. 613 Mr Chris Mole MP 1 4 Vision for No. Ipswich 625 Mrs B Robinson 1 4 Vision The visions set out are flawed because they are based on insufficient evidence and questionable politics. Stability and realistic sustainable solutions in the current economic, social and environmental climate.
731 Mr & Mrs McKie 1 4 Vision To endeavour to maintain or decrease the population density of Ipswich and to enhance the quality of life for current residents. This option focuses on decreasing traffic congestion, providing more green and nature friendly spaces within the town centre, conserving greenfield areas and spending the money saved enhancing buildings or run down areas and demolishing eyesores like high rise 1960s flats.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 1 4 Vision To keep our amenities and improve the infrastructure for those who are already here with truly affordable Residents' housing. Association 773 K Oliver 1 4 Vision The statements are so general and all encompassing that they cover most eventualities. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 1 4 Vision Development should be considered in relation to the whole. Ipswich should look carefully at current and International future needs and not build for the sake of meeting (apparently arbitrary) targets.
835 Mr David Barker Barton Crest 1 4 Vision Retain aspirations of 1, 2 and 4, combining with need to deliver housing: "The planned growth of Ipswich Willmore Nicholson should take place as soon as possible, in a sustainable manner, as set out in RSS in order to improve the quality of life for all in Ipswich. 856 J. Jones 1 4 Vision Ipswich should pursue hi-tech as in Cambridge that has been planned for but not yet achieved. Ensure that employment opportunities are promoted, not restricted. 857 A. Jones 1 4 Vision Ipswich should pursue hi-tech as in Cambridge that has been planned for but not yet achieved. Ensure that employment opportunities are promoted, not restricted. 899 G Duncan 1 4 Vision/ targets IBC boundary should be extended- greater Ipswich should bear more housing targets. Develop outside of the boundary. 900 R Duncan 1 4 Vision No more development- Ipswich does not need to be bigger. Keep Ipswich as green as possible. Sort out work before worrying about houses- otherwise it will become a commuter town.
900 R Duncan 1 4 Vision/ targets IBC boundary should be extended- greater Ipswich should bear more housing targets. Develop outside of the boundary.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 901 V Duncan 1 4 Vision No growth- avoid becoming a London Spillover. Plenty of trees and green areas. Need work for people living in Ipswich at present. Development must not bring more crime, traffic, pollution. No housing until there is sufficient work. 902 S Duncan 1 4 Vision No more development- Ipswich does not need to be bigger. Keep Ipswich as green as possible.
903 J Ames 1 4 Vision Questions whether growth is necessary to meet the needs of the town's people. Prevent creation of deprivation by providing jobs alongside housing. 906 P Birdsall 1 4 Vision Alternative: the money that flows into the town should link to a vision of "even new development cuts Council Tax for existing residents". 912 Mrs R J Southworth 1 4 Vision Combine options 1 and 4. 931 D C Harper 1 4 Vision Scale down RSS growth targets to more realistic levels. 952 Mr S Bretherton 1 4 Vision The vision should also state that it will become a beacon for architecture, arts and sports excellence within the East of England. 957 A Fenton 1 4 Vision Combination of 1 and 4 - see above. 1002 R Ward Suffolk 1 4 Vision No. Preservation Society 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 1 4 Vision Extend 4 to say local amenities will be improved by development- not just 'not harmed'. Countryside Project
968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 1 1 & 4 4 Vision for Visions 1 and 4 combined would help to ensure quality of life for all of the town, not just those affected by County Ipswich development. Sustainable development should be at the heart of the DPD and supporting text should Council refer to sustainability objectives, including biodiversity, green space, etc.
900 R Duncan 1 4 5 Vision Option 4: would lead to the delivery of the other 3. 33 N Brigham Sustrans 1 4 3 & 4 Vision Option 4 preferred as emphasises the need for sustainability. Does not disagree with any of the visions. Option 4 could be more positive " to ensure that dev in Ipswich happens in a sustainable manner and helps the whole of Ipswich to live in a more sustainable manner". 39 A Nesus 1 Idea for vision To attract people to a town that they are proud of and make it prosperous for future generations.
43 N Gibbons 1 Targets It is not necessary to provide 15,400 houses and 18,000 jobs. Up to 5,000 houses already underway- more only needed if there is a surplus of jobs. 56 T Halford 1 Should growth The planned growth is not in the interests of Ipswich residents. take place
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 57 N Palmer Bidwells 1 4 Reason for It allows for the required growth in a sustainable way preferred vision 69 G King The 1 4 Vision The vision should be meaningful, not vague aspirations, and think beyond the plan period to reflect the Countryside long-term nature of sustainable development. The plan should be based on positive objectives, not Agency predict and provide. Policies should be based on researched needs. 73 M Crook 1 Town Suggests extension of town boundary. boundary 74 J Melton 1 Attracting Need to provide affordable and private houses to attract those from prosperous areas to move here. newcomers 83 Anon 1 Housing target Why has the housing target gone up from the structure plan?
86 J Southworth 1 Jobs and What assumptions are the figures based on? Which came first- housing or jobs? Housing targets 86 J Southworth 1 Character of Fears that Ipswich will turn into a dormitory for commuters. Ipswich 94 Mr & Mrs Williams, Mrs 1 Targets Where do the figures come from? Cantwell
94 Mr & Mrs Williams, Mrs 1 Omission Sources of employment. Where will the jobs come form? As jobs have declined in the last 5 years the Cantwell 18,000 target seems unrealistic.
94 Mr & Mrs Williams, Mrs 1 Character of Express concern that Ipswich will become a commuter town. Cantwell Ipswich
95 K Oliver 1 Omission Where will all the jobs come from? Structural employment/economic changes will make the achievement of jobs target very hard. Mass employers (i.e. industry) are on their way out, the service industry moved abroad. 101 Anon (Northern 1 Targets What is driving the need for more houses and jobs? Fringe resident) 106 P Stephenson 1 2 Vision 2 This is the most balanced and broadly embraces the quality of life issue.
109 J Welsh Green Living 1 1 Vision for Option 1- Quality of life for all (and its improvement) is critical for life to be sustainable. Centre Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 110 M Thorp 1 Growth Supports expansion of Ipswich. agenda 128 T. Tyrell 1 Develop Suggests development on poorer agricultural land on eastern fringe or south towards A12. Questions outside whether development needs to be in the borough's boundary. Borough Boundary 129 R. Wilson 1 Housing target Questions whether this target really needs to be achieved.
129 R. Wilson 1 The We must take care or the environment- global warming, flooding must not be exacerbated. environment 139 S. Ion Councillor for 1 4 Vision for Option 4: Development should not strain existing services e.g. schools, hospitals, roads, etc. Rushmere Ipswich
139 S. Ion Councillor for 1 RSS targets Disagrees with RSS targets although concedes not much can be done about them. Rushmere
185 Daniel Sanford 1 Borough The Borough boundary should not be a deciding factor for edge of town development, other than in the boundary sense of preventing unlimited expansion and destroying the greenbelt - the Borough Council should be able to properly co-operate and co-ordinate with the County and District Councils.
185 Daniel Sanford 1 Vision The Council should plan for employment + housing + public transport (which also means housing is not too close to employment) - and so avoiding using 2 dimensional political spin terms like 'balance'.
199 M J Howard 1 Targets Doubt assumption that the national or regional plan needs this number of houses. Judging by present development at the airport, Compair, Bishop Hill and Foxhall Road, there is already enough.
243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 1 1 & 4 Vision for Option 3 would mean upheaval and disturbance to achieve development quickly- this is not necessary. the Earth, Ipswich Suffolk Wildlife Trust
259 M. Duhm 1 4 Vision for Option 4: Emphasis on sustainability. Option 3 would mean poor results. Ipswich 261 L. Williams 1 4 Vision for Option 4: Sustainable must be the driving force behind Council policy. Option 2 is acceptable in principle Ipswich but vague, subjective and hard to monitor. 264 D. Seaton 1 1 Vision for against the loss of surrounding agriculture and its natural beauty. Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 265 G. Whitehead 1 Vision for Ipswich is a large town with a small town atmosphere- this should be retained. Ipswich 272 L. Caudle 1 Vision for No more housing developments. They remove space for vehicles and open space, and are not Ipswich environmentally friendly 284 M. Bowen 1 4 Vision for Option 4: A sustainable approach is the only realistic long-term option. Ipswich 314 John Baker 1 Scale of Challenges the feasibility of increasing the population by 50% because: local industries have shed staff growth and employ fewer people now, so where will people work; water supply and sewerage could not cope; schools cannot find enough teachers; hospitals cannot cope with existing demand; NHS dental services have almost ceased to exist; there are hundreds of houses advertised for sale every week; and the currently stressed road system could not cope.
318 Mr Hunt 1 Scale of Request for definition of the word "plan". Will the plan enable the smooth progression of natural growth growth through a swift response to planning applications, or is it something that has to be made to happen? We may need a huge increase in house building to bring down prices. 342 Mrs Birch 1 Scale of 15,400 seems a lot of new houses. growth 359 Mrs C Reeve 1 Scale of The requirement for 15,400 new homes and 18,000 new jobs is inconsistent with current observations - growth companies are closing down or shedding staff and work being moved overseas. The rationale for the figures looks flawed. 359 Mrs C Reeve 1 Vacant Empty homes should be surveyed and used as part of the supply. Put measures in place to use these dwellings before building on greenfield land. 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 1 3 & 4 Vision Would assist most directly in achieving the enhanced role given to the borough by the RSS and the Panel Planning Kesgrave Report. Covenant Limited 362 Mr B Reeve 1 Scale of The requirement for 15,400 new homes and 18,000 new jobs is inconsistent with current observations - growth companies are closing down or shedding staff and work being moved overseas. The rationale for the figures looks flawed. 362 Mr B Reeve 1 Vacant Empty homes should be surveyed and used as part of the supply. Put measures in place to use these dwellings before building on greenfield land. 363 R D Paterson 1 Urban extent The areas within the existing southern by-pass and the needed northern by-pass should all be considered as one urban area - part of Ipswich. 377 Mrs Hammond 1 Scale of You say houses are needed for people to access jobs in Ipswich but there are now fewer jobs in Ipswich growth and people travel out of the borough for employment.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 381 Mrs F M Green 1 Scale of The extra houses have been asked for by IBC because of its housing needs study and not been imposed growth from the top down. Ipswich should still be working to the Suffolk Structure Plan figures, not draft RSS. There seems to be more than enough brownfield land to build on in the urban area. Also where are the 18,000 jobs going to come from - lately we have been losing jobs not gaining. Also how is the level of growth compatible with stabilising traffic levels at 1999 levels and how will this be achieved?
399 D Halstead 1 Scale of Ipswich should challenge the Government's policy of locating so many houses in the South East where growth rainfall and hence water resources are so low. The Government's policy also distorts the economy of the country and overloads the infrastructure in the South East. 461 R A Carter 1 Givens - scale If hundreds of houses are built on Henley and Westerfield Roads over the next two decades, then of growth another development will be needed for the 20 years after that. This is due to politicians who have since WW2 rapidly increased the population of our already overpopulated country, without any mandate from the people. 463 Mr Studd 1 Vision Ipswich to become a unitary borough with an extended boundary, and keep land as green belt around Thorington Park/The Strand, north of Humber Doucy Lane, Henley Road, Westerfield Road and Lower Road, Westerfield. 493 Rose Freeman The Theatres 1 Vision Ipswich should not be limited to a one-sentence vision. A number of visions could be stated. We would Trust like to see an amalgamation of options 1, 2 and 4.
501 C Cox Barton Threadneedl 1 Vision The vision should take account of the plan period to 2021 and the need for future development to be Willmore e Property planned and managed to ensure sustainable patterns of development. Investments
511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 1 General Little information is contained about the evidence base in the Core Strategy. comment 511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 1 General The Core Strategy needs to set out a broad spatial strategy linked to a key diagram. It should not identify comment specific sites. Allocations in the sites document would then need to conform to this spatial strategy.
511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 1 Vision The four vision options are very general in nature and could apply to almost anywhere. They do not reflect the specific needs of Ipswich , its characteristics, or the geography of Ipswich, relative to the evidence base that has been established. They do not appear to be mutually exclusive and may all contain elements that could form part of the final spatial vision.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 1 General A lack of clear spatial expression at the preferred options stage could render the Core Strategy unsound. comment Without this the Core Strategy cannot properly fulfil its intended purpose of providing a long term spatial vision for the area and would not provide an adequate framework for the identification of possible development sites. Thus the Core Strategy will need to address broad locations for delivering housing and other strategic development needs. This could usefully be presented through a key diagram.
511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 1 General There are currently no objectives in the Core Strategy. We assume that this is a function of the general comment nature of the issues and options paper and that objectives will be derived in the context of the responses received to the six issues. As the vision is developed, IBC should be clear about how the objectives have been derived from and relate to the vision. 511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 1 General The core policies will guide broad patterns of development and constraint. They should provide the comment principles of how, where and when development will be delivered and by whom. This will include matters that influence strategic decisions about directions and levels of growth, design quality, sustainability and delivery of supporting infrastructure, not detailed development control criteria. There is no inclusion of information relating to what matters will be covered by core policies. This needs to be considered further. We would expect the core strategy preferred options document to clearly articulate the links between the various elements of the Core Strategy (vision, objectives, core policies).
512 Mr Eric Cooper Highways 1 Vision All four options have some merit, but it would be useful to expand on what is suggested by including Agency reference to sustainable transport, reducing the need to travel and offering alternative modes of transport which contributes to minimising impact on the environment. 512 Mr Eric Cooper Highways 1 Scale of Draft RSS requires 15,400 dwellings in Ipswich but 20,110 dwellings in the Ipswich Policy Area. There is Agency growth no mention in the documentation of proposals for synergy between the Ipswich LDF process and adjoining authorities' frameworks. The Agency consider that it is important to take account of the wider implications of growth affecting the various frameworks and the impact on the A14. The Haven gateway A14 study may go some way towards understanding these impacts.
516 L Woolf 1 Scale of Concerned about the scale of growth, particularly in relation to water supplies and loss of agricultural growth land, as we will need to produce more and more of our own food as energy prices increase and countries like China catch up with western living standards. Many northern towns have suffered population decline and therefore must have some spare infrastructure and utilities capacity. We should revive depopulated areas before creating new developments. It is irresponsible to draw in a large number of people from elsewhere. 549 Ishaku Maitumbi EERA 1 Vision The options are broadly consistent with the draft EoE Plan vision and objectives, but would be better expressed together - so that quality of life, sustainable development and effective delivery are seen as a whole. It could also include some element of enhancing the Borough's assets and respecting its diversity as expressed in draft EoE Plan. The Borough's aspirations for growth need to be captured in the vision.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 1 3 Vision for Option 3 would ensure the most suitable development would take place on sites already identified. Salter Ipswich Concentrate growth in areas to be a catalyst to neighbouring sites in a planned and sustainable manner.
597 P & J Youngs 1 4 Vision for Ipswich would benefit from another injection of companies (as BT, Willis etc in the 1970s). Ipswich 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 1 3 Vision for Option 3 would ensure the most suitable development would take place on sites already identified. Campus Ipswich Concentrate growth in areas to be a catalyst to neighbouring sites in a planned and sustainable manner. Suffolk 600 R Davies Gerald EveBritish 1 4 Vision for It is important to seek to ensure that development is brought forward in a sustainable manner. Energy plc Ipswich 603 C Shah LIDL UK 1 3 Vision for GmbH Ipswich 603 C Shah LIDL UK 1 1 Vision for Option 1- too vague. GmbH Ipswich 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 1 3 Vision for Option 3 would ensure the most suitable development would take place on sites already identified. Woodrow Ipswich Concentrate growth in areas to be a catalyst to neighbouring sites in a planned and sustainable manner. Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 1 3 Vision for Option 3 would ensure the most suitable development would take place on sites already identified. British Ports Ipswich Concentrate growth in areas to be a catalyst to neighbouring sites in a planned and sustainable manner.
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 1 3 Vision for Option 3 would ensure the most suitable development would take place on sites already identified. Ipswich Concentrate growth in areas to be a catalyst to neighbouring sites in a planned and sustainable manner.
632 Mrs M Pearson 1 Location of Need to take an overview of all areas of development and their impacts on one another. How will jobs be development created for the long term? How will we attract appropriate employers? If new development takes place, what will be given back to the community? If government targets are hit, does higher funding automatically follow? 633 Mr G Pearson 1 Scale of The Council cannot directly influence the creation of enough jobs to meet the government's target. Thus development creating additional housing will just add to the daily exodus of workers away from Ipswich thereby adding to existing transport etc problems. Infrastructure is under severe pressure and I hear of no plans to increase expenditure on it. Adjacent councils should be planning together to lessen the impact of development on existing communities. 635 Mr & Mrs Vernau 1 Scale of Ipswich's charm is that it is a rural town with some green fields and parts to enjoy. Having worked in the development/in hospital for over 20 years it is obviously struggling now to meet the needs of the existing population. More frastructure development would stretch the system to breaking point. If new housing is essential then the smallest amount possible should be built on brown sites only.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 674 Mr G E Pryke 1 Scale of The Regional Plan is flawed. Increasing numbers of jobs do not need to be town orientated so there is no growth guarantee that the land allocated for small businesses would be taken up, not that jobs would be forthcoming. Any substantial increase in the population of the town will worsen the current transport bottlenecks. The proliferation of flats will result in overcrowding as they are not family friendly and discourage any sense of community. They contrast poorly with post-war developments such as Australia estate. With the increase in Asian and Eastern European workers coming to the town, there is a shortage of homes for first time buyers, and new build should provide for those disadvantaged by this. If population growth is inevitable then perhaps new settlements should be considered in surrounding districts?
728 Mr & Mrs Coley 1 Scale of Has no one questioned the sustainability of a 30% increase in the size of the town? What about roads, growth medical facilities, and schools already at full stretch, and water supplies? The Council should challenge the figure. 777 L Quantrill 1 Scale of Question the need for 15,400 extra homes. Need should be based on meeting local demand for housing growth and jobs. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 1 4 Vision Option 4: so development is adequately controlled/considered. International
783 E Phillips 1 4 Vision Option 4: Rapid development puts too much pressure on existing services and amenities. These can only be extended gradually. 835 Mr David Barker Barton Crest 1 3 Vision Option 3. RSS Panel Report emphasises importance of early delivery of housing. This option reflects this Willmore Nicholson principle. Options 1, 2 and 4 are too general. 839 K. Hill 1 Need for Where will jobs be found (to support housing growth) when employment is being curtailed in the Ipswich employment area? 849 P. Dof 1 5 Need for Use empty houses and flats- this would reduce the need for greenfield land. development 852 D. Powell 1 Omission- Architecture in Ipswich: comments Waterfront development, criticizes Wherstead Road and Duke Street urban design development, and to a lesser extent London Road. 852 D. Powell 1 Targets Where will the 18,000 jobs come from? Do we need more offices? 856 J. Jones 1 4 Vision Option 4: Development should be sustainable and not affect current amenities and the environment.
857 A. Jones 1 4 Vision Option 4: Development should be sustainable and not affect current amenities and the environment.
858 M. Gray 1 1 Vision Need to capitalise on positive changes currently happening in Ipswich by bringing good, well-paid jobs- do not endanger vision option 1 by building too many homes too soon. 858 M. Gray 1 1 and 2 Vision Options 1 and 2. Ipswich must be made more attractive to enable it to compete with other centres (Norwich, Colchester) and to attract new people and jobs. A dash for housing would jeopardise achievement of vital amenities and services to support growth.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 889 B. Glover 1 Omission Where will all the jobs come from to achieve the target? 891 R. Hine 1 Vision There is not enough employment for the housing growth predicted (cites Willis redundancies). Where will the jobs come form? Questions whether Northern Fringe development would meet local needs or be used by people from outside Ipswich. 899 G Duncan 1 4 Vision Option 4: would lead to the delivery of the other 3. 902 S Duncan 1 4 Vision Option 4: would lead to the delivery of the other 3. 905 N Hine 1 Vision There is not sufficient employment to support housing. 906 P Birdsall 1 4 Vision Growth should not harm residents' quality of life. 907 G Ellis 1 Vision/targets Questions whether targets are accurate. Many new flats and houses in Ipswich stand empty.
933 Lydia Vulliamy 1 Scale of Questions whether the scale of growth proposed is really necessary.Any development should be growth sustainable. Conservation issues are more important than commerce. 938 Mrs E Burrows 1 Vision Ipswich is a borough - it should not try to emulate other cities with windswept piazzas and high density flats but be an individual town as it always was. The town used to be versatile with a livestock market, docks, and big engineering companies, a famous art college and Broomhill Baths. What is the point in having a second rate university instead of the college - we need vocational courses. Development in Ipswich should be people-sized and for local people.
974 D & J Sheppard 1 Vision Challenge the contention that all this extra growth is needed. 977 Mr T Scott 1 Vision Put local people first. Put money into Broomhill Pool, not the Wolsey Theatre and Corn Exchange.
977 Mr T Scott 1 Scale of Where are the new companies to provide the additional jobs? You are swamping the area with new growth housing and foreigners. How many local people can afford a waterside apartment and yacht?
983 K MacFadyen 1 Scale of Do really need lots of new build? growth 1005 D Dufty Transport 1 4 Vision Option 4. 2000 Group Ipswich and Suffolk 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 1 4 Vision Positive and considers protection of features of community value. Supports inclusion of the word Countryside sustainability. Project
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 1010 C Dawson Planning Ipswich 1 3 Vision Ipswich School does not disagree with any of the “visions” expressed in the 4 Options. All express a Potential School generally positive approach to the future of the town. However, Option 3 may be worthy of prioritisation in that it requires a focused approach to the delivery of the planned growth of the town as soon as possible. This should, of course, be carried out in a planned manner and, presumably, on a phased basis. However, the LDF should adopt a proactive approach in providing for future growth and establishing site allocations to allow this to take place.
1012 J Peecock Peecock 1 Givens The doc should refer to PPS1 and PPG3. An urban capacity study should be published as should the Short impact windfall sites have had on hsg numbers in the Borough.There are many other brownfield sites that offer potential during the plan period 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 1 1 & 4 Vision for County Ipswich Council 1 I Wedd 2 2 5 Location of The Council should have the creation of communities in mind when locating & designing new Dev development & spaces. Sense of identity. This largely means option b but each area should be considered individually. 6 N Bateman 2 2 5 Location of Focus on town centre, Ravenswood & Waterfront. More houses are a priority. Dev 57 N Palmer Bidwells 2 2 5 Location of Option 2 preferred for all kinds of development. To ensure accessibility and sustainability. development 105 W Last 2 5 Location of Option 2: Office and industrial development. Option 3: Housing, Retail and Leisure. Share improvements Development all around town. 106 P Stephenson 2 5 Location of Option 2: Industrial and retail. Option 3: Housing, office and leisure. Development 107 P Horne 2 5 Location of Option 1: Housing. Option 2: Office and industrial and Option 3: Retail and Leisure development 109 J Welsh Green Living 2 5 Location of Option 1- Office, some leisure. Option 2- Some housing, industry, retail, some leisure. Option 3- some Centre Development housing.
183 A Fuller 2 3 5 Location of Development 193 John Ireland 2 5 The Approach (a) Concentrate housing development in the key locations within Ipswich: (b) Concentrate office To The development in the centre of Ipswich: (c) Concentrate industrial development in the key locations within Location of Ipswich: (d) Disperse retail development all over Ipswich: (e) Concentrate leisure development in the Development key locations within Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 223 R Mudhar 2 5 The Approach (a) Disperse housing development all over Ipswich; (b) Concentrate office developments in the key To The locations within Ipswich; (c) Concentrate industrial developments in the key locations within Ipswich; (d) Location of concentrate retail development in the centre of Ipswich; (e) Disperse leisure development all over Development Ipswich.
288 Mrs J Seaton 2 5 Location of Option 1 (concentration in town centre) for all types of development. development 292 T G Holden 2 5 Location of Option 3 dispersal - as widely as possible for all new development. development 416 Mrs D Longden Nacton Priory 2 (a) 1 5 Location of Concentrate housing in the centre of Ipswich. Court development Residents' Association 447 B C Pinner 2 (a)3, 5 Location of Option 3 (disperse across Ipswich) for housing (a) and leisure (e). (e)3 development 458 S Speight 2 5 Location of Generally business should locate in the town centre providing adequate parking is provided. development 490 A C Raworth 2 5 Location of Option 1 (concentrate) office (b) and retail (d). Option 2 (key locations) industrial development (c). Option development 3 (disperse) housing (a) and leisure (e). 491 Mrs V Andrews 2 e 5 Location of Leisure development (e) selected but preferred locational approach not specified development 504 C Dawson Planning PRUPIM & 2 5 Location of Housing in the town centre and other suitable locations. Offices in the centre (accessibility and proximity Potential Hartfield development to other activities). Retail should be in the centre in line with PPS6 - catering for all types of retailing within Development the broader central area. Leisure should be in the central area as advised by PPS6. Sports based s activities may be better outside the centre. The DPD will need to distinguish between types of leisure. Commercial leisure should be in the town centre as far as possible, for accessibility.
507 T Beaven 2 5 Location of Option 1(concentration in centre) - offices. Option 2 (concentration in key locations) - industry and retail. development Option 3 (dispersal) - housing and leisure. 508 R Paddison Babergh 2 5 Location of Option 1 (concentration in centre) - housing (a), retail (d), leisure (e). Option 2 (concentration in key District development locations) - office (b) and industry (c). Council 510 E Kemsley Peacock & WM Morrison 2 5 Location of Option 2 (concentration in key locations) - housing (a) and retail (d). Smith Supermarket development s Plc
513 P Miller 2 5 Location of Option 1 (concentration in centre) - retail (d). Option 2 (concentration in key locations) - industry (c) office development (b) and leisure (e). Option 3 (dispersal) - housing (a).
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 2 5 Location of a.hsg=3.b office=2,cind=2,d retail=1, e.leisure=3 L Dev 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 2 5 Loc of Dev A balanced approach needs to be taken towards the location of new dev in order to ensure a range of Martin Homes housing, office, retail and leisure uses are available throughout Ipswich. Key retail and leisure uses are Associates more likely to be focused within the existing town centre area, the provision of housing and employment uses along main transport corridors and areas where sustainable travel opportunities can be maximised, is supported. 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 2 5 Loc of Dev housing -2, office-3,industrial-3,retail-2,leisure-2 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 2 5 Loc of Dev a=2,b=1,c=2,d=1,e=2 Malyan 928 543 Tom Clayton 2 3, 2, 2, 5 Loc of Dev 1, 1 558 P R Richards 2 a 3 5 Loc of Dev 558 P R Richards 2 b 1 5 Loc of Dev 558 P R Richards 2 c 1 5 Loc of Dev 558 P R Richards 2 d 1 5 Loc of Dev 558 P R Richards 2 e 2 5 Loc of Dev 559 G Thomas 2 5 Loc of Dev Housing- Option 3 although option 1 provides opportunity to recycle brownfield land. Office dev - Option 1. Industry - Option 2. Retail - Option 1, although neighbourhood shopping areas which provided a localised shopping function should be allowed to grow in proportion to the size and requirements of the catchment areas they serve. Leisure - Option 3. 567 R Gape 2 5 Location of 1=d,2=b,c,e, 3==a development 577 Michael Brain 2 a, b, c, 5 Location of d, e Development 578 L Jenkins Suffolk 2 2 5 Loc of dev Supports option 2 for all (a,b,c,d,e) Constabulary
584 T & S Groot- 2 5 Location of Reduce traffic burden in the centre by locating offices and businesses around the edge of town. Noisy Wassink development businesses should only be out of town. 610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 2 5 Location of Option 1 (concentration in centre) - retail (d). Option 2 (concentration in key locations) - office (b), industry S Group development (c) and some leisure (e). Option 3 (dispersal) - housing (a) and some leisure (e).
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 2 5 Location of Option 2 concentration in key locations for all the types of development (a,b,c,d, and e). Green development Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 2 5 Location of Option 1 (concentration in centre) - leisure (e). Option 2 (concentration in key locations) - retail (d). development Option 3 (dispersal) - housing (a), office (b), industry (c). 617 S Rosenberg 2 5 Location of Concentrate development in the centre of town to keep it alive. development 624 S Mills Network Rail 2 5 Location of It is not possible to express a particular preference for certain uses as this will be dictated by site location, development area specific planning policies and changing market conditions. However in central Ipswich close to the station, all options in Q5 seem suitable with the proviso that new industrial uses may be less compatible with the level of new housing and mixed use development already coming forward in the area.
625 Mrs B Robinson 2 3 5 Location of Option 3 - dispersal - for all the types of development. development. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 2 5 Location of Option 2 concentration in key locations for all the types of development (a,b,c,d, and e). Development development s Ltd 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 2 5 Location of Concentration in centre (1): retail and leisure. Concentration in key locations (2): office and industry. Residents' development. Dispersal (3): housing. Association 740 H Kembery 2 5 Location of Concentration in town centre (1): retail. Concentration in key locations (2): office, industry. Dispersal (3): development. housing and leisure. 773 K Oliver 2 5 Location of Concentration in town centre (1): housing. Concentration in key locations (2): office, industry, retail and development leisure. 783 E Phillips 2 1, 2 & 3 5 Location of Office and retail: 1 &2; Housing and leisure: 3; industry: 2. development 900 R Duncan 2 1 5 Location of Option 1 for housing and offices. development 901 V Duncan 2 5 Location of Need more industrial development- need more work in Ipswich to maintain living conditions. development 902 S Duncan 2 1 5 Location of Option 1 for housing and offices. development 906 P Birdsall 2 1 & 2 5 Location of 1: Housing, office, leisure. 2: industrial and retail. The town centre is dead after working hours- this should development be reversed 912 Mrs R J Southworth 2 5 Location of Concentration in centre (1): retail. Concentration in key locations (2): office, industry. Dispersal (3): development. housing and leisure.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 2 5 Location of Concentrate in town centre (1) - office and retail. Concentrate in key locations (2) - housing, industry and Malyan development leisure. Planning 931 D C Harper 2 5 Location of Concentrate in centre (1) - office, retail and leisure. Concentrate in key locations (2) housing and industry. development 952 Mr S Bretherton 2 5 Location of Concentrate in centre (1) - office. Concentrate in key locations (2) housing, industry, retail and leisure. development 972 N Cenci IBC 2 5 Location of Concentrate in centre (1) - retail. Concentrate in key locations (2) - office, industry and leisure. Disperse Councillor development (3) - housing. 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 2 5 Location of Concentrate in centre (1) - retail. Concentrate in key locations (2) - office, industry and leisure. Disperse C Group development (3) - housing and some leisure. 978 Mrs G Ellis 2 2 5 Location of Concentrate all development in key locations. development 980 Mrs & Mrs Wand 2 5 Location of Concentrate development in town centre, and if not there, in key locations. Wholesale development R & M development throughout Ipswich should be avoided as this may change the character of the town irrevocably.
990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 2 5 Location of Concentrate in centre (1) - retail. Concentrate in key locations (2) - office, industry. Disperse (3) - Society development housing, leisure.
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 2 5 Location of a, d and e - 3 (disperse). B and c - 2 (key locations) Peoples Development Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 2 (a)3, 5 Location of Option 3 - dispersal for (a) housing and (e) leisure. Option 2 concentration in key locations for (b) office, Preservation (b)2, development and (c) industry. Option 1 concentration in centre for (d) retail. Society (c)2, (d)1, (e)3 1010 C Dawson Planning Ipswich 2 5 Location of Housing: Option 2/3. The Northern Fringe is one such key location- the only major opportunity for housing Potential School development identified. Leisure: In terms of Question 5e, the preferred approach to the location of new leisure development may be distinctive for sporting facilities, as opposed to commercial leisure. Sporting facilities will, by their nature, require significant areas of land and this is most likely to be capable of delivery on the urban edge, rather than within the heart of the built up area. Open sports facilities, such as playing fields and pitches, are also more easily capable of accommodation in greenfield areas as their open nature makes them less intrusive.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 57 N Palmer Bidwells 2 6 Development High density residential, office, retail and leisure development can be concentrated in the centre. This principles should not be at the expense of allowing development at key locations. 223 R Mudhar 2 6 The Approach Yes - as indicated. To The Location of Development
259 M. Duhm 2 6 Location of Location selection should improve shopping in town centre. Development 490 A C Raworth 2 6 Location of No. development 491 Mrs V Andrews 2 6 Location of Elements of options a, d, and e. development 504 C Dawson Planning PRUPIM & 2 1 and 2 6 Location of A mix of 1 and 2 is most appropriate given the amount and range of development needed in Ipswich. It Potential Hartfield development would allow the concentration of development in the centre for a range of uses, especially retail, leisure Development and commercial. Also housing. The scale of growth needed will not be capable of accommodation just in s the town centre, hence other key locations needed. 508 R Paddison Babergh 2 6 Location of Yes, for housing development. It is important that IBC can meet its RSS target of 15,400 dwellings within District development its boundary as far as possible. Council 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 2 6 Loc of Dev The approach to the location of development needs to be a balanced one involving maximising the use of Martin Homes available brownfield sites whilst at the same time allocating appropriate sites outside the town centre to Associates cater for a different type of housing need. Existing employment land needs to be safeguarded to ensure a balance of land uses and to ensure that new housing within urban areas is not at the expense of existing employment areas. 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 2 6 Loc of Dev Options 1&2 together 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 2 6 Loc of Dev There needs to be a finer grain approach to land uses within the town centre. For example providing Malyan 928 specific areas or quarters as the focus for employment, leisure etc. will increase viability of that use through economies of association. 543 Tom Clayton 2 6 Loc of Dev Yes. All to a limited degree spreading housing developments can allow for a greater mix of housing. Mixing in retail and some employment will help to create more of a community. At the same time, focusing major employment, retail and leisure development in key areas would facilitate and justify the improvement of transport links to those areas.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 577 Michael Brain 2 6 Location of The most appropriate solution will depend on the economic and environmental limitations that may grow Development to affect our living patterns. If the private car continues to be affordable, and the population of Ipswich grows by 40%, then it would not make sense to pursue Option 1 and focus developments in the centre of Ipswich, since this would merely increase traffic congestion to levels which were impractical, intolerable, and uneconomic. Conversely, Option 3 would virtually require the continued mass availability of the private car, which may be environmentally unrealistic unless an alternative carbon-neutral fuel can be produced economically, in sufficient volume, and quickly. Hence Option 2 would appear to respond to the most likely scenario, suggesting a return to local communities having easy local access to all the key elements for living, with the possibility of linking the chosen centres by public transport.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 2 6 Loc of dev Whichever option is the closest to the 5 newly identified policing areas. Constabulary
599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 2 6 Location of Option 1 is important- sequential test should be employed for most development. A mix of uses must be Campus development ensured on the Waterfront. Suffolk 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 2 6 Location of Option 1 is important- sequential test should be employed for most development. A mix of uses must be Woodrow development ensured on the Waterfront. Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 2 6 Location of Ports are essential trade in the Ipswich and the UK generally. It is also important to passenger transport British Ports development UK government states that the country 'needs a thriving port industry'. The LDF should reflect this. Option 1 is important- sequential test should be employed for most development. A mix of uses must be ensured on the Waterfront. 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 2 6 Location of The LDF should reflect this. Option 1 is important- sequential test should be employed for most development development. Regeneration must be ensured on the Waterfront- mixed uses and a sustainable environment. 610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 2 6 Location of The key factor is accessibility – for each type of development the question needs to be asked where the S Group development intended users are likely to be coming from. “One-off” leisure developments, especially cultural, need to be in places accessible by public transport, which will mainly be the town centre.
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 2 6 Location of Option 1 is important insofar as the sequential [approach] would be employed but key locations outside Green development the perceived centre are as important so long as they would be adequately served by suitable transport Properties infrastructure. Option 2 recognises that some uses such as industrial areas are better suited away from Ltd the centre.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 613 Mr Chris Mole MP 2 6 Location of Yes there can be some concentration of office locations. development 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 2 6 Location of Option 1 is important insofar as the sequential [approach] would be employed but key locations outside Development development the perceived centre are as important so long as they would be adequately served by suitable transport s Ltd infrastructure. Option 2 recognises that some uses such as industrial areas are better suited away from the centre. 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 2 6 Location of Get businesses out on industrial estates and put more affordable shops and housing in the town. Residents' development. Association 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 2 6 Location of There needs to be a finer grain approach to land uses within the town centre, e.g. providing specific areas Malyan development or quarters as the focus for employment, leisure, etc. will increase viability of that use through the Planning economics of association. 931 D C Harper 2 6 Location of Option 3 for some housing and leisure. Option 2 for some office, retail and leisure. development 952 Mr S Bretherton 2 6 Location of I think that lower density housing development will be required on greenfield sites around the edge of development Ipswich to complement the high density development within Ipswich. It is naive to think otherwise.
971 Mr D Kidney English 2 6 Location of For all sites that are to be considered for development, whether they are within the centre, within key Nature development locations or dispersed over the Borough, we advise the Council to take into account their associated biodiversity and geological conservation interests. The following issues must be considered when evaluating the development potential of a site: proximity to designated sites of international, national and local importance; presence of statutory protected species; presence of/proximity to Local Biodiversity Action Plan species and habitats; and presence of features of geological interest.
972 N Cenci IBC 2 6 Location of Yes - makes sense and ensures good planning. Councillor development 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 2 6 Location of Leisure developments - major cultural and specialist development should be in the town centre, but sport C Group development facilities should be dispersed. 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 2 6 Location of This is the way it will happen. Society development
1002 R Ward Suffolk 2 6 Location of Yes, in reality it is likely that all the principal development types identified in 5 will need to be dispersed Preservation development throughout Ipswich to service communities. Society 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 2 6 Location of PPSs set out provisions for this. County development Council
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 9 Vincent 2 3 7 Location of Disperse as widely as possible & near shopping centres. Need to consider transport links, sewerage, Dev schools - no McDonalds on housing estates 109 J Welsh Green Living 2 7 Location of Sustainability and access- reasons for location choices. Retail need town centre location, but heavy Centre development goods need (existing) retail parks.
193 John Ireland 2 7 The Approach Housing, industrial and leisure areas should be discrete. Shopping areas should be easily accessible by To The all and should therefore be located across the town. Location of Development
223 R Mudhar 2 7 The Approach Some developments benefit from being grouped, office, industrial and leisure developments for instance To The hence the trend of retail and industrial parks. Leisure may be a combination of all - Ipswich is reasonably Location of well served by a wide distribution of parks and recs. There is plenty of retail space in the town. More Development should be made of Eastgate for instance, as well as smaller stores.
259 M. Duhm 2 7 Location of Town centre parking would be an issue for many categories. Development 264 D. Seaton 2 7 Location of There is a need to encourage people to live, work and shop in central parts of the town rather than its development periphery. 288 Mrs J Seaton 2 7 Location of To preserve the countryside and revitalise the centre of the old town. development 491 Mrs V Andrews 2 7 Location of Need a balance. In the town centre there is Crown pools for leisure use. On the outskirts of town there development are more options. Too much housing chokes an area. 508 R Paddison Babergh 2 7 Location of This is important for residential development. For retail development it is important that new schemes are District development concentrated in the town centre to strengthen its function, aid regeneration and enable linked shopping Council trips. By ensuring that sufficient land is available in the town centre there will be less pressure on the edge of town site at Copdock roundabout. This would accord with PPS6.
510 E Kemsley Peacock & WM Morrison 2 7 Location of Option 2 would ensure that development is concentrated in sustainable locations across the Borough and Smith Supermarket development not just located within central Ipswich. s Plc
535 R Hopwood Bidwells 2 7 Loc of Dev Together options 1&2 provide a sound basis on which to deliver development. 543 Tom Clayton 2 7 Loc of Dev As above 567 R Gape 2 7 Location of So that housing is spread out with no ghetto effects. So that employment is easy to get to. So that the development centre of town stays alive.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 577 Michael Brain 2 7 Location of I don't see it as a matter of preference. I think we have to recognise the strong possibility that at least Development some change will be necessitated within the next fifteen years by environmental and consequential economic forces, which must be accommodated within the town's infrastructure. Market forces have brought us into this situation based on the competitive depletion of plentiful resources. When the resources become scarce and the environmental impact of their depletion becomes apparent, it will surely require something other than market forces to provide the solution, and that something will involve a strategy for living within the new limitations.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 2 2 7 Loc of dev Option 2 helps a community forge an identity. A combination of people living and working in the area Constabulary where they actually live, help build the community.
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 2 7 Location of As above. Green development Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 2 7 Location of Reduces need for travel and access by public transport. development 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 2 7 Location of As above. Development development s Ltd 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 2 7 Location of To stop the town shutting down at 6pm every night and turning into a no go area for decent people except Residents' development. pubbers and clubbers. Association 740 H Kembery 2 7 Location of Important to put industry near existing good road links so new roads do not have to be built, and away development. from residential areas. 773 K Oliver 2 7 Location of All available town centre and brownfield sites should be developed before using more greenfield areas. development To regenerate the town centre you need a resident population there. 931 D C Harper 2 7 Location of The only probably solution to further decay of Ipswich is a viable living area. development 972 N Cenci IBC 2 7 Location of As above. Transport problems need to be taken into consideration. Councillor development 1002 R Ward Suffolk 2 7 Location of Because it represents the most sustainable way forward. Preservation development Society
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 2 7 Location of Location of development should be linked to s106 agreements. Housing: focus on selected areas helps to County development improve planning for supporting services, e.g. education. The document, should take account of Council biodiversity/ PPS9, and plan for considerations such as BAP habitats, green/ ecological networks of paths, open spaces etc. Development should take note of PPS9-green spaces in developments.
60 R G & R Free 2 8 Location of Should develop major housing out of town (but not on the Northern Fringe), complete with all the facilities M development needed and a good public transport system, thus easing pressure on the town centre.
73 M Crook 2 8 Location of Should develop in Northern Ipswich- South West Ipswich has had more than enough. development 77 I Maitumbi EERA 2 8 Development IBC should consider the implications of the removal of guidance to neighbouring districts on development in adjacent next to Ipswich Borough. boroughs 77 I Maitumbi EERA 2 8 Joint work with IBC need to consider whether a joint approach (below the sub-regional level) is needed to plan the whole neighbouring of the Ipswich Urban Area. authorities
92 Anon 2 8 Develop IBC should speak to other local authorities about putting some of the development at Copdock. outside Borough Boundary 103 L Cunningham 2 8 Location of Avoid areas of congestion e.g. Yarmouth, Bramford, Ranelagh and Foxhall Roads which increase Development congestion in the centre of town. Sites e.g. Ravenswood have more feeder roads and so have better access. 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 2 8 Location of Q. 5 does not allow for mixed use development. Provision should be made for this to enable sustainable Planning Kesgrave development forms of development. Covenant Limited 447 B C Pinner 2 8 Location of Retail and industrial development is best outside the borough to allow better parking etc. development 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 2 8 Location of The following principles should be adopted: decisions about the location of development should seek to Wildlife Trust development protect existing areas of biodiversity importance. Also, opportunities should be taken to enhance the biodiversity of an area, particularly for priority species and habitats listed in the UK and Suffolk BAPs. Due regard should be given to safeguarding areas which contribute to the ecological network, or alternatively opportunities should be taken to strengthen and enhance these networks. Ecological surveys should be carried out early in the planning process in accordance with guidance in PPS9.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 490 A C Raworth 2 8 Location of No. development 491 Mrs V Andrews 2 8 Location of Every residential unit should have at least 1 off road parking space. Every development should include development green space and tree planting (and not just residential developments). 507 T Beaven 2 8 Location of Look for alternatives to using green belt sites - I.e. do not develop fields in north Ipswich around development Westerfield and Tuddenham Roads. 537 C Brown Boyer Persimmon 2 8 Loc of Dev It is preferable to concentrate housing development both in the centre of Ipswich and at key locations Planning Ltd Homes both in the centre of Ipswich and at key locations around the town, including strategic development at the (Essex) Ltd northern fringe. This approach does not seem to be explicitly covered by the options provided, but would ensure a balance between assisting urban regeneration and delivery of peripheral greenfield development that is realistically required to meet the housing target of emerging RSS14. Concentration of development at the northern fringe has clearly been established as the most appropriate option by the Structure Plan, whilst development of a strategic site of this scale would be best able to provide a balanced, mixed use sustainable urban extension.
539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 2 8 Loc of Dev Development should be seen within the context of adding value to the town through its ability to address Malyan 928 issues such as poor quality public realm/barriers to communication/access. Locational policy should refer to such criteria. 577 Michael Brain 2 8 Location of At one extreme, I suggest that all future towns and cities may need to be re-configured to be much less Development dependent on cheap motoring. Hence housing will need to be re-integrated with local community services such as schools, shops, healthcare, sport and leisure facilities, and with employment - though I would make exceptions for any facility which might represent a potential danger to a residential community, and I can therefore appreciate the continued need for industrial estates. I do not see similar benefits for "leisure estates" such as Cardinal Park: on the contrary, the latter appears to me to be a ghetto for fast- food and alcohol consumption, and not a versatile centre for all the family to enjoy. Recognisable communities with recognisable centres might then favour a regeneration of public transport, though I would re-iterate that I would expect a rural centre such as Ipswich still to depend on private transport in some form.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 2 8 Loc of dev From a policing perspective it would be ideal if any proposed development takes into consideration the 5 Constabulary policing areas.
579 R Henderson RSPB 2 8 Loc of dev No strict preference but Option 1& 2 would be most sustainable in terms of utilising existing infrastructure and facilities. 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 2 8 Location of Agree with Option 2, but note the RSS Panel recommendation of a partnership approach involving joint Woodrow development DPDs. A joint approach to delivery of housing and employment in W.Ipswich would be greatly beneficial. Development These comments are made in relation to Chantry Vale (Babergh) which TW are proposing as a business s Ltd. site.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 613 Mr Chris Mole MP 2 8 Location of No. development 624 S Mills Network Rail 2 8 Location of Network Rail supports the siting of new development and increased densities in accessible locations such development as near railway stations. NR is the statutory undertaker responsible for maintaining and operating the country's railway infrastructure and estate. Where land is no longer needed for operational use there is often potential for redevelopment that in turn would bring wider regeneration benefits for the area. Much of our estate is previously developed land in sustainable locations and therefore ideally suited for redevelopment. As such options 1 and 2 may be more suitable than option 3 as a preference for brownfield sites provides more of a focused and reasoned approach than the dispersed development option.
625 Mrs B Robinson 2 8 Location of Would prefer to see prioritisation of use of brownfield sites. development. 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 2 8 Location of Concentrate development on brownfield sites that have the least impact on current residents, development conservation areas, listed buildings and tree preservation orders. Keep industrial and office developments at larger employment or industrial areas. Leisure developments should be concentrated in the town centre or away from residential developments. 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 2 8 Location of No. Residents' development. Association 765 Clifford Smith 2 8 Location of Recent years have seen some dreadful developments in Ipswich that do not provide a mix of house development types, make no provision for the car and have no landscaping or amenities. By listing in the Sites document every pocket of available land there is a further invitation to town cramming. The strategy should be to select a major new area and develop it carefully according to a master plan covering basic infrastructure, density, mix, open space, landscaping etc. Then other areas of the town should be developed to reflect what is there at the moment and not repeating the poor infill developments we have seen hitherto.
783 E Phillips 2 8 Location of Similar to option 3 but protect certain green sites from development. development 852 D. Powell 2 8 Location of Ipswich shopping entire due to out of town retail (inc. near park and ride). Promotes park and ride development facilities without adjacent retail- this supports town centres. 899 G Duncan 2 8 Location of "The existing park and ride areas and bus lane could be more utilised with industrial units by park and development ride- better uses of buses." 900 R Duncan 2 8 Location of Incorporate park and Ride into industrial units. development 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 2 8 Location of Development should be seen in the context of adding value to the town through its ability to address Malyan development issues such as poor quality public realm/ access barriers. Locational policy should refer to such criteria. Planning
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 952 Mr S Bretherton 2 8 Location of District centre nodes should be identified in addition to central Ipswich, where the density of housing, development retail, and industry can be concentrated together with multi-modal transportation nodes in order to provide more sustainable communities. These could include areas such as Ravenswood/Ransomes Europark, Ipswich Hospital/woodbridge Road East, Norwich Road, Tesco/Pinewood, Asda/Whitehouse, Morrisons/Eastways, Derby Road, Westerfield. Each has opportunities to provide interchanges between rail, bus and car, or park and ride. 957 A Fenton 2 8 Location of There should be no hard and fast rule as there are a lot of issues to assess before any decisions are development made and the effects on infrastructure, and conservation issues, vary immensely from locality to locality. If things are spread out then the heart of Ipswich could die. If everything is focused in the heart of Ipswich then traffic chaos and pollution would worsen. The types of home being provided affects the location also family housing needs to be near schools, whilst flats need to be near transport facilities. This approach gives the best overall local fit.
966 Miss H Ormondroy 2 8 Location of Development of the Waterfront is a good idea but it must be done sensitively - respect the historic development buildings. Development should also be dispersed widely across the town. 971 Mr D Kidney English 2 8 Location of When considering areas to be developed, we advise the Council to bear in mind the value of land in Nature development terms of the potential for restoration of Local Biodiversity Action Plan habitats. PPS9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation , Section 5 (ii) states that Local development frameworks should, “identify any areas or sites for the restoration or creation of new priority habitats which contribute to regional targets, and support this restoration or creation through appropriate policies”. Development on areas which have a low potential for restoration should be favoured over areas with a high potential. Development should also be in line with the region’s Catchment Flood Management Plan.
990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 2 8 Location of Homes close to work and leisure is more sustainable and better integrates communities. Society development
1002 R Ward Suffolk 2 8 Location of None. Preservation development Society 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 2 8 Location of Consider each site on its own characteristics. Plan proactively for provision of accessible natural green Countryside Development space- new option 'f' for open space promoted. Project
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 608 M Norden Suffolk 2 8 Location of Specifically I can't comment on the 3 options but would like to see the following principles adopted. The Biodiversity development location of development should aim to protect existing biodiversity and green space, covering statutory Partnership and nonstatutory sites of nature conservation imprtance. It should also protect and identify opportuities to enhance LBAP habitats and species found in Ipswich borough in accordance with PPS9. A strategic view of planned development in the borough should aim to reinforce and enhance the existing ecological networks of parks, greenspaces, allotments, river corridors and the docks. New development should incorporate biodiversity and green space principles into their design as per PPS9. The TCPA's Biodiversity by Design provides good examples of how to do this. If brownfield sites are developed, apropriate ecological surveys should be undertaken and appropriate mitigation and enhancement implemented.
849 P. Dof 2 19 Infrastructure Plan for easy access to schools, churches, etc. Compact road system to reduce fuel use/ pollution and rationalise journey distances. 33 N Brigham Sustrans 2 1,1,2,1, 5,6 & Location of Hsg Option 1, Office Option 1, Industrial Option 2, Retail Option 1, Leisure Option 1. Q6 For hsg and 1 7 Dev leisure Options 1 & 3 are relevant.Q7 The town centre should be the location with easiest access by foot, cycle and public transport. 284 M. Bowen 2 6 & 7 Location of Options 1 and 2- growth should be concentrated in the centre and other key locations. development 14 B Samuel 2 Location of Angle Q.1Yes. Should focus on brownfield and river fronts but also British Sugar site. Dev 17 K Holley 2 Location of Land near station should be regenerated along Yarmouth Rd, waterfront, Ravenswood etc. Infrastructure Dev concerns about significant greenfield dev - traffic levels on A1214 London Rd-Felixstowe Rd. Prefers to see dev concentrated on A12 and A14, not to artificially constrain new housing dev to the Borough boundary. 25 T Leggatt 2 Location of Development should only take place in Central Ipswich on brownfield sites. No greenfield dev. No to Dev Govt hsg targets. Should plan for affordable housing everywhere on brownfield sites.
25 T Leggatt 2 Location of Against out of town, wants more local small shops. Shops should be developed locally in areas where Dev housing exists. Likewise for employment. 27 S Boa 2 Location of Areas of 60s housing? And that are run down should be considered Dev 29 D Kergon 2 Location of Need a vision beyond 2021. Mixed devs to ensure community cohesion, to cater for all home occupiers, Dev with fast & economic links between them and town centre. There should be a study of all available potential land within River Gipping, Valley Rd, Colchester Rd, Hospital, Ring Road, Nacton & River Orwell. Development should be dispersed, but avoid use of greenfield.
31 D Hindmarch 2 Location of Spread dev but avoid too many in any one area (create ghetto) and ensure small gardens are provided or Dev adequate green space to serve wildlife and to avoid isolation of high rise tenants.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 37 K Pierce 2 Location of Dev should be dispersed (c). The people of Ipswich would benefit instead of commuters in elitist areas. Dev 43 N Gibbons 2 2 Location of Build only where there is sufficient infrastructure (especially roads/ transport) development 49 M Neale 2 1 Location of Older retired people benefit from being in the town centre as they can reach amenities by foot, helping to housing for the keep them active and mobile- being a bus ride away is not sufficient. elderly 53 M Lunn 2 3 Disperse Disperse development across Ipswich to spread the benefits of that development around the town. development 55 Mrs Buckle 2 1 Location of Development should be concentrated in the central part of town- the Waterfront and Ipswich Village development 62 J Offord 2 2 Concentrate Concentrate development in key locations to consolidate infrastructure. development 62 J Offord 2 1 Location of Concentrate employment opportunities and growth in existing areas- town centre, Ipswich Village. development Business development must be in the centre to ensure that central Ipswich remains an attractive place to visit, and competes with other centres e.g. Colchester, Norwich. 65 D Morgan 2 2 Location of Concentrate on existing patterns, but with an emphasis in the town centre to ensure a dynamic hub development linking with and extending to the Waterfront. Must regenerate inner areas that have declined greatly (e.g. St. Matthews Street/ Norwich Road, St. Helens Street, The Wash - (hopefully as a result of the Mint Quarter development) 65 D Morgan 2 1 Location of The priority should be the maintenance of a vibrant town centre- too much dissipation of development mixed-use would threaten this. development 69 G King The 2 2 Location of Identification of sites should be sensitive and logical, respecting local character, biodiversity and meet Countryside development associated needs of growth. Agency 70 T Cocker 2 3 Location of Dispersal option. Large developments have a huge impact on surrounding areas, especially relating to development. traffic.. 74 J Melton 2 3 Dispersal of Disperse development to avoid concentrations of solely new buildings - should fit in with surroundings. development 77 I Maitumbi EERA 2 1 & 2 Location of Option 3 is least consistent with RSS policies SS2 and HG2 (it does not reflect the sequential approach) development 80 S Pinder- 2 Location of Qu5: Option3 Banthorpe Development 103 L Cunningham 2 2 Waterfront New flats and apartments should be built around the Waterfront as at present. This will impact on town development centre traffic, however. 111 S Young 2 2 Location of Q. 5: Option 2 development
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 119 B Noll 2 2 Location of Develop In town centre/ Ipswich Village, Waterfront and the Northern Fringe. development 128 T. Tyrell 2 1 Location of How much employment will be within walking distance of Ipswich station? employment development 133 R. Squirrell 2 Size of new Groups of smaller developments would be better- less impact. development 139 S. Ion Councillor for 2 2 Location of Option 2 selected for all forms of development. Slight emphasis on town centre but not to degree set out Rushmere development in Option 1.
139 S. Ion Councillor for 2 2 Location of Option 2 would reduce pressure on town centre road system by building on main traffic routes. Rushmere development
190 Angela & Ellis 2 3 Development should be spread across Ipswich with flats in the centre of town and houses in other areas. Mark 198 Paul Remblance 2 2 Jobs v houses Option 2.
243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 2 Location of Options 1 and 2 are almost identical. the Earth, Development Suffolk Wildlife Trust
256 G. Knight 2 2 Location of Supports concentration in key locations- e.g. around local shopping centres and major development sites. Development 259 M. Duhm 2 Location of Housing- Option 3; Office, industrial, retail and leisure- Option 2. Development 261 L. Williams 2 Location of Housing, Office, retail and leisure: option 1. Industrial: Options 2 and 3. Location should be influenced by Development reducing the need to travel, and to travel sustainably when required to do so. 284 M. Bowen 2 1 and 2 Location of Office, retail and leisure: option 1. Housing and industrial: Option 2. development 286 Mr C Edmondson 2 Location of Development should go in the town centre and avoid green fields. development 292 T G Holden 2 Location of Need a more strategic approach. Should extend the borough boundary to cover the travel to work area development etc, such as Rushmere and Kesgrave. 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 2 2 Location of Option 2 for all uses. Concentrate development to assist provision of infrastructure. Option 1 is Planning Kesgrave development impractical as insufficient land is likely to become available. Option 3 would add to congestion and Covenant pressure on services without delivery of extra infrastructure. Limited
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 379 J Johnston 2 Concentrate The regeneration of the docklands is vital - it generates wealth for the town and the local area and development attracts jobs and people. Brownfield developments such as the university are a tribute to the Council's success in this area. Areas of deprivation should continue to be regenerated with new infrastructure and improvements to the existing. 445 Mrs Grant 2 Location of Concentrate development within current built up areas including between Bramford and Sproughton road. development Offices should be located in the town centre but not at the expense of shops. Residential areas should be single use. 458 S Speight 2 Location of Development should go in areas that can support it i.e.. with adequate infrastructure and services. development 459 A Stewart 2 Location of Employment should be located on brownfield land, then employees could bus to work and it would bring development life to the town centre. 463 Mr Studd 2 Location of Redevelop the sugar beet factory site for employment only, not housing. development 493 Rose Freeman The Theatres 2 Location of Option 2 is the obvious choice as it allows flexibility with responsibility, but we would expect there to be a Trust development policy within this topic on existing community and cultural facilities and issues regarding their loss.
511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 2 Omission - The Core Strategy must set out criteria for the location of gypsy and traveller sites to guide the allocation gypsy sites of sites in the Sites DPD. See Circular 01/2006, paragraph 31. 512 Mr Eric Cooper Highways 2 Location of The Agency is concerned with the amount and location of development. The A14 is a route of strategic Agency development national importance and is predicted to come under greater levels of stress in the future with high levels of congestion at key points. The Core Strategy should reflect the opportunity for minimising impact on this route, by concentrating the maximum amount of development in the town centre, thus providing opportunities for the use of non-car modes, and by locating development away from the A14 so as to prevent additional orbital vehicle movements. Land use is an important consideration. Uses should maximise the potential for internalisation of trips and for balancing tidal impact of peak movements e.g.. by locating homes and employment close to each other.
527 R Pope 2 Loc of Dev Concentrate development areas (b) not around the waterfront, use other areas (c) 549 Ishaku Maitumbi EERA 2 Approach to Option 3 is the least consistent with the draft EoE Plan policies SS2 and HG2 (as it does not reflect a the Location of sequential approach) Development
549 Ishaku Maitumbi EERA 2 Housing vs The Core Strategy does not address how development will be phased to ensure housing, and Employment employment and infrastructure are progressed together. Therefore need to address this phasing issue. Core strategy also does not address the issue of promoting heritage, art and culture, in developing this issue, the Council needs to take into account policies C1-C5 draft EoE Plan, in particular identifying needs and providing a clear policy framework for specific facilities
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 584 T & S Groot- 2 3 Location of Option 3. Wassink development 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 2 2 Location of Option 1 is important- sequential test. However key sites remain out of the centre, such as Wherstead Salter development Road Caravan Park- as long as they are served by adequate sustainable transport. Option 2 recognises that some uses are better located out of centre (e.g. industrial uses).
599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 2 2 & 3 Location of Option 2: Housing, office, industrial, retail. Option 3: Leisure. Campus development Suffolk 600 R Davies Gerald EveBritish 2 1 & 2 Location of Housing, industrial, retail and leisure: Option 2. Office: option 1. It is important to retain a focus on the Energy plc development town centre, but also to make the most of p.d.l. within and adjacent to the town centre.
602 A Bush (personal 2 2 Location of Employment areas can successfully be located in out of town locations. These can be reached by capacity) development sustainable means and provide a pleasant setting. 603 C Shah LIDL UK 2 Location of Office: option 1. Industrial and retail: option 2. Housing and leisure: option 3. All three are suiable.This GmbH development allows a flexible approach. 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 2 2 & 3 Location of Option 2: Housing, office, industrial, retail. Option 3: Leisure. Woodrow development Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 2 2 & 3 Location of Option 2: Housing, office, industrial, retail. Option 3: Leisure. British Ports development
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 2 2 & 3 Location of Option 2: Housing, office, industrial, retail. Option 3: Leisure. development 777 L Quantrill 2 Location of Development should be spread around Ipswich using brownfield land first, and retaining as much open development space as possible. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 2 2 Location of Option 2 for all types of development. Town centre could be greatly improved, e.g. road and footpath International development surfaces.
820 A Bumstead 2 All Location of Option 1: retail; option 2: housing, office, industrial; option 3: leisure. development 835 Mr David Barker Barton Crest 2 None Location of Employment should be concentrated in the centre of Ipswich. Consider the homes target. The Panel Willmore Nicholson development Report states that the priority for using pdl should not override the need to bring forward development. We therefore need a balanced approach. The employment target means that employment land should not be lost. employment are best located in the centre as this is most sustainable. The Council should continue to promote brownfield development but also put forward greenfield development to make up the current housing shortfall.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 850 S. Sadler 2 2 Location of Option 2 development 855 R. Worman 2 2 Location of Option 2 development 856 J. Jones 2 All Location of Option 1: retail and leisure. Option 2: industrial and office. Option 3: housing. Town centres are natural development locations for retail and leisure and some housing. Retail food provision should be included on large scale developments to reduce travel. 857 A. Jones 2 All Location of Option 1: retail and leisure. Option 2: industrial and office. Option 3: housing. Town centres are natural development locations for retail and leisure and some housing. Retail food provision should be included on large scale developments to reduce travel. 858 M. Gray 2 All Location of Option 1: Office. Option 2: Industrial and retail. Option 3: Housing and leisure. development 897 M. Allison IBC 2 2 Location of Option 2 for all types of development. More sustainable- development not too central or dispersed- but Environment development town centre must remain the focal point of the town and its vitality. Protection Panel 897 M. Allison IBC 2 Omission New kind of development: 'for greenspace and bio-diversity value' put forward (for location Option 2). Key Environment locations also include greenspace. Protection Panel 899 G Duncan 2 1 Location of Option 1 for housing and offices. development 974 D & J Sheppard 2 Location of Plenty of brownfield sites have been developed. The unused ugly plots in town should be used, not open development green fields. 1005 D Dufty Transport 2 All Location of 1: Retail. 2: Industrial, office, housing. 3: leisure. 2000 Group development Ipswich and Suffolk 243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 3 8 Location of Alternative: not to go ahead with dramatic increase in population size. the Earth, Development Suffolk Wildlife Trust
1 I Wedd 3 2 9 Houses v flats More people want houses not flats. We are already building far too many.
57 N Palmer Bidwells 3 3,4 9 Density of Higher density would be more appropriate in the town centre. Provision needs to be made for a range of development housing types and locations.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 107 P Horne 3 3 9 Flats v houses Q. 9: Option 3
183 A Fuller 3 4 9 Residential Density 193 John Ireland 3 4 9 The Density of The Council should try to ensure that there are always a variety of sites coming forward over the next Residential fifteen years that can ensure the availability of house and flats. Development
223 R Mudhar 3 3 9 The Density of Compact, town centre flat living suits younger people at the beginning of their careers with access to Residential entertainment and to some extent, older people whose children have left home. Houses are needed for Development people with children and those who prefer the style, provided they are prepared to pay for consuming more land and resources. 288 Mrs J Seaton 3 1 9 Flats v houses Flats are good for older people and young adults.
301 Mr Yapp 3 2 9 Flats vs. Developers should build more affordable family housing on existing brownfield sites, instead of luxury houses flats. 416 Mrs D Longden Nacton Priory 3 1,3 9 Density New homes should be flats concentrated in town centre. Court Residents' Association 447 B C Pinner 3 3 9 Density 490 A C Raworth 3 3,4 9 Density Options 3 and 4 - exclude options 1 and 2 which are impractical in terms of meeting demand. 491 Mrs V Andrews 3 4 9 Density 504 C Dawson Planning PRUPIM & 3 4 9 Flats v houses The population needs a mix of provision. Potential Hartfield Development s 507 T Beaven 3 4 9 Flats v houses Flats have inherent problems with social unrest due to high density living, as evidenced by large blocks of flats built in Greater London in the 1960s and 1970s. But obviously they can provide cheaper modern accommodation if built in the right areas. 513 P Miller 3 4 9 Flats v houses
523 Councillor Gooch IBC 3 3 & 4 9 Density Variety to meet changing demands eg.Lone parent families/extended families in one house. L
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 3 2,4 9 Density Option 4 is favoured since this seeks a balanced approach to the delivery of housing to help meet the Martin Homes Boroughs housing req in the longer term. With the market currently saturated with flatted devs within the Associates town centre and waterfront, a substantial number of new residential units in Ipswich should be houses as per Option 2. 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 3 4 9 Density It is important to have a mix of housing to cater for the varied needs of the growing population of Ipswich. However there can be a focus towards flats due to the growing need for higher density development and to provide for a larger number of flats due to the growing need for higher density development and to provide for a larger number of small households. 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 3 4 9 Density It is the most balanced approach that is likely to reflect the needs of the housing market and attract half Malyan 928 established families and young professionals. 543 Tom Clayton 3 4 9 Density A mix of accommodation. A town centre flat is not for everyone, but neither does everyone out of the centre want a house. 558 P R Richards 3 3 9 Houses v flats If demand exists for flats then the majority should be flats or other developments that create a high number of houses for a given area. 559 G Thomas 3 3 9 Houses v flats Housing Needs Study will provide necessary evidence, but Central Gov projections indicate that 72% of demand for housing will come from 1 person households suggesting that more flats will be required for the period to 2021. Option 3 therefore best fits this context. But flats should not be limited to town centre/waterfront if the requirement is for single person households. There will need to be a range of prices - the waterfront will be beyond most people. Low rise flats 3-5 storeys high can and do provide for more affordable property to purchase. This also ensures effective use of existing land is maintained.
567 R Gape 3 3 & 4 9 Density The joy of Ipswich is the mix of the old and the new. Not everyone wishes to live in a flat (or indeed a house) and to force them to do so (by restricting supply) is undemocratic. 577 Michael Brain 3 4 9 Density 578 L Jenkins Suffolk 3 4 9 Density Prefers option 4. A combination of both flats and houses helps ensure a more diverse mix, helping to Constabulary prevent the creation of deprived areas.
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 3 4 9 Flats v houses Option 4. Provision needs to match need, and location of different forms of housing should match the S Group preference for that form in that location.
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 3 3,4 9 Flats v houses Flats should be available throughout the next 15 years and on all suitable sites in accordance with PPS3. Green Land for houses should also be available across town but increasingly away from the centre/waterfront Properties where higher densities are more sustainable. Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 3 4 9 Flats v houses There needs to be a mixture of sizes of home across different tenures in all parts of the community.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 617 S Rosenberg 3 2 9 Flats v houses Most should be houses.
624 S Mills Network Rail 3 4 9 Flats v houses The plan should not be prescriptive as conditions can change over time and flexibility needs to be retained within policies to cope with such changes. 625 Mrs B Robinson 3 4 9 Flats v houses If you have a target, i.e.. 30%, keep to it.
728 Mr & Mrs Coley 3 1 9 Flats v houses no more flats but small houses with gardens for families.
730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 3 3,4 9 Flats v houses Flats should be available throughout the next 15 years and on all suitable sites in accordance with PPS3. Development Land for houses should also be available across town but increasingly away from the centre/waterfront s Ltd where higher densities are more sustainable. 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 3 3,4 9 Flats v houses To encourage people to live in the town centre. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 3 3 9 Flats v houses Flats are great first homes and for single people. However, families like houses. Please ensure these are built with energy saving devices and solar heating. A decent garden would also be good as it helps support wildlife more than some agricultural land. 773 K Oliver 3 3,4 9 Flats v houses Houses in the town centre are not practicable and are unlikely to provide the low cost options for first time buyers, students etc. 900 R Duncan 3 3 9 Flats v houses Option 3. Proportion should reflect need.
901 V Duncan 3 3 9 Flats v houses Option 3. Proportion to cover need.
902 S Duncan 3 3 9 Flats v houses Option 3. Proportion should reflect need.
903 J Ames 3 3 9 Flats v houses Option 3. Balance flats and houses- flats closer to centre.
906 P Birdsall 3 1 9 Flats v houses Option 1: the vast majority of development shouold be within the existing town.
908 R Ellis 3 2 9 Flats v houses Ipswich needs houses not flats.
912 Mrs R J Southworth 3 3 9 Flats v houses
928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 3 4 9 Flats v houses It is the most balanced approach that is likely to reflect the needs of the housing market and attract half Malyan established families and young professionals. Planning 931 D C Harper 3 1,3 9 Flats v houses Could most readily provide numbers without sacrificing standards, and make affordable target possible.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 952 Mr S Bretherton 3 3 9 Flats v houses
957 A Fenton 3 4 9 Flats v houses
972 N Cenci IBC 3 2,4 9 Flats v houses Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 3 3,4 9 Flats v houses Most productive use of land, responds best to findings of Housing Needs Study. C Group 978 Mrs G Ellis 3 2 9 Flats v houses
984 Mr D M Sargeant 3 3 9 Flats v houses Provide for new flats at the Waterfront/town centre, but ensure there are sites for new houses across the rest of town. 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 3 4 9 Flats v houses Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 3 2, 3, 4 9 Density Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 3 4 9 Density Option 4 because it represents a sustainable way forward and policy which will deliver the needs of the Preservation local community. Society 105 W Last 3 2 10 Flats v houses Q.. 10: 20%flats, 80% houses. Building expensive flats does not help first-time buyers.
106 P Stephenson 3 10 Demand for Demand for town centre flats must be evaluated over time. flats 139 S. Ion Councillor for 3 10 Proportion More houses than flats. Flats should only be built where they won't have a negative impact on existing Rushmere houses to flats housing stock- mainly town centre.
183 A Fuller 3 10 Residential As and when. It is impossible to see the requirements that will be needed in 10-15 years time. Density 193 John Ireland 3 10 The Density of Can only tell through market research. Residential Development
284 M. Bowen 3 10 Flats v houses The proportion should be guided by the Housing needs survey.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 288 Mrs J Seaton 3 10 Flats v houses Minimal housing on greenfield land. Maximum flats on brownfield land.
360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 3 10 Flats vs. Provide a balance. There must be a greater proportion of family houses with gardens. Permissions for Planning Kesgrave houses flats must be matched by permissions for houses. Covenant Limited 490 A C Raworth 3 10 Density Will depend on demand. 491 Mrs V Andrews 3 10 Flats v houses 1/4 flats and 3/4 housing and provide for first time buyers.
504 C Dawson Planning PRUPIM & 3 10 Flats v houses Planning policy should not specify the proportion. The market should decide. Potential Hartfield Development s 507 T Beaven 3 10 Flats v houses 10% flats.
523 Councillor Gooch IBC 3 10 Flats vs 25%/75% L houses 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 3 10 Density Option 4 is favoured since this seeks a balanced approach to the delivery of housing to help meet the Martin Homes Boroughs housing req in the longer term. With the market currently saturated with flatted devs within the Associates town centre and waterfront, a substantial number of new residential units in Ipswich should be houses as per Option 2. 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 3 10 Density This should be directed by a Housing Survey to establish the needs of the growing population.
543 Tom Clayton 3 10 Density 40% - 60% 567 R Gape 3 10 Density I think that the Council should be undertaking a mass survey of home dwellers and also considering the impact of the new campus and its student population, together with the need for housing its senior citizens. 577 Michael Brain 3 10 Density This is a matter for the markets and those who work in them rather than for a private individual such as myself. 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 3 10 Flats v houses Proportions. Across the Borough- 1 (flats) to 4 (houses). Centre/Waterfront 3 (flats) to 1 (houses). Salter 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 3 10 Flats v houses Proportions. Across the Borough- 1 (flats) to 4 (houses). Centre/Waterfront 3 (flats) to 1 (houses). Campus Suffolk 600 R Davies Gerald EveBritish 3 10 Flats v houses Proportions should be based on demonstrable need and demand. Energy plc
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 3 10 Flats v houses Proportions. Across the Borough- 1 (flats) to 4 (houses). Centre/Waterfront 3 (flats) to 1 (houses). Woodrow Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 3 10 Flats v houses Proportions. Across the Borough- 1 (flats) to 4 (houses). Centre/Waterfront 3 (flats) to 1 (houses). British Ports
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 3 10 Flats v houses Proportions. Across the Borough- 1:4 (flats:houses). Centre/Waterfront 150:1 (flats:houses).
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 3 10 Flats v houses As per housing needs survey. S Group
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 3 10 Flats v houses Across the borough: 1:4 flats to houses. At the Waterfront: 3:1 flats to houses. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 3 10 Flats v houses 30:70 flats to houses.
625 Mrs B Robinson 3 10 Flats v houses Need a housing need analysis. Council houses to replace those now owner occupied.
730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 3 10 Flats v houses Across the borough: 1:4 flats to houses. At the Waterfront: 3:1 flats to houses. Development s Ltd 740 H Kembery 3 10 Flats v houses Depends on the demographics of Ipswich.
773 K Oliver 3 10 Flats v houses Flats in the main are low cost housing and first time buyers, generally younger people, would buy in the town centre. These are more likely to provide the impetus to support more and better town centre activity.
783 E Phillips 3 10 Flats v houses Proportion depends on sites- but ensure minimum use of greenfield land.
912 Mrs R J Southworth 3 10 Flats v houses 50:50 split.
931 D C Harper 3 10 Flats v houses Most foreseeable job provision will be low paid therefore need affordable housing therefore there should be a high flats to houses ratio. 952 Mr S Bretherton 3 10 Flats v houses In central Ipswich, about 3:1 in favour of flats, and in outer areas, 3:1 in favour of houses. At selected district nodes around Ipswich the proportion of flats should be increased.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 957 A Fenton 3 10 Flats v houses I do not know current proportions but there appears to be a bias towards flats. People will want to move on up the housing ladder so there needs to be an adequate supply of other housing types to provide for this. Otherwise we would be in danger of denying people choice and of not supplying a sufficient variety of house and plot sizes for people to exercise their choice.
976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 3 10 Flats v houses Whatever proportion is indicated by the Housing Needs Study and (for the private sector) by the market. C Group 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 3 10 Flats v houses You need to identify the precise needs in the light of current and future demographics and demand. Society Guidelines can then be issued and they will help to resist the demands of developers.
1002 R Ward Suffolk 3 10 Density The proportion that delivers local needs. Preservation Society 5 M Smith 3 11 Houses v flats Mixture of flats & Houses spread across the town not concentrated in one place.
53 M Lunn 3 11 Housing Build houses and flats en masse, thus making housing affordable. delivery and affordability 55 Mrs Buckle 3 11 Housing If smaller flats and houses are built then they are more affordable. delivery and affordability 89 Anon 3 11 House sizes Small houses should not be built next to big houses- small house owners are less house proud.
97 Anon 3 11 Overcrowding We are building to too high densities. Streets will become cluttered with cars.
100 D Hindmarch 3 11 Overcrowding Overpopulation can lead to ghetto-isation- to retain the character of the town avoid cramming.
106 P Stephenson 3 11 Car owner Take car owner density into account when planning for flats and houses. density 124 I Lane 3 11 Houses v flats This decision should be made based on demand. It would be a mistake to build flats that stand empty whilst there is a need for housing. 183 A Fuller 3 11 Residential Birth rate. Influx of employment. Density 193 John Ireland 3 11 The Density of Nature and availability of infrastructure (e.g.. new roads). For high density housing, where do all the cars Residential go? Development
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 261 L. Williams 3 11 Flats v houses Stop building large communities of social housing- should build mixed communities for young, old, poor, employed, etc and consider travel to work, shops, services etc. 284 M. Bowen 3 11 Flats v houses Housing needs survey, demographic data, market demand.
360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 3 11 Flats vs. Use housing needs surveys. Planning Kesgrave houses Covenant Limited 447 B C Pinner 3 11 Density Use of brown land. 490 A C Raworth 3 11 Density Development should be concentrated on brownfield sites. Flats should be restricted to 4 or 5 storeys outside the Waterfront. 491 Mrs V Andrews 3 11 Flats v houses Ageing population - provide for older people and free up family housing.
507 T Beaven 3 11 Flats v houses Noise levels and parking levels tend to be higher with flats therefore measures to address them should be built into smaller blocks with windows pointing away from family homes and no large balconies overlooking house gardens. 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 3 c 11 Flats vs Plans for access to amenities eg. need schools near houses not flats and greenspace to meet needs big L houses parks, flats and smaller greenspace for others) 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 3 11 Density Option 4 is favoured since this seeks a balanced approach to the delivery of housing to help meet the Martin Homes Boroughs housing req in the longer term. With the market currently saturated with flatted devs within the Associates town centre and waterfront, a substantial number of new residential units in Ipswich should be houses as per Option 2. 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 3 11 Density In the more sustainable locations a much higher density development can be allowable. Only a flatted development can truly be provided at high densities to maximise the efficient use of land. Therefore flatted dev should be encouraged in sustainable locations. 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 3 11 Density Flats tend to attract young professionals and the elderly. As such they should be accessible to the widest Malyan 928 range of services and facilities. 543 Tom Clayton 3 11 Density In no particular order: infrastructure; local facilities and amenities - schools/healthcare/shops; transport and access - current and potential; proximity or ease of access to employment; services - water/sewerage etc., 567 R Gape 3 11 Density Demand, demography, sustainability, fit with existing buildings, style, transport, work patterns, history, the need for people to have homes that they may be proud of living in, and also of owning.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 577 Michael Brain 3 11 Density I would simply assert that the Council should plan according to reputable and objective analysis of market trends, coupled with the foregoing strategic analysis of the impact of environmental and economic imperatives. Regarding the present Waterfront development, for example, we appear to have the worst of all worlds, in that there is little provision for private cars, there is no provision for public transport, hence the expectation is that it will be populated by fit pedestrians! While this may seem an exaggerated view, my point is that the Development Strategy should address the needs of the people it will serve, whether they are motorists or pedestrians or cyclists, whether they are fit or disabled, and so on. If the perception is that many of the new Ipswich residents will be flat-dwelling commuters, then flats need to be built within easy access of the rail station (and there should therefore be an objectively critical appraisal as to whether the Waterfront fulfils this requirement). For those new residents who will work locally, then clearly their housing or flat requirements could be provided near their new place of work, which in turn be the bas
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 3 11 Density A "Development statement" will detail the accountability and responsibility of developers and residents. Constabulary
595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells 3 11 Flats v houses PPS3, infrastructure requirements, housing land availability studies.
599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 3 11 Flats v houses PPS3, infrastructure requirements, housing land availability studies. Campus Suffolk 600 R Davies Gerald EveBritish 3 11 Flats v houses Market demand is a key consideration. Energy plc 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 3 11 Flats v houses PPS3, infrastructure requirements, housing land availability studies. Woodrow Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 3 11 Flats v houses PPS3, infrastructure requirements, housing land availability studies. British Ports
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 3 11 Flats v houses PPS3, infrastructure requirements, housing land availability studies.
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 3 11 Flats v houses Housing Needs Survey, Accessibility (especially by transport other than by car), use of brownfield land, S Group provision for particular groups (e.g. elderly, disabled, students), maintenance of green space within Borough, maintenance of accessible “genuine countryside” within easy reach of Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 3 11 Flats v houses PPS3; infrastructure requirements; accurate and up to date housing land availability studies. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 3 11 Flats v houses Demand, particularly in the social rented sector.
625 Mrs B Robinson 3 11 Flats v houses Mixed communities.
643 Mrs B Noll Director, The 3 11 Flats v houses we need houses with gardens for families on the greenfield sites north of Ipswich. Grove 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 3 11 Flats v houses PPS3; infrastructure requirements; accurate and up to date housing land availability studies. Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 3 11 Flats v houses The main consideration for building flats or houses should be the impact on the surrounding area and residents and whether there is the infrastructure to handle the density proposed. The second consideration should be the quality of life of the future residents in the development.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 3 11 Flats v houses Bringing into use empty accommodation above shops in town. No detached houses in their own grounds. Residents' More semi-detached homes to get people mixing. Association 740 H Kembery 3 11 Flats v houses Demographics.
773 K Oliver 3 11 Flats v houses Stop selling Council houses. Do not allow new flats/houses to be bought as second homes by people with no vested interest in Ipswich. Do not allow new properties to be used by the Council for housing unsuitable tenants. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 3 11 Flats v houses Consider structure of existing/ future population. Consider, e.g. ageing population- elderly prefer International bungalows near shops with good public transport.
820 A Bumstead 3 11 flats v houses Setting: more care required when deciding on the scale of flats and houses.
856 J. Jones 3 11 Flats v houses Young professionals may want desirable flats. Families and existing communities do not want flats- associated with social problems e.g. crime. 857 A. Jones 3 11 Flats v houses Young professionals may want desirable flats. Families and existing communities do not want flats- associated with social problems e.g. crime. 901 V Duncan 3 11 Flats v houses Consider work available, amenities and transport.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 912 Mrs R J Southworth 3 11 Flats v houses Ecological factors, good modern design, absolutely no bungalows (wasteful of space and boring).
928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 3 11 Flats v houses Flats tend to attract young professionals and the elderly. As such they should be accessible to the widest Malyan range of services and facilities. Planning 931 D C Harper 3 11 Flats v houses Most foreseeable job provision will be low paid therefore need affordable housing therefore there should be a high flats to houses ratio. 952 Mr S Bretherton 3 11 Flats v houses The demographics of households in the future and age profile of an expanding population. Care must be taken to take account of the likely future needs of University students and flat dwellers as they marry and have children. If appropriate communities are not provided for them, they will leave the area.
957 A Fenton 3 11 Flats v houses The normal considerations - market cost, infrastructure, parking etc.
972 N Cenci IBC 3 11 Flats v houses Skyline visuals; realistic demand for flats; demand of first time buyers for affordable housing. Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 3 11 Flats v houses Need; land use; sustainability; the Housing Needs Study. C Group 980 Mrs & Mrs Wand 3 11 Flats v houses There should be a mix of housing especially to help first time buyers. There is too much "executive" style R & M development in Ipswich.
990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 3 11 Flats v houses See above. Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 3 11 Density 20/80 Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 3 11 Density Identify needs following regular housing surveys. Preservation Society 1010 C Dawson Planning Ipswich 3 11 flats v houses It should also be recognised that it is not solely the planning system which will determine the proportion of Potential School flats to houses required in the town. This will be a consequence of local household requirements and expectations. It would be inappropriate for the planning system to restrict the supply of flats or houses if local households have a particular preference. More properly, the planning system should be capable of responding to user requirements and allowing the mix of flats and houses which the market requires.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 57 N Palmer Bidwells 3 6 12 Density targets Option 6 is specific to Ipswich and is based on past experience of what is achievable.
139 S. Ion Councillor for 3 5 12 Density Do not like higher density figures in (a) and (b) of Option 6. Rushmere Targets
193 John Ireland 3 5&6 12 The Density of Compromise! Residential Development
223 R Mudhar 3 6 12 The Density of Residential Development
288 Mrs J Seaton 3 6 12 Density targets
447 B C Pinner 3 6 12 Density 490 A C Raworth 3 6 12 Density Option 6. 491 Mrs V Andrews 3 5 12 Density 504 C Dawson Planning PRUPIM & 3 6 12 Density Reflects levels already achieved. But rather than set a density target it may be better maximise the use of Potential Hartfield land in the context of achieving a safe, attractive and useable residential environment, thus recognising Development the role of good design. s 507 T Beaven 3 5 12 Density 508 R Paddison Babergh 3 6 12 Density Option 6. District Council 513 P Miller 3 6 12 Density 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 3 12 Density The densities set out in Option 6 are clearly influenced by the substantial number of high density flatted Martin Homes schemes in the waterfront which cannot be relied upon to continue indefinitely. We are concerned that Associates density targets should be expressed as guidelines only, not policy. What is right for one urban site is not necessarily right for another. Site context and density range greatly within the existing urban area and local distinction must be respected.
535 R Hopwood Bidwells 3 6 12 Density 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 3 6 12 Density Malyan 928 543 Tom Clayton 3 6 12 Density
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 558 P R Richards 3 6 12 Houses v flats
559 G Thomas 3 12 Densities Option 6 densities which have been applied since 2001 have achieved some very exciting and good quality well designed developments. Clearly such a high density strategy should be maintained with considerable emphasis to ensure the design and build quality is of a very high standard. Likes some of the more recent res dev schemes-high density and good quality.Provided this can be maintained then Option 6 is appropriate. 567 R Gape 3 6 12 Density 577 Michael Brain 3 5 12 Density 578 L Jenkins Suffolk 3 5 12 Density Constabulary
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 3 6 12 Density targets S Group
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 3 6 12 Density Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 3 6 12 Density targets
625 Mrs B Robinson 3 6 12 Density 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 3 6 12 Density Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 3 5 12 Density 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 3 5 12 Density Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 3 5 12 Density 773 K Oliver 3 5 12 Density 820 A Bumstead 3 12 Density targets Would prefer an option in-between 5 and 6.
900 R Duncan 3 6 12 Density targets Option 6: modern security enables very high buildings.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 901 V Duncan 3 5 12 Density targets Medium density- up to 110 units far too dense.
902 S Duncan 3 6 12 Density targets Option 6: modern security enables very high buildings.
906 P Birdsall 3 6 12 Density targets Option 6: the price f housing an population growth must be higher density.
912 Mrs R J Southworth 3 6 12 Density 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 3 6 12 Density Malyan Planning 931 D C Harper 3 5 12 Density 952 Mr S Bretherton 3 6 12 Density 957 A Fenton 3 6 12 Density 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 3 6 12 Density C Group 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 3 6 12 Density Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 3 6 12 Density Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1010 C Dawson Planning Ipswich 3 12 Density In responding to Option 5, the guidance in PPS3 is general advice only and should not be simply applied Potential School as a blanket policy. There must be provision within LDF policies to allow densities to respond to particular site circumstances. Appropriate density is more a product of good design than a simple mathematical equation. It may be preferable, therefore, for the LDF to require housing developments to maximise site potential via appropriate densities which reflect a number of factors. These might include;
· Site characteristics · Characteristics of the local area · Market requirement for residential accommodation · Accessibility · The ability to achieve an attractive, safe and useable residential environment.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 223 R Mudhar 3 13 The Density of Ipswich is a compact town which retains a distinctive town centre. Some of the other material on your Residential website indicates Ipswich has a higher level of social housing, this should be higher density for economic Development reasons and it would be a shame to see a soulless sprawl such as Los Angeles.
288 Mrs J Seaton 3 13 Density targets Flats on brownfield land at maximum density. Minimum greenfield encroachment.
447 B C Pinner 3 13 Density Seems more sensible for low density sites. 490 A C Raworth 3 13 Density This reflects what is being achieved, although high density may be inflated by the special circumstances of the Waterfront. 491 Mrs V Andrews 3 13 Density Allows for open space. 507 T Beaven 3 13 Density Option 6 sounds like cramming people in! 508 R Paddison Babergh 3 13 Density This would make best use of the land available and the densities have already been achieved. District Council 513 P Miller 3 13 Density Ipswich has a good supply of open space for people to enjoy away from the home. If higher densities work, use them. 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 3 13 Density The densities set out in Option 6 are clearly influenced by the substantial number of high density flatted Martin Homes schemes in the waterfront which cannot be relied upon to continue indefinitely. We are concerned that Associates density targets should be expressed as guidelines only, not policy. What is right for one urban site is not necessarily right for another. Site context and density range greatly within the existing urban area and local distinction must be respected.
535 R Hopwood Bidwells 3 13 Density It is clear that all land should be efficiently used. In the case of residential development this is providing at as high a density as is practical for any particular site. The experience of Ipswich clearly shows that higher densities can be achieved and therefore these higher amounts should be pursued to maximise the efficient use of land. 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 3 13 Density Allows greatest flexibility for both low density family housing and high density urban living. Malyan 928 543 Tom Clayton 3 13 Density Minimise usage of Greenfield sites 558 P R Richards 3 13 Houses v flats It is the more sustainable option
567 R Gape 3 13 Density Local reality is always preferable to arbitrary targets. But that must be tempered with understanding that general high density development stresses the transport (and other) infrastructure.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 577 Michael Brain 3 13 Density I suspicions that to move to such high-density targets without proven supporting infrastructure will merely exacerbate the current trends to increasingly aggressive and anti-social behaviour. I don't doubt there are economic benefits to be had, especially in an energy-depleted environment; but we are not yet in control of the present problems of street crime and other forms of aggression, so I would urge great caution in any action which might exacerbate the problem.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 3 5 13 Density The ODPM PPS states that high density gives rise to increased policing demand. Option 5 offers the Constabulary greatest space for residents.
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 3 13 Density targets This is the formula which has been specifically designed for Ipswich and is more likely to accord with local S Group needs and circumstances.
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 3 13 Density National policy can be too restrictive in identifying a site's true development capacity. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 3 13 Density targets Need to provide maximum number of homes and density creates sustainability and reduces land consumption. 625 Mrs B Robinson 3 13 Density Common sense and flexible approach. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 3 13 Density National policy can be too restrictive in identifying a site's true development capacity. Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 3 13 Density It means that density is less in all three areas. 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 3 13 Density Infrastructure weakened if density is increased. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 3 13 Density Option 6 seems to pack houses in more. We all need breathing space. 773 K Oliver 3 13 Density High density housing results in disaster - see East London. 912 Mrs R J Southworth 3 13 Density Based on local experience - provided buildings are not too spatially limited. 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 3 13 Density Allows greatest flexibility for both low density family housing and high density urban living. Malyan Planning 931 D C Harper 3 13 Density Option 6 could be unnecessarily dense. 5 is least objectionable. 952 Mr S Bretherton 3 13 Density Ipswich needs higher density development including landmark high rise apartment buildings in order to realise its full potential as a 21st Century city.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 957 A Fenton 3 13 Density Because it is the lower density and I feel people need space to live in harmony with each other and I do not want to build the modern version of back to backs in a taller form which would lead to a new wave of social problems. 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 3 13 Density Option 6 is most appropriate to local needs and local circumstances. C Group 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 3 13 Density What we can do within planning parameters we should do. Option 5 can be too restrictive. Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 3 13 Density past experience Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 3 13 Density Neither option selected because densities should be arrived at after analysis of the characteristics of the Preservation area and potential of the site taking into account any constraints. They need to be identified when design Society and access statements are being prepared. It is wrong to have predetermined densities although the SPS would not object to establishing minimum densities. The SPS also supports high density, well-designed developments, as this can minimise the need to develop greenfield sites.
523 Councillor Gooch IBC 3 5 12 & Density Dislikes high density dev - overcrowding L 13 33 N Brigham Sustrans 3 3 9 & Density Q9.Option 3.Q11 Access by foot, cycle and public transport 11 4 L H Barton 3 4 Houses v flats A mix of houses and flats are necessary.
8 J A Cook 3 Houses v flats More starter homes needed, small houses as well as flats. More homes needed for people who value outside space. Early flats at waterfront are attractive, later ones, particularly Gasworks site, Wherstead Rd are ugly. 14 B Samuel 3 Houses v flats Appropriate balance between type, density and green space. Need a mixture but higher % flats with shared open spaces. 18 A Kleissner 3 Houses v flats There are sufficient (or even a surfeit) of flats and are need to build larger units. The new houses in Orchard St are a step in the right direction. 26 M A Bolton 3 1 Houses v flats The majority of new housing should be in the form of flats
32 S Brinkley 3 Houses v flats Flats should take up less space but docks flats will be empty as too expensive for 1st time buyers and not good for families. New "affordable houses" are a rip-off - tiny and lack garden space.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 38 S Steward 3 2 Houses v flats Stop building apartment blocks. There is a need for (affordable) family homes
39 A Nesus 3 4 Houses v flats There should be a mix of houses and flats
41 J E Trowell 3 3 Flats v houses Flats in IP1, houses elsewhere.
43 N Gibbons 3 1 Flats v Houses Mainly flats.
49 M Neale 3 3 Houses v flats flats should be reserved for town centre brownfield sites- there should be houses elsewhere (specifically on the Northern Fringe) 54 Mr & Mrs James 3 2 Flats v houses There should be more family-size housing for rent. W F 55 Mrs Buckle 3 1 Flats v houses The majority should be flats and apartments
65 D Morgan 3 2 Houses v flats The basic requirement is for 2/3 storey houses with a garden and garage- there is a clear danger of too many high rise flat developments across the Borough at present. 70 T Cocker 3 2 High rise flats High rise flats in Ipswich have been tried and failed.
70 T Cocker 3 4 Flats v houses A range of flats and houses should be built to a high standard.
74 J Melton 3 2 Houses v flats We already have enough flats and apartments. Further development should be houses.
75 A Gunn 3 2 Flats v houses Flats are unsuitable for families.
80 S Pinder- 3 4 Flats v houses Qu9: Option 4 Banthorpe 82 F Beaumont 3 2 Flats v houses Will all of the flats be filled? Will it work?
92 Anon 3 2 Flats v houses There is a need for family properties.
100 D Hindmarch 3 2 Flats v houses Too many flats, not enough small houses with gardens. Flats do not work long term.
103 L Cunningham 3 Houses v flats Need for family units to sustain the community.
103 L Cunningham 3 4 Flats v houses Need mainly houses for community development. The two can be mixed as in Ravenswood.
105 W Last 3 2, 3, 4 Flats v houses Q.. 9: Options 2, 3 and 4.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 105 W Last 3 6 Density Option 6- would allow for small town houses as well as other size accommodation. Targets 106 P Stephenson 3 3 Flats v houses Flats more appropriate for town centre. Family houses should be provided away from the town centre- a more suitable family environment. 106 P Stephenson 3 6 Density Practical experience to date is the best guide. Targets 109 J Welsh Green Living 3 4 Flats v houses Option 4: Average household size is reducing (2.4 will fall to 2.1)- this indicates there should be a higher Centre proportion of flats than existing.
118 D Harper 3 3 Flats v houses Put flats in areas of high density only.
119 B Noll 3 Flat prices Flats are priced too high- above the capacity of most people's salaries. 119 B Noll 3 2 Flats v houses 80% should be 2 and 3 bed houses. Houses are urgently needed for young families and must be reasonably priced. 120 Edwards 3 4 Flats v houses there should be a mixture of houses and flats. Flats have environmental benefits but must be affordable. Houses should be mixed 2 & 3 as well as 4 bedroom. 139 S. Ion Councillor for 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Q 9: Options 3 and 4 Rushmere
185 Daniel Sanford 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Development density: options (c) and (d) but with many as redevelopments of existing sites in the centre and elsewhere. 198 Paul Remblance 3 Flats v houses Apartments: Surely the limit on prestige apartments has already been reached with what has been approved - mainly for the waterfront. How many normal waged people can afford £250,000+ for a flat. Can you? Hence more small houses and low rise flats (Option d). 204 Anne Dunn 3 3 & 4 Houses v flats New flats - waterfront / town centre; mixture of flats and houses on sites elsewhere.
257 H. Howe 3 1 Flats v houses Greatest need is for first-time and single buyers- more account must be taken of these needs rather than large family houses and luxury flats. 259 M. Duhm 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses options 3 and 4: Flats not suitable for families with young children or elderly- unless lifts provided.
259 M. Duhm 3 5 Density targets Option 5: must have been well-researched
261 L. Williams 3 4 Flats v houses Decision should be made based on demographic info- the need for extra housing.
264 D. Seaton 3 1 Flats v houses Build low-rise flats/apartments to avoid greenfield development.
264 D. Seaton 3 6 Density targets Build to these densities to avoid greenfield development.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 284 M. Bowen 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Options 3 and 4 would provide the best range of opportunities to secure the type of housing needed.
284 M. Bowen 3 6 Density targets Option 6 is likely to suit local circumstances.
287 Mr W B Scott 3 Flats v houses We need more bungalows.
292 T G Holden 3 Flats v houses There are enough flats and apartments now. Some are already second homes. Need more family houses. 342 Mrs Birch 3 Flats vs. Surely only a minority of buyers want flats. houses 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 3 4 Flats vs. To meet the needs and aspirations of current and future Ipswich residents. There is an imbalance Planning Kesgrave houses between provision and actual needs for housing due to concentration of recent planning permissions for Covenant flats and apartments in the centre. Limited 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 3 5 Density targets Option 5: Recent central high density developments have lacked essential services, e.g. local shops, Planning Kesgrave open space, play areas. Option 5 would redress this. Higher densities than in the past in suburban areas Covenant would reflect guidance and make efficient use of greenfield sites. Limited 423 Mr & Mrs Jackson 3 Houses vs Flats up to 6 storeys high should predominate in the town centre, Ipswich Village and Waterfront. flats 433 B Glover 3 Houses vs We need a mix of dwellings but please no more high rises. Need shops cafes leisure etc integrated with flats new housing. 463 Mr Studd 3 Flats v houses Restrict tower blocks to limited locations, and blocks of flats to be no more than four storeys high elsewhere. 515 T J Dowe 3 Density Object to high densities around the prestigious waterfront and to low quality buildings being packed in. Reduce densities and increase quality. Away from the Waterfront in family housing areas we need to build bigger garages - at present garages are too small and cars are being parked on drives, footways, and the road. 549 Ishaku Maitumbi EERA 3 The Density of Response on flats/house: This issue to be determined locally. Reponse on density: As the minimum Residential density targets are consistent with Policy SS16 in the draft EoE Plan this does not raise a regional issue. Development The precise thresholds for higher densities is an issue to be determined locally.
584 T & S Groot- 3 2 Flats v houses Option 2. House dwellers look after their properties better than flat dwellers, who depend on management Wassink companies. 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Flats should be available on all suitable sites. Houses should be available away from the centre. Salter 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 3 6 Density targets Options 6: national planning policy can be too restrictive in identifying development capacity of sites. Salter
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 597 P & J Youngs 3 2 Flats v houses There is great demand for family sized houses for commuters.
599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Flats should be available on all suitable sites, with higher densities in the town centre & Waterfront.. Campus Houses should be available away from the centre. Suffolk 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 3 6 Density targets Options 6: national planning policy can be too restrictive in identifying development capacity of sites. Campus Suffolk 600 R Davies Gerald EveBritish 3 3 Flats v houses Supply of both should be a key aim. Flats are likely to be most appropriate in the town centre. Energy plc 600 R Davies Gerald EveBritish 3 6 Density targets The highest density, commensurate with location, facilities and services, should be sought across all Energy plc development sites. 603 C Shah LIDL UK 3 4 Flats v houses Option 4 gives people a choice. GmbH 603 C Shah LIDL UK 3 11 Flats v houses Consider people with families. GmbH 603 C Shah LIDL UK 3 6 Density targets Option 6: tailored for Ipswich. GmbH 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Flats should be available on all suitable sites, with higher densities in the town centre & Waterfront.. Woodrow Houses should be available away from the centre. Development s Ltd. 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 3 6 Density targets Options 6: national planning policy can be too restrictive in identifying development capacity of sites. Woodrow Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Flats should be available on all suitable sites, with higher densities in the town centre & Waterfront. British Ports Houses should be available away from the centre.
605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 3 6 Density targets Options 6: national planning policy can be too restrictive in identifying development capacity of sites. British Ports
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Flats should be available on all suitable sites, with higher densities in the town centre & Waterfront. Houses should be available away from the centre. 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 3 6 Density targets Options 6: national planning policy can be too restrictive in identifying development capacity of sites.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 624 S Mills Network Rail 3 Density targets We support higher densities in central accessible locations e.g. around stations, subject to an assessment identifying what mitigation/enhancement may be needed to ensure provision of an appropriate level of transport infrastructure. This approach is preferable to setting density bands. There should be no cap on maximum density in the right location. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 3 3 Flats v houses Do we not have enough flats already? Flats without parking need easy access to transport and shops. International
783 E Phillips 3 3 & 4 Flats v houses Options 3 and 4: to restrict the height of flats away from the centre- fine views are being ruined by ugly developments. 783 E Phillips 3 5 Density of Ipswich has already been overdeveloped. development 820 A Bumstead 3 4 flats v houses Option 4 seems the most balanced option
835 Mr David Barker Barton Crest 3 None Flats v houses Ensure a mix of house types to create balanced communities. This should be informed by up-to-date Willmore Nicholson housing needs assessments. Policies should be flexible enough to allow developers to respond to market forces in individual sites. Restrictive policies affect viability and constrain delivery.
835 Mr David Barker Barton Crest 3 6 Density targets Option 6. Willmore Nicholson 850 S. Sadler 3 2 Houses v flats Option 2
855 R. Worman 3 3 & 4 Houses v flats Provide a mixture of houses and flats
856 J. Jones 3 2 Flats v houses Option 2: houses are most desired by families. Flats best placed on Waterfront/ town centre.
856 J. Jones 3 5 Density targets Opposes v. high density due to lack of infrastructure- supports lower density development.
857 A. Jones 3 2 Flats v houses Option 2: houses are most desired by families. Flats best placed on Waterfront/ town centre.
857 A. Jones 3 5 Density targets Opposes v. high density due to lack of infrastructure- supports lower density development.
858 M. Gray 3 3 Flats v houses Options 3: would reduce traffic by concentrating development within walking distance of amenities.
899 G Duncan 3 3 Flats v houses Option 3. Proportion should reflect need.
899 G Duncan 3 6 Density targets Option 6: modern security enables very high buildings.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 938 Mrs E Burrows 3 Flats v houses Development at the Waterfront has mostly been a success but we should not over-egg it by building too many high density flats. Developments should include a mix including small mews houses. This would appeal to a wider range of people. Sadly most of the flats already built are of no architectural merit. The Council should make sure developers do not dictate the house types and that the full range of housing need is met. 983 K MacFadyen 3 Flats v houses Seem to have apartments everywhere.
1005 D Dufty Transport 3 4 flats v houses Option 4. 2000 Group Ipswich and Suffolk 1010 C Dawson Planning Ipswich 3 4 flats v houses Option 4 is the most sensible way forward in that it requires the Council to plan for the delivery of new Potential School homes via both houses and flats. 37 K Pierce 3 Houses v flats Build flats on waterfront, houses and low rise flats everywhere else.
968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 3 4 Flats v houses Option 4: a balanced approach- more responsive to emerging needs. County Council 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 3 6 Density targets LDF should maximise use of sites, having regard to site specific characteristics and Housing Needs County Assessments- consistent with PPS3. Council 898 B Glover 4 2 Mixed use Mix sites where possible- except industry. Make sure work places blend in well. development 453 J Chaplin Strutt & J.J. Wilson 4 10 Additional site The site is located at Bishop's Hill, Ipswich, and is currently occupied by a wholesale fruit distribution Parker (Ipswich) Ltd company. It is a brownfield site. It should be considered for redevelopment. It is becoming increasingly difficult to operate the distribution centre efficiently from the site given the restrictions on access through the Waterfront and Ipswich to reach a main road. It would be more appropriate for the company to relocate to a more accessible location. There are employment uses adjacent to the site and residential areas beyond. The site could be redeveloped to make a positive contribution to the area, as could a wider area around it. The site is suitable for residential use and is in a sustainable location. Residential use will support the Government's objective of maximising the re-use of previously developed land.
33 N Brigham Sustrans 4 2 14 Mixed Use Q.14 Option 2 Developments
57 N Palmer Bidwells 4 3 14 Mixed uses Option 3 is preferred because there is a need to ensure mixed use development in key locations.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 139 S. Ion Councillor for 4 3 14 Mixed uses Q. 14: Option 3 Rushmere
183 A Fuller 4 3 14 Mixed Use Development 223 R Mudhar 4 2 14 Mixed Use All major sites with certain main uses should also provide for a mix of uses. Development 288 Mrs J Seaton 4 4 14 Mixed Use development 416 Mrs D Longden Nacton Priory 4 2 14 Mixed use Mix on all major sites. Court Residents' Association 447 B C Pinner 4 2 14 Mixed use 490 A C Raworth 4 1 14 Mixed use 491 Mrs V Andrews 4 1 14 Mixed use 513 P Miller 4 2 14 Mixed use 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 4 2 14 Mixed Use L Devs 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 4 14 Mixed Use Major sites in the plan will be allocated for a particular strategic role. The mix of uses will be determined Martin Homes Devs by what that strategic role is. The Northern Fringe for example will have a primary function of delivering Associates new homes and whilst it will still need to contain a mix of uses, the range and quantum will be specific for that area. Conversely, a major employment site is unlikely to warrant the inclusion of a mix of other uses since that is not its purpose. We do not think therefore that there is a 'one size fits all' policy approach.
535 R Hopwood Bidwells 4 3 14 Mixed Use Devs 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 4 3 14 Mixed Use Malyan 928 Devs 558 P R Richards 4 2 14 Mixed Use Devs 567 R Gape 4 3 14 Mixed Use devs 577 Michael Brain 4 2 14 Mixed Use Developments
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 578 L Jenkins Suffolk 4 1 14 Mixed Use Constabulary
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 4 2 14 Mixed use S Group
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 4 3 14 Mixed use Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 4 1 14 Mixed use 625 Mrs B Robinson 4 2 14 Mixed use 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 4 3 14 Mixed use Development s Ltd 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 4 2 14 Mixed use Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 4 2 14 Mixed use 773 K Oliver 4 3 14 Mixed use 901 V Duncan 4 4 14 Mixed use Option 4. development 902 S Duncan 4 4 14 Mixed use Option 4 development 906 P Birdsall 4 1 14 Mixed use Option 1. Determine major sites as anything currently outside developed town and town centre. development 912 Mrs R J Southworth 4 3 14 Mixed use 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 4 3 14 Mixed use Malyan Planning 931 D C Harper 4 2 14 Mixed use 952 Mr S Bretherton 4 3 14 Mixed use 957 A Fenton 4 3,4 14 Mixed use 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 4 1 14 Mixed use C Group
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 4 2 14 Mixed use Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 4 3 14 Mixed Use Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 4 3 14 Mixed use Preservation Society 139 S. Ion Councillor for 4 15 Mixed uses Would prefer each site to looked at on its own merits. This would take account of the local situation and Rushmere public opinion.
183 A Fuller 4 15 Mixed Use Major sites mixed use. Small sites, one use only. Development 223 R Mudhar 4 15 Mixed Use Though I favour some mix of uses, I would not favour some uses in residential areas. Small retail and Development residential is ok. Large retail (e.g.. 24/7 superstores) and housing are not compatible because of noise. Likewise some industrial 24/7 processes. Ipswich already suffers a very high noise level at night from helicopter over flights, early aircraft noise, speedway and a rise in traffic noise after 6pm. I do not want to see the noise burden increased if possible.
259 M. Duhm 4 15 Mixed Use Match the use to the location as regards access by road, pollution and environmental impact, etc. Development 264 D. Seaton 4 15 Mixed Use Avoid major development- concentrate on piecemeal development of brownfield sites to preserve Development countryside. 288 Mrs J Seaton 4 15 Mixed Use Not in favour of major developments. Brownfield sites a priority. development 490 A C Raworth 4 15 Mixed use No. 504 C Dawson Planning PRUPIM & 4 15 Mixed use Mixed use neighbourhoods can be achieved through single use sites, therefore no option is selected. Potential Hartfield Development s 507 T Beaven 4 15 Mixed use This depends greatly on the size of the development and the type of facilities close by, I.e. the approach should take into account local facilities and overall facilities within Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 510 E Kemsley Peacock & WM Morrison 4 15 Mixed use We wish to object to options 1 - 3 as outlined in the issues and options document, as it would not always Smith Supermarket be appropriate or feasible to provide a mixed use scheme on all sites, and will be unduly onerous. We s Plc would suggest that mixed use developments are encouraged on specific sites and not required.
523 Councillor Gooch IBC 4 15 Mixed Use Site by site basis preferred because not just site size that is important, also closeness to other things L Devs eg.A14 526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 4 15 Mixed Use Major sites in the plan will be allocated for a particular strategic role. The mix of uses will be determined Martin Homes Devs by what that strategic role is. The Northern Fringe for example will have a primary function of delivering Associates new homes and whilst it will still need to contain a mix of uses, the range and quantum will be specific for that area. Conversely, a major employment site is unlikely to warrant the inclusion of a mix of other uses since that is not its purpose. We do not think therefore that there is a 'one size fits all' policy approach.
539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 4 15 Mixed Use To apply mix use policy to all key sites would be too prescriptive. Certain sites and locations might be Malyan 928 Devs key, but in viability, design and functional terms militate towards a single use.Specific sites should therefore be identified where mixed use proposals are both viable and desirable. Other key sites should be a single use. 543 Tom Clayton 4 15 Mixed Use All new sites should be considered in relation to the existing neighbourhood. Mixed use should be Devs possible on any site, but should not be a prerequisite. Mixed use will be appropriate in some cases where there is a lack of local facilities, but in other cases can make better use of what is already there.
559 G Thomas 4 15 Mixed Use Option 2 is most preferable to enable a balanced approach for major sites, accepting that certain types of Devs dev will not necessarily req other land use reqs. Alternatively could situate new land use reqs adj to areas which are well serviced by a mixture of existing land uses and facilities. This is one of the reasons why the central areas of the town which already has a wealth of employment shopping transport schooling etc make such an attractive location to maximise the reuse of former employment sites.
577 Michael Brain 4 15 Mixed Use As outlined in Issue 2 above, I suspect that sustainable communities in an energy-depleted environment Developments will depend on easy local access to essential facilities, supported by public transport between community centres. However, I would make an exception for any form of activity which represented any sort of risk for a residential neighbourhood: this would include industrial estates and certain forms of leisure activity (e.g. noisy night clubs), among other possibilities. Option 2 seems to align with this requirement in broad terms. 578 L Jenkins Suffolk 4 15 Mixed Use There can be advantages for crime prevention to attracting a mixed use of land. Try not to create areas Constabulary devoid of occupation, activity and surveillance at particular times of the day.
579 R Henderson RSPB 4 15 Mixed Use Opps for maximising env gain should be an integral part of all dev policies. This should include devs maximising opps to build in beneficial biodiversity features, sustainable transport opportunities and sustainable drainage and waste treatment.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 600 R Davies Gerald EveBritish 4 15 Mixed use There should be flexibility in allowing for the most appropriate mix of uses on individual sites. This is Energy plc development responsive to changes in local and wider circumstances. 613 Mr Chris Mole MP 4 15 Mixed use No. 624 S Mills Network Rail 4 15 Mixed use No preference for a particular option. Mixed use schemes can provide benefits in terms of sustainability, better access to local services, greater activity and public safety on weekends etc. However the economics of provision and site specific issues remain material considerations in negotiating schemes on a case by case basis so single uses should not be ruled out. Single use sites can still be part of mixed use neighbourhoods through the use of master planning etc.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 4 15 Mixed use No Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 4 15 Mixed use I do not favour some uses in residential areas - small retail is OK, but large retail like superstores and housing are not compatible because of noise. 773 K Oliver 4 15 Mixed use I am totally opposed to a mix of industrial and residential development. The latter should be free from noise etc. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 4 None 15 Mixed use Each site should be considered in relation to the whole, and in relation to surrounding areas. International development
912 Mrs R J Southworth 4 15 Mixed use Each proposed new development should be considered carefully and decided in relation to the existing amenities. 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 4 15 Mixed use Too prescriptive to apply mixed use to all sites. Certain sites and locations may be key, but viability, Malyan design and functionality militate against mixed use. Specific sites should be identified where mixed use Planning proposals are viable and desirable but other key sites should be single use. 957 A Fenton 4 15 Mixed use Not really. 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 4 15 Mixed use Housing developments away from the town centre need community facilities of their own. However, in C Group general, industry, in particular that generating noise or traffic movements, should be clustered separately.
990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 4 15 Mixed use Yes. Each site's use should be outlined in the LDF. More mixed use developments would be a good Society thing. It is only possible to define major pedantically which is not very constructive. Option 4 is unacceptable. 1002 R Ward Suffolk 4 15 Mixed use Yes. Site use must be determined having regard to the objectives of developing the site, the needs of the Preservation community and the characteristics of the general area. Society 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 4 15 mixed use Where possible, close relationships between different uses (e.g. housing/employment) should be sought County development on a site-by-site bases- but mixed use requirement as a matter of course would be inappropriate. Council
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 183 A Fuller 4 16 Mixed Use Small sites would be very congested for mixed use. Development 223 R Mudhar 4 16 Mixed Use A mix of uses means some people can work and live in the same area which gives them more time and Development less stress and varies the character of an area, giving it local distinctiveness. 288 Mrs J Seaton 4 16 Mixed Use Local residents are opposed to northern fringe destruction. development 507 T Beaven 4 16 Mixed use It is common sense. For example, the proposed development of thousands of homes in north Ipswich will obviously stretch schooling facilities locally and requires a new school to be built. A redrawing of catchment areas will be unfair to those council tax payers who have already moved into the Northgate catchment area and have been paying their fair share for some years now.
526 K Coleman Andrew David Wilson 4 16 Mixed Use Major sites in the plan will be allocated for a particular strategic role. The mix of uses will be determined Martin Homes Devs by what that strategic role is. The Northern Fringe for example will have a primary function of delivering Associates new homes and whilst it will still need to contain a mix of uses, the range and quantum will be specific for that area. Conversely, a major employment site is unlikely to warrant the inclusion of a mix of other uses since that is not its purpose. We do not think therefore that there is a 'one size fits all' policy approach.
543 Tom Clayton 4 16 Mixed Use It builds on what is already there, rather than working to a prescriptive plan. Devs 577 Michael Brain 4 16 Mixed Use As stated before, I suspect it will arise from practical necessity rather than preference Developments
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 4 16 Mixed Use ODPM "Safer Places" states that the right mix of uses in an area almost always leads to more Constabulary surveillance more of the time.
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 4 16 Mixed use Major housing developments need to contain a range of community facilities to provide for new residents S Group and to compensate neighbouring areas for increased use of existing facilities. Retail areas benefit from a certain amount of housing provision which prevents “dead” town centres. On the other hand, industrial uses should be segregated, and there is merit in clustering major office developments and large-scale leisure developments. 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 4 16 Mixed use On the basis that only major forms of development can produce a real mix of uses ranging from retail to Green residential to employment without affecting each other. Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 4 16 Mixed use Creates maximum opportunity for local working. 625 Mrs B Robinson 4 16 Mixed use Research from America indicates its success.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 4 16 Mixed use On the basis that only major forms of development can produce a real mix of uses ranging from retail to Development residential to employment without affecting each other. s Ltd 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 4 16 Mixed use Option 2 allows for community facilities eg. community centres, but no scrap yards, factories etc. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 4 16 Mixed use A mix of uses means some people can work and live in the same area. 773 K Oliver 4 16 Mixed use Consider some of the existing sites in Ipswich eg. Dales Road where the two are mixed and ask residents what they think. 931 D C Harper 4 16 Mixed use Least objectionable. 957 A Fenton 4 16 Mixed use This is difficult. 1002 R Ward Suffolk 4 16 Mixed use Because it allows a degree of flexibility. Preservation Society 57 N Palmer Bidwells 4 17 How to Existing major developments, good transport corridors, need for further development. determine major sites 139 S. Ion Councillor for 4 17 Mixed use Major sites- anything above 500 houses. Rushmere major site threshold 183 A Fuller 4 17 Mixed Use At least 100 houses / flats and easy access to a road. Development 223 R Mudhar 4 17 Mixed Use By a combination of area and occupancy. Development 284 M. Bowen 4 17 Major sites Location, amount of developable land available, transport. 447 B C Pinner 4 17 Mixed use 25 or more 490 A C Raworth 4 17 Mixed use More than 1,000 houses. 491 Mrs V Andrews 4 17 Mixed use By consulting local people in that area before making a decision. 513 P Miller 4 17 Mixed use Mixed use is for ensuring that certain areas of town do not empty at certain times of the day/week and remain alive. Often mixed use can use shared facilities most efficiently. "Major" should be used where this can occur. 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 4 17 Mixed Use The term major must refer to development much greater than that currently considered to be major for Devs the purposes of planning applications. To be able to practically provide for a mix of development then a site area of at least 5 hectares should be considered. 567 R Gape 4 17 Mixed Use A major site is defined by land area and also floor area in the case of intensive development. The specific Devs numbers are for further discussion, but 2 ha of land is a good starting point.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 577 Michael Brain 4 17 Mixed Use This would depend on the outcome to Issue 2 and identifying an effective way of satisfying transport Developments requirements between home, work, school, leisure, and so on, in the event that private motoring becomes largely unsustainable. Given that the out-of-town retail centres are based on cheap motoring, will they remain sustainable as hubs in a public transport network? Or will we see a reversion to a re- vitalised town centre? Or will work, leisure and commerce be conducted largely "on-line", and do we have sufficient scarce resources to continue to manufacture the necessary quantities of computer chips? Personally, I don't know the answer, nor do I know a man who does, but I would like to think that someone somewhere is beginning to address these questions, and that locally we are preparing ourselves for there to be answers on which we must act.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 4 17 Mixed Use A major dev could be seen as one that leads to an existing community losing its identity or one that has Constabulary an adverse impact on existing police resources.
599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 4 17 Mixed use Residential: 1 hectare or more, 100 residential units or more. Employment: 50,000 sq.ft Campus development/ Suffolk major sites 603 C Shah LIDL UK 4 17 Mixed use Determine major sites using mix of uses, proximity to transport links, residential density. GmbH development 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 4 17 Mixed use Residential: 1 hectare or more, 100 residential units or more. Employment: 50,000 sq.ft Woodrow development/ Development major sites s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 4 17 Mixed use Residential: 1 hectare or more, 100 residential units or more. Employment: 50,000 sq.ft British Ports development/ major sites 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 4 17 Mixed use Residential: 1 hectare or more, 100 residential units or more. Employment: 50,000 sq.ft development/ major sites 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 4 17 Mixed use 1ha or over, or 100 residential units or more, or 50,000 sq ft of employment. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 4 17 Mixed use 10+ dwellings but also need to prohibit piecemeal development of larger sites. 625 Mrs B Robinson 4 17 Mixed use Environmental beauty; bio-diverse sites.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 4 17 Mixed use 1ha or over, or 100 residential units or more, or 50,000 sq ft of employment. Development s Ltd 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 4 17 Mixed use Old factory sites. Residents' Association 773 K Oliver 4 17 Mixed use Business concerns should be categorised and allocated to areas appropriate to their affect on residential property owners. 856 J. Jones 4 17 Major Major development: brownfield sites, greenfield and Waterfront. development definition 857 A. Jones 4 17 Major Major development: brownfield sites, greenfield and Waterfront. development definition 912 Mrs R J Southworth 4 17 Mixed use How does the Council define it? 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 4 17 Mixed use Major sites should be identified as those that are key in delivering the Council's objectives. Malyan Planning 931 D C Harper 4 17 Mixed use Major sites - town centre, Waterfront, Ipswich Village, Bramford/Sproughton Road, Ravenswood areas.
952 Mr S Bretherton 4 17 Mixed use Major would include most free standing developments as opposed to infill development which has a minimal impact. 957 A Fenton 4 17 Mixed use Not sure. 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 4 17 Mixed use By location (e.g. town centre) or by significance of use (eg. important employment site) or by size. C Group 1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 4 17 Mixed Use Transport access Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 4 17 Mixed use It is an issue for the size and nature of the development and the role that it would play in terms of the Preservation functioning of the area and the infrastructure it will need or support. Society 55 Mrs Buckle 4 Avoiding Could flats be built over shops, offices and supermarkets instead of using greenfield sites? greenfield development 62 J Offord 4 2 Mixed uses Major development should be mixed use.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 75 A Gunn 4 Mixed use Employment and homes should be close to minimise commuter traffic. development 77 I Maitumbi EERA 4 1, 2 & 3 Mixed use Options 1, 2 and 3 are broadly consistent with RSS policy SS16. development 105 W Last 4 1 Mixed use Option 1- Sites should be big enough to allow for retail and housing. development 106 P Stephenson 4 4 Mixed use Option 4 would contribute most effectively to making Ipswich a more attractive place to live. development 109 J Welsh Green Living 4 4 Mixed use Option 4: Main work activities should be separated. Noise/relaxation and travel given as reasons. Centre development
111 S Young 4 Flats v houses Q. 9: Option 4
128 T. Tyrell 4 1 Access to How much development will be in easy access of shops? shops 185 Daniel Sanford 4 Mixed Used Uses & Issues: a mix of housing, community and employment, as fit with local plan requirements. development 261 L. Williams 4 1 & 2 Mixed Use Development 264 D. Seaton 4 4 Mixed Use Development 284 M. Bowen 4 3 Mixed use Option 3 provides most flexibility to meet local circumstances. development 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 4 None Mixed use No options supported. Strongly support concept of mixed use development to meet different needs. Size Planning Kesgrave development as well as location are relevant, as well as other factors such as site character and particular local needs. Covenant A more holistic approach would be the most realistic way to meet housing and jobs targets in a Limited sustainable way with local benefits. 493 Rose Freeman The Theatres 4 Mixed use It would be helpful to define all the available uses including theatre, arts and cultural facilities. Option 3 Trust would allow the major uses (housing and retail) in key locations to support minor ones (theatre arts and culture). This would allow future development to include provision for community halls, arts centres, etc. Policies should promote such objectives. Your cultural strategy should include a review and assessment of existing venue provision and future needs. A flourishing arts scene gives a sense of identity and vitality. 549 Ishaku Maitumbi EERA 4 Mixed use The first 3 options are broadly consistent with Policy SS16 of the draft EoE Plan Development 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 4 3 Mixed use Only major forms of development can produce a real mix of uses without affecting each other. Salter development
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 4 3 Mixed use Only major forms of development can produce a real mix of uses without affecting each other. Campus development Suffolk 603 C Shah LIDL UK 4 1 Mixed use Option 1 allows for a variety of use and choice. Provision should be made to include discount food retail- GmbH development it appeals to people from a diverse background. 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 4 3 Mixed use Only major forms of development can produce a real mix of uses without affecting each other. Woodrow development Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 4 3 Mixed use Only major forms of development can produce a real mix of uses without affecting each other. British Ports development
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 4 3 Mixed use Only major forms of development can produce a real mix of uses without affecting each other. development 674 Mr G E Pryke 4 New site If development is necessary, what about the golf course behind St Audrey's? 783 E Phillips 4 4 Mixed use Option 4: larger developments could allow more than one use. I don't believe that you can mix residential development with other uses. 835 Mr David Barker Barton Crest 4 None Mixed use Policy should be flexible to allow an appropriate mix on each site depending on site size and location. Willmore Nicholson development 854 R. Wallace 4 1 Mixed use Option 1: all areas need to be mixed use development. development 856 J. Jones 4 2 Mixed use Option 2. Town centre- Supports mixed use as a way to reduce commuting. development 857 A. Jones 4 2 Mixed use Option 2. Town centre- Supports mixed use as a way to reduce commuting. development 858 M. Gray 4 2 Mixed use Option 2. Town centre- Supports mixed use as a way to reduce commuting. development 993 S McGrath Indigo Sainsbury's 4 4 Mixed use Option 4: requiring mixed uses can limit the potential of sites. Best potential may be achieved by pursuing Planning Supermarket development a mix of uses within a wider area. s Ltd. 1005 D Dufty Transport 4 3 Mixed Use Option 3. 2000 Group Ipswich and Suffolk
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 1010 C Dawson Planning Ipswich 4 14 Mixed Use It is difficult to respond to Question 14 without some guidance on what constitutes a “major” site. If a Potential School major site is likely to be something of the nature of the possible greenfield land releases to the north of the town, it would probably be appropriate that such areas accommodate a mix of uses. In this way, a sustainable community can be created. On smaller sites, however, it may be inappropriate to enforce a mix of uses where there is no clear planning purpose. Whilst mixed areas are supportive of sustainable urban form, their achievement is not strictly a consequence of requiring a mix of uses on each individual sites. For example, within an area which contains a large amount of commercial development, a mixed use locality may be best achieved by the development of an individual site solely for residential, rather than a mixed approach.
1 I Wedd 5 2 0 Infrastructure Major transport improvements need in central Ipswich. Wet Dock crossing is a good idea, provided attractively done. Central Ipswich is already congested and will worsen if the new buildings (inc the university) go ahead. 1 I Wedd 5 0 18 Landscaping Landscape architects should be employed at the earliest stage to give thought to town and site layouts. Should get it right for the future, not allow cost to be the determining factor. Street trees should be planted. (IP4) 4 L H Barton 5 18 Transport Improvements to public transport should continue. Private motoring needs to be restricted. 5 M Smith 5 2 18 Transport Support for improved public transport, particularly to villages and railways stations. Encourage people to leave their cars at home. 8 J A Cook 5 18 Infrastructure Need to address health provision. Hospital struggling to cope, NHS Dentists not available. How can this be addressed? Traffic appalling at rush hour. How can buses/trains service cope better?
41 J E Trowell 5 18 Water and Extra water supply and hospital expansion are needed to support housing growth. hospitals 41 J E Trowell 5 18 Infrastructure Water supply is paramount.
55 Mrs Buckle 5 18 Parks and play Top priority should be given to parks and play areas. areas 57 N Palmer Bidwells 5 18 Key services Transport infrastructure. needed to support growth
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 58 S Scott Forestry 5 2 18 Using Produce opportunity maps as a means of determining the extent to which woodland could contribute to Commission woodland for sustainable flood control and containing some contaminates on brownfield land. flood control and containing some contaminates
60 R G & R Free 5 18 Infrastructure - Hospitals, surgeries, dentists and other vital services are also important. Some health services are facing M services problems/ closure and there is a shortage of NHS dentists. 63 K Gleeson Lambert National 5 18 Omission While there are no specific proposals for new prison development in this Borough, the Council are Smith Offender requested to consider inclusion of a criteria based policy to deal with a firm proposal, should it arise in the Hampton Management plan period. Pay regard to Circular 3/98. The Secretary of State expects local authorities to work with the Service prison service to identify new land for prisons through the LDF process. 3/98 states that DPDs should take account of the need for new prison developments, which should be identified through the planning system. The Prison Service will take into account the local and regional context, the court catchment areas served and the relationship of the site to nearby population centres. Circular 3/98 also sets out location criteria for prison location and sets out the benefits of prisons to local areas.
69 G King The 5 2 18 Green Clear guidance should be given relating to open space to be available. Countryside Infrastructure Agency 70 T Cocker 5 2 18 Community Provide a range of facilities to serve established and new communities. facilities 100 D Hindmarch 5 18 Omission More thought needs to go to provision of community facilities: schools, leisure facilities for teenagers, elderly too. 109 J Welsh Green Living 5 2 18 Key services Local renewables e.g. power. Grey water solutions. Hospitals. Centre needed to support growth
110 M Thorp 5 18 Omission There must be provision of a large park- at least 15 acres. 118 D Harper 5 2 18 Community Need to provide cultural facilities and outdoor spaces. Facilities 119 B Noll 5 18 Key services Should provide leisure, shopping, employment and amended bus routes (see comment 10 above). needed to support growth
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 120 Edwards 5 18 Infrastructure Concern- effect of number of properties planned on resources such as water- and what about schools, concern doctors' surgeries, etc? 120 Edwards 5 2 18 New facilities New arts centre/ theatre/ science museum or some special attraction required. for town
128 T. Tyrell 5 2 18 Leisure Need to provide leisure facilities facilities 130 E. Hill 5 2 18 Student Need to tie in housing numbers with the need for student housing at the new university. accommodatio n 139 S. Ion Councillor for 5 18 Services Supports all those set out in para 3.10 Rushmere needed to support growth
180 D Caulfield 5 18 Infrastructure Health services; water conservation services.
181 Shirley Talbot Suffolk 5 18 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
182 Mr W J & Gooney Suffolk 5 18 Infrastructure Mrs E P Wildlife Trust
183 A Fuller 5 18 Infrastructure EBLR, Northern By Pass from Martlesham to Claydon, A14 upgraded to motorway to M1
184 Gwen Boston Suffolk 5 18 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
186 John L Girt Suffolk 5 18 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
193 John Ireland 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport, cycle and pedestrian ways, water and sewerage, schools, libraries, doctors and dentists.
196 Marian Edwards 5 18 Infrastructure Bus Service.
201 Paul Izzard 5 18 Infrastructure Doctors, dentists, hospital, police, schools, bus services.
208 Neil Gulliver 5 18 Infrastructure Appropriate access to recreational countryside areas.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 218 Maggie Dooley 5 18 Infrastructure Schools, health, public transport, social care, dental, leisure, sports.
219 Mr R A Chequer 5 18 Infrastructure
223 R Mudhar 5 18 Infrastructure Dentists, parks and green spaces, off road cycle paths in the new developments, some road developments 242 M. Higgins 5 2 18 Extra Expand/extend public transport and cycle lanes. Infrastructure
243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 5 2 18 Extra Public transport the Earth, Infrastructure Suffolk Wildlife Trust
245 B. Gooding 5 2 18 Extra Expand/extend public transport and cycle lanes. Infrastructure
261 L. Williams 5 18 Infrastructure Cycle routes, bus services and train services should be expanded.
264 D. Seaton 5 18 Infrastructure 1. Centralised amenities./shops to encourage use of public transport/walking. 2. Health facilities- the hospital can barely cope with demand (the respondent speaks from experience as a physician). 3. Roads.
282 M. Phillips 5 2 18 Infrastructure Safe cycle routes, public transport.
284 M. Bowen 5 18 Infrastructure/ Public transport, population-related services, water. services 288 Mrs J Seaton 5 18 Infrastructure Keep shopping in the centre. Encourage home deliveries for elderly. Discourage private traffic from centre. 302 David Saunders 5 18 Infrastructure Sewerage and utilities; a northern by-pass; schools; hospitals. needs 303 Mr & Mrs Brockman 5 18 Infrastructure Transport links; new schools; improved healthcare. needs 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 5 18 Services North Ipswich needs a variety of services- education, shopping, health, leisure- to meet the needs of Planning Kesgrave existing and future residents. Covenant Limited 431 Mr & Mrs Cable-Davex 5 18 Key Services Improved bus services and the expansion of consistent pedestrian crossings.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 437 J McNabb 5 18 Key services Improve public transport. 447 B C Pinner 5 18 New Car parking. infrastructure
449 T Kitson 5 18 Infrastructure Hospital, doctors, schools, day centres for the elderly and vulnerable, police, etc.
476 Ms J Jousiffe 5 18 Infrastructure/k Cycle and pedestrian routes required and also better cultural facilities. ey services
487 J Walsh 5 18 Infrastructure/k Transport for cars, pedestrians and cyclists, and green spaces. ey services
491 Mrs V Andrews 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport, schools, roads, health service.
493 Rose Freeman The Theatres 5 18 Infrastructure Welcome reference to cultural facilities in 3.10. Trust
508 R Paddison Babergh 5 18 Infrastructure It is important that new development is matched by improvements in infrastructure, otherwise District development would be unsustainable. Council 513 P Miller 5 18 Infrastructure All would need to be expanded except those that are underused at present.
516 L Woolf 5 18 Infrastructure Hospital could not cope with extra population; doctors and dentists are already overloaded; secondary schools are full; how will extra sewage be disposed of? Who will fund additional facilities?
523 Councillor Gooch IBC 5 18 Infrastructure Schools, hospital capacity, dentists - light railway to waterfront/town/university - cycle network away from L road - improve theatre 528 Mr R M Collins Suffolk 5 18 Infrastructure public transport backed by campaign to change people's perception of travel Wildlife Trust member
541 Julian Dowding 5 18 Infrastructure Cycling friendly routes; and bus services
541 Bev Dowding 5 18 Infrastructure Cycling friendly routes; and bus services
543 Tom Clayton 5 18 Infrastructure Schools; transport
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 544 June Davenport 5 18 Infrastructure/ I'm absolutely appalled to hear that planners are even considering to build a link road from the east bank East Bank Link of the Orwell to the A14. As a regular user of all local roads, I know that this will not solve congestion but Road only make it worse. When will planners stop using roads to solve the town's transport problems. We need real permanent solutions, such as trams and more buses to rural areas only then will congestion be reduced. This is a designated County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve and as such should be protected forever. We can not keep concreting over our green spaces in the name of progress, it's just plain madness. I can only hope that others agree with me and this idea disappears as it did previously.
561 M Goode Suffolk East 5 18 Infrastructure Supports the comment that the growth of the town needs to be matched by growth in infrastructure, Primary Care specifically health facilities.This will need to include primary care premises development but also other Trusts NHS services such as mental health, acute care, A&E provision and ambulances. While 90%+ of all NHS interventions are at the primary care level, it is important not to forget that an increased population will need to be provided with increased health care overall. Access to health sites is extremely important and not everyone has access to a car. Therefore public transport links are often key to successful delivery of services.We therefore support the delivery of public transport infrastructure and also car parking where we plan new devs.
571 G Sayers 5 18 Infrastructure Buses/trams ? From the NW to the railway station - its appalling that there isn't a service there.
577 Michael Brain 5 18 New I would expect all key services to require expansion or improvement, since providing services requires Infrastructure resources and capacity, which have to be tailored to demand since they cost money whose expenditure has to be justified. Productivity improvements generally require technological enablers: the "more for less" axiom can be taken only so far before quantum effects take hold, and an extremely efficient service suddenly disappears when the last employee is re-deployed!
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 5 18 Infrastructure It is vital that any growth does not affect the current levels and standards of community safety and Constabulary policing enjoyed by IBC and the community.
579 R Henderson RSPB 5 18 Infrastructure Increased access to high quality open areas and greenspaces to enhance quality of life and env gain. More provision for sustainable transport, cycle networks and footpaths.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 581 Mr R Warren Sport 5 18 Infrastructure Need to give attention to implications of sport and recreation facilities. The forecast growth will put England considerable pressure on sports facilities such as playing fields, sports halls, swimming pools etc. It is likely that existing facilities will have inadequate spare capacity so and any existing deficiencies will be exacerbated and populations needs will not be met. Sports provision is integral to creation of healthy and sustainable communities and the expansion/improvement of facilities is essential if the core strategies visions are to be achieved. Sport Englands Spatial Planning for sport and Active Recreation document provides guidance on the role that sport can play in spatial planning. It can be downloaded from www.sportengland.org/spatial planning for sport and active recreation.pdf.It is essential that assessments are undertaken of existing and future needs in relation to sport and recreation facilities, in order to ensure that informed and robust information is available about the scale and nature of the additional needs that would be generated by the level of growth proposed. This would be needed to accord with Government g
588 J Lucek 5 18 Services Plan for more schools. 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 5 18 Infrastructure Schools, hospital facilities, doctors' surgeries, dental practices, libraries, transport interchanges. Campus Suffolk 602 A Bush Bacton 5 18 Omission The Ipswich LDF should make provision for places of worship/meeting halls, faith schools and cemeteries Gospel Hall (as the Adopted Local Plan does for the former of these). It would be better, clearer and less open to Trust interpretation to include a policy to address faith facilities specifically, rather than including them in 'community facilities'. Where appropriate, IBC should work with neighbouring authorities to develop a coordinated strategy. The RSS supports this (RSS Section 10 paragraphs, and Panel Report recommendations attached). Such provisions are important for the spiritual and moral well being of our communities.
602 A Bush Bacton 5 18 Omission Sufficient regard is not had to allocations for faith uses. Bacton G.H.T. may wish to relocate but there is Gospel Hall no policy for places of worship/faith schools In the LDF, putting the trust at a disadvantage. Trust 603 C Shah LIDL UK 5 18 Infrastructure Transport, medical, education GmbH 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 5 18 Infrastructure Schools, hospital facilities, doctors' surgeries, dental practices, libraries, transport interchanges. British Ports
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 5 18 Infrastructure Schools, hospital facilities, doctors' surgeries, dental practices, libraries, transport interchanges.
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 5 18 Infrastructure All of them. Profit-making services will improve naturally as their customer-base increases. Some S Group expansion will have to be planned and financed by public agencies, e.g. the Police. The LDF should seek to obtain the maximum possible level of developer contribution for improved services consistent with delivering the highest possible level of affordable housing.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 5 18 Infrastructure Schools, hospitals facilities, doctors surgeries, dental practices, libraries, and transport interchanges. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport, leisure, health and education.
614 Mr N Blake 5 18 Infrastructure Continued improvement in the pedestrian and cycle experience. Putting the car towards the edges and using bus, taxi, cycle, walking to enhance the centre. 625 Mrs B Robinson 5 18 Infrastructure All of them.
652 J A Smith 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport, including better access to railway
666 Mrs B Woods 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport
728 Mr & Mrs Coley 5 18 Services How will hospitals and doctors cope with such a huge rise in population? Also need improved shopping.
730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 5 18 Infrastructure Schools, hospitals facilities, doctors surgeries, dental practices, libraries, and transport interchanges. Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport, sewage and water.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 5 18 Infrastructure At least one new large reservoir. A new airport or dual the A140 so people can use Norwich airport. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 5 18 Infrastructure Parks and green spaces, off road cycle paths in new developments.
745 Hilary Cadman 5 18 Infrastructure Policing of street to enable a feeling of safety and well being. Ban drinking in the streets
764 Gillian Thomas 5 18 Infrastructure Roads, parking space particularly
767 F J Goulding 5 18 Infrastructure Sewage treatment works
773 K Oliver 5 18 Infrastructure Much depends on where the additional population is to be housed. If on greenfield sites, the current roads into Ipswich will be inadequate for peak hour traffic. Other facilities will also need extension.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 777 L Quantrill 5 18 Infrastructure New housing should have local centres, open space, recreation, schooling and health provision. At the Waterfront in particular some open space should be provided on the remaining sites. Current boundary of Ipswich should not be restriction. 781 Mrs H Hedley 5 18 Infrastructure Public Transport at reasonable prices
783 E Phillips 5 18 Infrastructure Key services: water and power services, leisure facilities
820 A Bumstead 5 18 Infrastructure Roads round north of town. Sewerage and drainage, schools, doctors' surgeries and parks. Frequent, affordable and convenient transport services. 825 Mr and Aherne 5 18 Infrastructure Allow more park and ride schemes- parking in Ipswich is very expensive. Mrs 830 J Saunders 5 18 Infrastructure Growth of Ipswich and closing small hospitals will impact on Ipswich hospital (and also the parking there). Schools and parking there. Roads in general. 830 J Saunders 5 18 Infrastructure Provide off-road parking in narrow streets where there is parking on both sides of the road.
839 K. Hill 5 2 18 Infrastructure Employment, Hospitals, Cycle ways in their own right, not part of roads.
856 J. Jones 5 18 Infrastructure All services need improvement: health, education, transport, accessible supermarkets, leisure, electricity, drainage, water. 857 A. Jones 5 18 Infrastructure All services need improvement: health, education, transport, accessible supermarkets, leisure, electricity, drainage, water. 858 M. Gray 5 18 Infrastructure/ All services, particularly medical, schools and public transport. services 859 D. Witherley 5 18 Infrastructure/ Local health facilities- dentists, doctors, hospital- have long waiting lists and would be inadequate for services proposed growth. 860 A. Witherley 5 18 Infrastructure/ Must consider means of providing additional water services alongside extra homes. services 861 D. Witherley 5 18 Infrastructure/ Local health facilities- dentists, doctors, hospital- have long waiting lists and would be inadequate for services proposed growth. 898 B Glover 5 18 Services More cultural facilities. 901 V Duncan 5 2a 18 Infrastructure Supports option a
901 V Duncan 5 18 Services Must have interfaith centre for all religions to gather for celebrations. 906 P Birdsall 5 18 Infrastructure Q 18: sewerage treatment.
907 G Ellis 5 18 Services Protect facilities for the most vulnerable from closing. Need to provide for an ageing population and 'care in the community' patients.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 912 Mrs R J Southworth 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport to and from Stanstead Airport, subsidised if necessary.
931 D C Harper 5 18 Infrastructure All areas need serious work to restore to levels experienced before previous expansions had overloaded them 952 Mr S Bretherton 5 18 Infrastructure Public transport will need to be expanded with significant infrastructure expenditure.
964 Mr D Dufty 5 18 Infrastructure The borough is seriously short of swimming baths. 2 lidos have been closed in recent memory and both were important to the community. With global warming their importance will increase. There is no facility in the borough for high diving - the nearest is at Colchester. This is not good enough.
966 Miss H Ormondroy 5 18 Infrastructure Need more emphasis on community centres and doctors surgeries.
972 N Cenci IBC 5 18 Infrastructure Hospital services and core public utilities. Councillor 974 D & J Sheppard 5 18 Infrastructure Roads are full already, as are local schools. Additional primary and secondary schools will be needed, as a new hospital. 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 5 18 Infrastructure Especially sustainable transport facilities - public transport + pedestrian and cycling facilities. C Group 977 Mr T Scott 5 18 Infrastructure Need infrastructure - hospital, doctors, police, water, and other services. Should also provide facilities for children. 983 K MacFadyen 5 18 Infrastructure Need adequate schools for any new housing development. Also concerned about water supply.
992 E Ayden 5 18 Infrastructure Better public transport needs 1002 R Ward Suffolk 5 18 Infrastructure All of those listed in Option 2. Preservation Society 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 5 18 Services New open/green space will be vital to meet recreational needs for extra population- even more so with Countryside reducing garden sizes/provision. Improve facilities for pedestrians and cyclists to move freely though Project attractive landscapes to replace car journeys.
771 Mr R Worman 5 18 Infrastructure Key things to take into account in future development are: providing adequate roads and public transport, affordable housing, schools, surgeries and other services needed to deal with an expanding population.
42 Mrs Welsh 5 2 19 Bus prices Buses are far too expensive in Ipswich. 57 N Palmer Bidwells 5 2c 19 Need for Option C needed to improve access between the town centre and the waterfront. infrastructure.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 63 K Gleeson Lambert National 5 2 19 Infrastructure Smith Offender Hampton Management Service 87 Ms J Shepherd 5 2 19 Infrastructure
109 J Welsh Green Living 5 1 19 Need for new Option 1- with elements of option 2, e.g. a- a combined bus station makes sense. A number of existing Centre infrastructure systems are under-utilised.
152 R A Radford Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
155 C Keeble 5 2 19 Infrastructure
156 S J Colgan 5 2 19 Infrastructure
157 M J Oliver - 5 2 19 Infrastructure Trotter 158 Mr James Duncan 5 2 19 Infrastructure
159 Jo Charlton 5 2 19 Infrastructure
161 Peter Howe 5 2 19 Infrastructure
163 J Earwaker 5 2 19 Infrastructure
164 Mr & Mrs Hollis Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure G Wildlife Trust
165 Mr D A Clarke Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
166 Mr & Mrs Beggs 5 2 19 Infrastructure S 167 Mr D Atkins Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 168 D G Heckels 5 2 19 Infrastructure
169 Mr D Riseborough 5 2 19 Infrastructure
171 Barbara Gutowska Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
172 Mr C A Groom Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
173 Mr & Mrs Piotrowski Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure M Wildlife Trust
174 Angela & Bradbrook Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Neville Wildlife Trust
175 Eugene Mullan 5 2 19 Infrastructure
176 Nicholas Tebbs 5 2 19 Infrastructure
177 Mrs M J Long Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
178 Helen Jacobs 5 2 19 Infrastructure
179 K Dunnett 5 2 19 Infrastructure
180 D Caulfield 5 2 19 Infrastructure
181 Shirley Talbot Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
182 Mr W J & Gooney Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Mrs E P Wildlife Trust
183 A Fuller 5 2 19 Infrastructure
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 184 Gwen Boston Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
186 John L Girt Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
188 Mr D & Abbott 5 2 19 Infrastructure Mrs A 191 Paul E R Brown Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
193 John Ireland 5 2 19 Infrastructure
194 Pam Ireland Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
196 Marian Edwards 5 2 19 Infrastructure
197 Mr & Mrs Robertson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Charles and Elisabeth 200 Annette Lloyd 5 2 19 Infrastructure
201 Paul Izzard 5 2 19 Infrastructure
203 Yoko Watanabe 5 2 19 Infrastructure Penaluna 205 Mrs J Stannard 5 2 19 Infrastructure
206 T R Oliver 5 2 19 Infrastructure
207 R H Garnett 5 2 19 Infrastructure
208 Neil Gulliver 5 2 19 Infrastructure
209 David Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 210 A J & R Gaylard Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
212 Ms E Webb 5 2 19 Infrastructure
213 Jane Shepherd 5 2 19 Infrastructure
214 Mr Brown 5 2 19 Infrastructure Anthony 216 Marianne White Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
217 Lorraine West 5 2 19 Infrastructure
218 Maggie Dooley 5 2 19 Infrastructure
219 Mr R A Chequer 5 2 19 Infrastructure
220 Ms M L Stone Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
221 Mr & Mrs Leatham Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Bernard Wildlife Trust
222 Mr David Pitt 5 2 19 Infrastructure E 223 R Mudhar 5 2 19 Infrastructure
224 Keith Morrill Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
225 Yvonne Smart Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
226 Brian Williams Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 227 Beryl Harding Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
228 P Read Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
229 Michael Hammond 5 2 19 Infrastructure
230 Mrs V Horne 5 2 19 Infrastructure
231 Jill Page Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
232 H S Clayton 5 2 19 Infrastructure
233 Celia Miller 5 2 19 Infrastructure
235 S Brocklehurst Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
236 A. Nette- 5 2 19 Infrastructure Thomas 237 J. Peake Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
238 S. Watson 5 2 19 Infrastructure
239 R. & A. Wolfe 5 2 19 Infrastructure
240 Mr & Mrs Jacobs 5 2 19 Infrastructure B. 241 L. Mett 5 2 19 Infrastructure
242 M. Higgins 5 2 19 Infrastructure
244 M. Cresswell 5 2 19 Infrastructure
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 245 B. Gooding 5 2 a, b, 19 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental c, f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 246 L. Macfarlane 5 2 19 Infrastructure
247 I. Wen 5 2 19 Infrastructure
248 A. Clarke 5 2 19 Infrastructure
249 Mr&Mrs Hazelwood Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
250 Mr&Mrs Jensen 5 2 19 Infrastructure
251 I. Quarton 5 2 19 Infrastructure
252 J.&M. Skellorn 5 2 19 Infrastructure
253 R. Glover 5 2 19 Infrastructure
254 D. Robinson 5 2 19 Infrastructure
255 D. Munday 5 2 19 Infrastructure
259 M. Duhm 5 2 19 Infrastructure
262 K. Daniels 5 2 19 Infrastructure
267 C. Bonniot 5 2 19 Infrastructure
270 D. Sutcliffe 5 2 19 Infrastructure
271 W. King 5 2 19 Infrastructure
272 L. Caudle 5 2 19 Infrastructure
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 273 A. Cordon 5 2 19 Infrastructure
274 R. Robinson 5 2 19 Infrastructure
275 M & R. Sparrow Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
276 C. Gilbert Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
277 R. Rix Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
278 R. Attenborrow Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
279 R. Bradbrock Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
280 R. Richards 5 2 19 Infrastructure
282 M. Phillips 5 2 19 Infrastructure
283 E. Sedgwick 5 2 19 Infrastructure
285 Ms A Plumb 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 288 Mrs J Seaton 5 2 19 Infrastructure
290 Su Fox 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 291 Ms D Baker 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 292 T G Holden 5 2 19 Infrastructure
293 B H Andrews Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. Wildlife Trust needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 295 Tak Cheung 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 296 G Grieco 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 297 Sarah Fitch 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 298 N Neale 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 299 Ms C Smy 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 300 Ms N Denny 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 303 Mr & Mrs Brockman 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 304 Carol Clemons Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
305 Peter Mills Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
306 M. & C. Miller 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 308 M & M. Luetchford 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 309 Mr M Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 312 Cheryl Lee 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 313 Terry Miles 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 319 K D Brown 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 323 B L Partridge Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
324 M Last 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 326 Mr Brander 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 328 Mrs M Smith Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
329 Ann Havard 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 330 John Moore 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 331 Diana Grace 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 332 C Hayward Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure D Rowley Wildlife Trust needs
334 L Willis 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 335 Dr Sutton 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 336 T Rice 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 337 J Booty 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 338 J and P Hudis Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
339 E Jeyasingh 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 340 D Hindmarch 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 343 J Morcom 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 345 R J Woollett 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 346 C Rutt 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 347 P Cansick 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 348 M Jackson 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 349 L Driver Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
353 Mrs Ashby 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 354 Dr Doshi 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 355 P & B Lay 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 358 W Ashby 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 361 C & M Tracy 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 365 C & P Gray 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 367 D McHardy 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 368 D Sparkes 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 369 Glenys Wright 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 370 Ron Vincent 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 371 R Thurlow 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 372 H Cufley 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 373 S Thurston 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 374 Marie Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 375 E Chandler 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 376 G Bernthal 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 378 A Daley 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 380 D Bale 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 382 Mr A Moore 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 383 C J Pollard 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 387 Cerne Deverell Woodland 5 2 19 Infrastructure Trust needs 388 Carys Swinger 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 389 Peter Coltham 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 390 Sarah Greenacre Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
392 David Bellamy Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
393 V & D Pauley 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 394 Jane Southall 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 395 Mr & Mrs Steward 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 397 K & V Watson 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 401 J H Stroud Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
404 A & M Wilson Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
406 Mary Kaye 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 408 Mr & Mrs Arbon 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 408 Mr & Mrs Dent 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 410 Mr & Mrs Padman 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 411 Mr R F Wragg SWT/Ipswich 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife needs Group 412 A Petty Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
413 T C Elliot 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 415 Mr P Osborne Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
417 Mr M Groom 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 418 Mrs M Groom Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
419 A Moss 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 420 T E Chalklen 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 424 Mr & Mrs Foster Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
426 Peter Ling Sustrans; 5 2 19 Infrastructure CTC; SWT needs 428 P Atkin 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 431 Mr & Mrs Cable-Davex 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 434 J S Turner 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 435 F Simpson 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 436 S Brame 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 437 J McNabb 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 440 S Bradbrook 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 441 B J Green Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
442 Mrs Snook 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 443 R Warner 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 444 T Wilmshurst 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 446 Mrs Birdsall 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 447 B C Pinner 5 1 19 New infrastructure
448 R Kitson 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 449 T Kitson 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 452 C Peartree 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
456 D Henry Savills Samuel 5 2 19 Infrastructure Beadie (Developmen ts) Ltd 460 A & R Stewart 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 464 Mrs J Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 465 D Fincham 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 466 Mrs Roots 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 467 J Powell 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 468 C Sheehan 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 469 C Sherrod 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 470 O Russell 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 471 C Overbury 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 472 I McIvor 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 473 Mrs S Jackson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 474 A Boyle 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 475 Captain Usherwood 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 476 Ms J Jousiffe 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 477 R Sideaway 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 478 R Sideaway 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 479 G Boucher 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 480 B Hall Greenways 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 481 V Willis 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 482 R Curtis Greenways 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 483 Nigel No surname 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. provided needs
484 W Haigh 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 485 S P Thorpe 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 486 S Coulstock 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 487 J Walsh 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 488 M Regnault 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. Wildlife Trust
490 A C Raworth 5 2 19 Infrastructure
491 Mrs V Andrews 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
492 N Gooding 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
493 Rose Freeman The Theatres 5 2 19 Infrastructure Theatres are dependent on people being able to get to them by public transport and by car, and being Trust able to park cars and bikes, and being able to get home safely after the show. Controlled parking zones around theatres can have serious implications for their economic viability. This should be taken into account in parking policies, as should pricing (excessive parking charges will deter patrons).
494 P Gooding 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
495 M Gooding 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
496 L Anderson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
497 I Murray 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
498 S Anderson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
499 D Anderson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
500 J Gooding 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
502 C Wilding 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 507 T Beaven 5 2 19 Infrastructure Option 2 - growth should be matched by new infrastructure.
508 R Paddison Babergh 5 2 19 Infrastructure Option 2 is strongly supported. If this does not happen, traffic pressure on the transport system could spill District out well beyond Ipswich and into Babergh District. Council 513 P Miller 5 2 19 Infrastructure
515 T J Dowe 5 2 19 Infrastructure
516 L Woolf 5 2 19 Infrastructure 15,400 homes will mean a large increase in traffic. At present Henley Rd, Westerfield Rd and Tuddenham Rd and Wherstead Rd all suffer delays at busy times. It is difficult to see how these roads could be improved and buses are not the answer as Ravenswood has shown. Development should not be permitted until suitable road improvements have been built. 518 Mrs Finch Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. Wildlife needs Trust; Ipswich Society 519 N Lathom- 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. Sharp needs 522 A Shirley 5 2 19 Infrastructure
523 Councillor Gooch IBC 5 2 19 Infrastructure L 525 Mrs E Cooper 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 528 Mr R M Collins Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs member
529 Mrs J Dunnett Ipswich 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife needs Group 530 Mr R Dunnett Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs member
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 531 Isla Budgen White House 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Community needs Infant School
532 T A Stamp 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 533 Scott Osborn 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 541 Julian Dowding 5 2 19 Infrastructure
541 Bev Dowding 5 2 19 Infrastructure
543 Tom Clayton 5 2 19 Infrastructure
552 Ms J Overett 5 1 19 Infrastructure The current infrastructure of the town is adequate to meet the needs associated with the growth of the town 552 Ms J Overett 5 2 19 Infrastructure The growth of the town will need to be matched by growth in infrastructure provision. New provision could include one or more of schemes from the following list 558 P R Richards 5 2 19 Infrastructure
560 R Gravell 5 2 19 Infrastructure
566 M Osbourne 5 2 19 Infrastructure/ East Bank Link Road 567 R Gape 5 2 19 Infrastructure
569 B Wilding 5 2 19 Infrastructure/ East Bank Link Road 571 G Sayers 5 2 19 Infrastructure
577 Michael Brain 5 2 19 New 3 Infrastructure
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 578 L Jenkins Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Constabulary
579 R Henderson RSPB 5 1 19 Infrastructure
593 R Dobson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 5 2 19 Infrastructure S Group
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 5 2 19 Infrastructure Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 5 2 19 Infrastructure
614 Mr N Blake 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 616 Mr D Watts 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 619 Mrs C Davies 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 620 J A Evans 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 621 Mrs J Edwards 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 622 Mr T Edwards 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 623 Mr J Edwards 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 625 Mrs B Robinson 5 2 19 Infrastructure
630 R Wright 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure. needs 631 Mr P Andreasen Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 636 M Thurston 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
637 Mr J Gobbitt 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
638 Mr R Johnson Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Wildlife Trust
639 P Andrews 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
640 J W Capon 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
642 Jane Bradburn 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
645 Jane Hall 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
646 Paul and Newton 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Linda 647 Mr and Grimwade 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Mrs 648 Sheila Hancock 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
650 Ms J Haggar 5 2 19 Infrastructure
651 Mr and Kite 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Mrs 652 J A Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
653 Tim Chapman 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
656 Carol Ward 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
657 Richard Ward 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
658 I M Maeers 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
662 Sharon Giles 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 663 Ann Bryant 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
665 Sandra Tricker 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
666 Mrs B Woods 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
667 Shirley Ball 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
668 Mrs E J Broom 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
669 Barbara Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
670 John Bailey 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
673 G K Thurlow 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
675 Carol Duncan 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
676 Louis Phillips 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
677 James Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
678 Mrs E Leeder 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
679 Rachel Cronin 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
680 Michael Carter 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
681 Mrs V M Curtis 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
682 Mrs E Carter 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
683 Peter Mann 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
684 Gary Curtis 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
685 S Sneddon 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 686 Julie Pearson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
687 Verina M Dumford 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
688 Colin Loveday 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
689 Dr Stephens 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Elizabeth 690 Lee Perter 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
691 Geoff Sinclair 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
692 Stephen Beaumont 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
693 Helena Mecrow 5th 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Woodbridge Sea Scouts
694 Dave Tricker 5th 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Woodbridge Sea Scouts
695 Lee McGuire 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
696 S McGuire 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
697 L Powell 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
698 N Chilvers 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
699 L R Howard 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
700 D Hewitt 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
701 Mark Prior 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
702 Charlotte Downing 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 703 C Houford 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
704 Colin Girling 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
705 Simon Lee- 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Frampton 706 Lydia Vulliamy 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
707 Justin Brown 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
708 Lisa Brown 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
709 D Thackeray 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
710 Shaun Hirsy 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
711 Paul Smith 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
712 Mrs Dyble 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
713 Zoe Dann 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
714 Mr A W Weston 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
715 Rob Hall 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
716 B J Wilkinson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
717 Linda Wilkinson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
718 Rebecca Barry 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
719 Andy Collins 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
720 Tracey Pennock 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
721 M Russell 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 722 S Kidd 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
723 D R Kidd 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
724 Mrs Turp 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
725 S Turp 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
726 Mr C M Samms 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
727 T E S M O Payne Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Wildlife Trust
729 Robert Cooper 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 5 2 19 Infrastructure Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 5 2 19 Infrastructure
738 Mr R Day 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 5 2 19 Infrastructure Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 5 2 19 Infrastructure
744 S D Huff Member of 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Suffolk Wildlife Trust
745 Hilary Cadman 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
746 Mrs M Wilkinson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
748 Barbara Forsdyke Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 756 Claire Wray Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Wildlife Trust
757 William Barrow Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Wildlife Trust
760 Neil Sharman 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
762 Jane Allain 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
764 Gillian Thomas 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
766 Anthony Prichard 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. William 767 F J Goulding 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
770 Mr and Johnson 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision. Mrs 772 Ron Kenwright 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
773 K Oliver 5 2 19 Infrastructure
774 David Siddam 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
778 David Toler 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
779 K D Groom 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
780 John Clarke 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by infrastructure provision.
781 Mrs H Hedley 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 784 Alison Bramwell 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 785 Simon Parnell 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 786 P M Gowers 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 787 F Donovan 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 788 Joan Donovan 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 789 George Gowers 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 790 Colin Wedge 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 791 Rachel Wedge 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 792 Trevor Woods 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 793 Margaret Woods 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 794 Lisa McPhillips 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 795 Caroline Hutchison 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 796 Ian Hutchison 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 797 Rebecca Loveday 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 798 Sam Froud 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 799 Catherine Garrard 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 800 David Hebblethwait 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure e needs 801 Jenifer Weanie 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 802 Bernice Bailey 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 803 K McGowan 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 804 James McGowan 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 805 V Lehkyj 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 806 Mr N Lehkyj 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 807 T Lehkyj 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 811 Pauline Taylor 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 812 Dorothy Cartwright 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 813 Andrew J Hardwick 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 814 Phillippa Spens 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 815 A E Mounter 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 816 Marilyn Betts 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 817 Celia Pearce 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 818 Mrs E A Pereira Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
821 Sara Orton 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 822 Phil Archer 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 823 Mr & Mrs Hessey SWT 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure S member needs 827 Andrew Pritchatt 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 828 F & A Groom & 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Hale needs 829 Mrs M Camplin 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 831 R. Read 5 2 19 Infrastructure
832 Arthur & Tydeman 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Beryl needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 837 Mrs C Burgess 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 838 Mr D Burgess 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 841 Lewis Paternoster 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 842 P Dearsley 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 843 Mrs S Turner 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 844 Alan Wells 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 863 Mrs A Sams 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 864 A Hart 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 865 K Hart Grantham 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure College needs 866 Alison McGuckin 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 867 Andy McGuckin 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 868 Linda Turner 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 869 S Ishaya 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 870 Rob Atkins 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 871 Darin Osborne 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 872 P Woolger 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 873 T A Bird 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 874 Stephen Haws 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 875 Neil Downing 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 876 Paul Bird 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 877 Michael Stringer 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 878 Ben Clark 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 879 James Woolven 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 880 Vicki Woolven 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 881 Frances Walsa 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 882 Miss H Parkin 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 883 Pauline Charnock 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 884 Simone Cooper 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 885 John Woods 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 886 Adrian Hale 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 887 Kate Exton 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 888 David Exton 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 894 Mrs Hine Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Nancy Wildlife Trust needs
909 Jason White 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 910 Amelia Drayson Green Party 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 911 Mrs Williams 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Victoria needs 912 Mrs R J Southworth 5 2 19 Infrastructure
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 916 Mr Thomas 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Graham needs 919 Stefan Freedman 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure and needs Bethan 922 C D Lofts Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
923 Rosemary Cann 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 924 Mr Derek Treadaway 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 925 V Leslie 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 926 L B Cousins Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
931 D C Harper 5 2 19 Infrastructure
932 Ian and Stuart-Box 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Janet needs 933 Lydia Vulliamy 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 934 Richard R Pawsey 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 937 David Yaroslaw 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 939 Gillian Bence-Jones 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 940 Sarah Rejman- 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Greene needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 941 Peter Locke Greenways 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Project, needs Friends of Holywells Park, SWT, Ipswich Wildlife Group
943 J A L & Hammond Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Mrs E Wildlife Trust needs
944 Michael Davis 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 945 Mrs R Woodward 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 946 Mr and Milner SWT, RSPB 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Mrs needs 947 S Watts Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
949 Nick Wilding 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 951 Rod Cecil 5 2 19 Infrastructure needs 952 Mr S Bretherton 5 2 19 Infrastructure
955 Mr C Turland 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 956 Mrs J Turland 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 957 A Fenton 5 2 19 Infrastructure
961 Janet Phipps 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 963 J Storer Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 972 N Cenci IBC 5 2 19 Infrastructure Councillor 973 Mr T Goodwin Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
975 Mr T Williams 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 5 2 19 Infrastructure C Group 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 5 2 19 Infrastructure Society
991 Mrs J Daly 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 992 E Ayden 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure needs 999 Rachel Brett Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Growth of town needs to be matched by new infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 5 2 19 New Peoples Infrastructure Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Preservation Society 151 J K & Gillespie 5 2 19 Infrastructure C A Gaskell 153 Messrs Parson & Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Burlinson Wildlife Trust
154 Mr N T & Palk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Ms J Doggett
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 416 Mrs D Longden Nacton Priory 5 1 19 Infrastructure Current infrastructure is adequate. Court Residents' Association 608 M Norden Suffolk 5 2 19 Infrastructure Biodiversity Partnership 87 Ms J Shepherd 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 104 R Garrod 5 2 20 East Bank Link Option E has would have severe implications for a Country Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. They Road represent 25% of the nature resource of the Borough. 151 J K & Gillespie 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure C A Gaskell f 152 R A Radford Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
153 Messrs Parson & Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Burlinson Wildlife Trust f
154 Mr N T & Palk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Ms J Doggett f
155 C Keeble 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 156 S J Colgan 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 157 M J Oliver - 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Trotter f 158 Mr James Duncan 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 159 Jo Charlton 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 161 Peter Howe 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 163 J Earwaker 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 164 Mr & Mrs Hollis Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure G Wildlife Trust f
165 Mr D A Clarke Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
166 Mr & Mrs Beggs 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure S f 167 Mr D Atkins Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
168 D G Heckels 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 169 Mr D Riseborough 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 171 Barbara Gutowska Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
172 Mr C A Groom Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
173 Mr & Mrs Piotrowski Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure M Wildlife Trust f
174 Angela & Bradbrook Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Neville Wildlife Trust f
175 Eugene Mullan 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 176 Nicholas Tebbs 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 177 Mrs M J Long Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
178 Helen Jacobs 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 179 K Dunnett 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 180 D Caulfield 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 181 Shirley Talbot Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 182 Mr W J & Gooney Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Mrs E P Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 183 A Fuller 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure e, g 184 Gwen Boston Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
186 John L Girt Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 188 Mr D & Abbott 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Mrs A f 191 Paul E R Brown Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
193 John Ireland 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure d, f 194 Pam Ireland Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust d, f
196 Marian Edwards 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 197 Mr & Mrs Robertson 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Charles f and Elisabeth
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 200 Annette Lloyd 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 201 Paul Izzard 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 203 Yoko Watanabe 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Penaluna f 205 Mrs J Stannard 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 206 T R Oliver 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 207 R H Garnett 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 208 Neil Gulliver 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 209 David Smith 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 210 A J & R Gaylard Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
212 Ms E Webb 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 213 Jane Shepherd 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 214 Mr Brown 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Anthony f 216 Marianne White Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
217 Lorraine West 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 218 Maggie Dooley 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 219 Mr R A Chequer 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 220 Ms M L Stone Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 221 Mr & Mrs Leatham Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Bernard Wildlife Trust f
222 Mr David Pitt 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure E f 223 R Mudhar 5 c, d, f 20 Infrastructure
224 Keith Morrill Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
225 Yvonne Smart Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
226 Brian Williams Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
227 Beryl Harding Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
228 P Read Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
229 Michael Hammond 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 230 Mrs V Horne 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 231 Jill Page Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust f
232 H S Clayton 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 233 Celia Miller 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 235 S Brocklehurst Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 236 A. Nette- 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Thomas f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 237 J. Peake Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 238 S. Watson 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 239 R. & A. Wolfe 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 240 D Hindmarch 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 240 Mr & Mrs Jacobs 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental B. f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 241 L. Mett 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 242 M. Higgins 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 244 M. Cresswell 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 246 L. Macfarlane 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 247 I. Wen 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 248 A. Clarke 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 249 Mr&Mrs Hazelwood Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 250 Mr&Mrs Jensen 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 251 I. Quarton 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 252 J.&M. Skellorn 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 253 R. Glover 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 254 D. Robinson 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 255 D. Munday 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 259 M. Duhm 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Supports options a, b, c and f. E would adversely affect wildlife. f 262 K. Daniels 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 267 C. Bonniot 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 270 D. Sutcliffe 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 271 W. King 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 272 L. Caudle 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 273 A. Cordon 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 274 R. Robinson 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 275 M & R. Sparrow Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 276 C. Gilbert Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 277 R. Rix Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 278 R. Attenborrow Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 279 R. Bradbrock Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 280 R. Richards 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 282 M. Phillips 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 283 E. Sedgwick 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 285 Ms A Plumb 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 288 Mrs J Seaton 5 g 20 Infrastructure
290 Su Fox 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 291 Ms D Baker 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 292 T G Holden 5 a,e 20 Infrastructure a) a single new bus station; and e) East Bank Link Road.
293 B H Andrews Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 295 Tak Cheung 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 296 G Grieco 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 297 Sarah Fitch 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 298 N Neale 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 299 Ms C Smy 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 300 Ms N Denny 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 303 Mr & Mrs Brockman 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 304 Carol Clemons Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
305 Peter Mills Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
306 M. & C. Miller 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 308 M & M. Luetchford 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 309 Mr M Smith 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 312 Cheryl Lee 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 313 Terry Miles 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 319 K D Brown 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 323 B L Partridge Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
324 M Last 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 326 Mr Brander 5 a,b,c,f, 20 Infrastructure g. needs 328 Mrs M Smith Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
329 Ann Havard 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 330 John Moore 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 331 Diana Grace 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure f needs 332 C Hayward Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure D Rowley Wildlife Trust needs
334 L Willis 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 335 Dr Sutton 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 336 T Rice 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 337 J Booty 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 338 J and P Hudis Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
339 E Jeyasingh 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 343 J Morcom 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 345 R J Woollett 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 346 C Rutt 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 347 P Cansick 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 348 M Jackson 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 349 L Driver Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
353 Mrs Ashby 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 354 Dr Doshi 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 355 P & B Lay 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 358 W Ashby 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 361 C & M Tracy 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 365 C & P Gray 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 367 D McHardy 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 368 D Sparkes 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 369 Glenys Wright 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 370 Ron Vincent 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure f needs 371 R Thurlow 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 372 H Cufley 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 373 S Thurston 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 374 Marie Smith 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 375 E Chandler 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 376 G Bernthal 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 378 A Daley 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure f needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 380 D Bale 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 382 Mr A Moore 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 383 C J Pollard 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 387 Cerne Deverell Woodland 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Trust needs 388 Carys Swinger 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 389 Peter Coltham 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 390 Sarah Greenacre Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
392 David Bellamy Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
393 V & D Pauley 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 394 Jane Southall 5 a,b,c,f, 20 Infrastructure g needs 395 Mr & Mrs Steward 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 397 K & V Watson 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 401 J H Stroud Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
404 A & M Wilson Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
406 Mary Kaye 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 408 Mr & Mrs Arbon 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 409 Mr & Mrs Dent 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 410 Mr & Mrs Padman 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 411 Mr R F Wragg SWT/Ipswich 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife needs Group 412 A Petty Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
413 T C Elliot 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 415 Mr P Osborne Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
417 Mr M Groom 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 418 Mrs M Groom Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
419 A Moss 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 420 T E Chalklen 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 424 Mr & Mrs Foster Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
426 Peter Ling Sustrans; 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure CTC; SWT needs 428 P Atkin 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 431 Mr & Mrs Cable-Davex 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 434 J S Turner 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 435 F Simpson 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 436 S Brame 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 437 J McNabb 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 440 S Bradbrook 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 441 B J Green Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust needs
442 Mrs Snook 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 443 R Warner 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 444 T Wilmshurst 5 b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to needs help access the Port of Ipswich. 446 Mrs Birdsall 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 448 R Kitson 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 449 T Kitson 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure needs 451 M & D Hayter 5 20 East Bank Link The East Bank Link Road must NOT be allowed, because: it would have an appalling impact on an Road environmentally sensitive area; we are extraordinarily lucky to live near the second most beautiful estuary in England (after the Dart) and should not degrade it with a further rehash of this totally unnecessary and intrusive road proposal; it would never be allowed on the Dart estuary and we should adopt the same mindset; and this is a wonderful stretch of wooded estuary that we should do everything to protect and enhance for future generations.
452 C Peartree 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 456 D Henry Savills Samuel 5 e 20 Infrastructure Beadie (Developmen ts) Ltd 460 A & R Stewart 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 464 Mrs J Smith 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 465 D Fincham 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 466 Mrs Roots 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 467 J Powell 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 468 C Sheehan 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 469 C Sherrod 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 470 O Russell 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 471 C Overbury 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 472 I McIvor 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 473 Mrs S Jackson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 474 A Boyle 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 475 Captain Usherwood 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 476 Ms J Jousiffe 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 477 R Sideaway 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 478 R Sideaway 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 479 G Boucher 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 480 B Hall Greenways 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 481 V Willis 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 482 R Curtis Greenways 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 483 Nigel No surname 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more provided needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 484 W Haigh 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 485 S P Thorpe 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 486 S Coulstock 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 487 J Walsh 5 c,f. 20 Infrastructure Better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of needs Ipswich. 488 M Regnault 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich.
490 A C Raworth 5 20 Infrastructure Selects options: a, b, c, e, f.
491 Mrs V Andrews 5 a,c,d,e, 20 Infrastructure Selected all except enhanced rail access. f,g 492 N Gooding 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 494 P Gooding 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 495 M Gooding 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 496 L Anderson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 497 I Murray 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 498 S Anderson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 499 D Anderson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 500 J Gooding 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 502 C Wilding 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 507 T Beaven 5 a,b,c 20 Infrastructure Options a,b,c.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 508 R Paddison Babergh 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure All options, (a) to (g) selected. District e,f Council 512 Mr Eric Cooper Highways 5 20 East Bank Link In 2002 subject to conditions the Agency had no objection to the proposal [East Bank Link Road]. Agency Road However, since then, the A14 has been designated of national importance, port facilities at Felixstowe have been approved and the projected growth of the area has accelerated significantly. Consequently with the levels of likely trips accessing the A14 in future, the Agency would resist a new junction primarily on policy grounds but also on highways issues including its proximity to adjacent junctions, congestion, and increased safety concerns.
512 Mr Eric Cooper Highways 5 20 Transport - wet Subject to detailed analysis of its effect on the A14 Wherstead interchange, the new crossing could Agency dock crossing provide relief to both the Nacton Road junction and the Orwell Bridge, and therefore may be of benefit to the Agency's management of the trunk road network. 512 Mr Eric Cooper Highways 5 20 Transport - A significant proportion of local traffic uses the Orwell bridge. The suggestion of a northern bypass, Agency northern particularly if it can be restricted to that of a local distributor road, has some merit as it would be bypass substantially cheaper than widening the Orwell Bridge and may relieve and extend the life of this section of the A14. However, the Agency is not aware of any analysis that has been undertaken of this option and therefore would wish to see some quantification of the benefits and impacts before commenting further.
513 P Miller 5 a,c,d,g. 20 Infrastructure
515 T J Dowe 5 20 Infrastructure The only scheme that would improve at a stroke the access to and from the Port is the Eastern Link Road. It would keep virtually all HGVs out of the centre of town. A bridge across the lock pit would help relieve the gyratory east-west route, but boats must still have access to the dock and this could cause delays to traffic in busy (boating) periods. Making Star Lane two-way and closing College Street will not work. 516 L Woolf 5 20 East Bank Link Opposed to the East Bank Link Road. It would destroy the last remaining piece of ancient grazed Road woodlands in Ipswich. To do so would be an ecological crime on a par with cutting down the Amazon rain forest. The road would create a new junction on the by pass which would encourage local traffic to use the by pass as a short cut to other parts of Ipswich. This should not be encouraged. It defeats the point of the bypass. Dock traffic could be removed from town roads if a roll-on roll-off ferry was provided for crossing the Orwell with a road for dock traffic only up to Wherstead junction.
518 Mrs Finch Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. Trust; Ipswich Society
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 519 N Lathom- 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Sharp needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 522 A Shirley 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure
525 Mrs E Cooper 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; a new d, f needs crossing of the Orwell (eg a Wet Dock crossing); more localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 528 Mr R M Collins Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich member
529 Mrs J Dunnett Ipswich 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich Group 530 Mr R Dunnett Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich member
531 Isla Budgen White House 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Community f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich Infant School
532 T A Stamp 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 533 Scott Osborn 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 5 20 Infrastructure a & b Malyan 928 541 Julian Dowding 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 541 Bev Dowding 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f 543 Tom Clayton 5 b & c 20 Infrastructure
552 Ms J Overett 5 a 20 Infrastructure New or upgraded bus stations
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 552 Ms J Overett 5 b 20 Infrastructure Enhanced rail access
552 Ms J Overett 5 c 20 Infrastructure Better links between the town centre, Ipswich village and Ipswich Waterfront
552 Ms J Overett 5 d 20 Infrastructure A new crossing of the Orwell (e.g. a Wet Dock Crossing
552 Ms J Overett 5 e 20 Infrastructure A link road from the east bank of the rive to the A14
552 Ms J Overett 5 f 20 Infrastructure Other more localised improvement to help access to the Port of Ipswich
552 Ms J Overett 5 g 20 Infrastructure More park and ride sites
558 P R Richards 5 d 20 Infrastructure
560 R Gravell 5 20 Infrastructure Options a,b,c & f.
566 M Osbourne 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure/ These are more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental damage. Option e would East Bank Link result in severe and permanent impacts to areas designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Road Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservative value and represent 1/4 of the critical natural land resource of the Borough. Option e should not be included in the Core Strategy and Policies LDD nor any other document in the LDF.
567 R Gape 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure
569 B Wilding 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure/ East Bank Link Road 571 G Sayers 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure
577 Michael Brain 5 a, b, c, 20 New d, e, f, Infrastructure g 593 R Dobson 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 5 a,b,c,f, 20 Infrastructure S Group g
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 5 b,c,f,g. 20 Infrastructure Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 5 a,c. 20 Infrastructure Options a and c. Possibly b,d and g later.
614 Mr N Blake 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 616 Mr D Watts 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 619 Mrs C Davies 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 620 J A Evans 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 621 Mrs J Edwards 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 622 Mr T Edwards 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 623 Mr J Edwards 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 625 Mrs B Robinson 5 a,b 20 Infrastructure
630 R Wright 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more needs localised improvement to help access the Port of Ipswich. 631 Mr P Andreasen Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Wildlife Trust Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
636 M Thurston 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 637 Mr J Gobbitt 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 638 Mr R Johnson Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Wildlife Trust Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
639 P Andrews 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 640 J W Capon 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 642 Jane Bradburn 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 645 Jane Hall 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 646 Paul and Newton 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Linda Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 647 Mr and Grimwade 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Mrs Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 648 Sheila Hancock 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 649 Mr J Fairclough 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 650 Ms J Haggar 5 20 East Bank Link Although there may be benefits from building an East Bank Link Road, but please consider the loss of Road important wildlife areas. The loss of habitat would weaken adjacent sites. Think before you act.
651 Mr and Kite 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Mrs Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 652 J A Smith 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 653 Tim Chapman 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 656 Carol Ward 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 657 Richard Ward 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 658 I M Maeers 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 662 Sharon Giles 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 663 Ann Bryant 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 665 Sandra Tricker 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 666 Mrs B Woods 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 667 Shirley Ball 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 668 Mrs E J Broom 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 669 Barbara Smith 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 670 John Bailey 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 673 G K Thurlow 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 675 Carol Duncan 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 676 Louis Phillips 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 677 James Smith 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 678 Mrs E Leeder 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 679 Rachel Cronin 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 680 Michael Carter 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 681 Mrs V M Curtis 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 682 Mrs E Carter 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 683 Peter Mann 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 684 Gary Curtis 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 685 S Sneddon 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 686 Julie Pearson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 687 Verina M Dumford 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 688 Colin Loveday 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 689 Dr Stephens 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Elizabeth Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 690 Lee Perter 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 691 Geoff Sinclair 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 692 Stephen Beaumont 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 693 Helena Mecrow 5th 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Woodbridge Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. Sea Scouts
694 Dave Tricker 5th 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Woodbridge Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. Sea Scouts
695 Lee McGuire 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 696 S McGuire 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 697 L Powell 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 698 N Chilvers 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 699 L R Howard 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 700 D Hewitt 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 701 Mark Prior 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 702 Charlotte Downing 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 703 C Houford 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 704 Colin Girling 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 705 Simon Lee- 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Frampton Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 706 Lydia Vulliamy 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 707 Justin Brown 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 708 Lisa Brown 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 709 D Thackeray 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 710 Shaun Hirsy 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 711 Paul Smith 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 712 Mrs Dyble 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 713 Zoe Dann 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 714 Mr A W Weston 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 715 Rob Hall 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 716 B J Wilkinson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 717 Linda Wilkinson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 718 Rebecca Barry 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 719 Andy Collins 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 720 Tracey Pennock 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 721 M Russell 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 722 S Kidd 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 723 D R Kidd 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 724 Mrs Turp 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 725 S Turp 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 726 Mr C M Samms 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 727 T E S M O Payne Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Wildlife Trust Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
729 Robert Cooper 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 5 b,c,f,g. 20 Infrastructure Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure
738 Mr R Day 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 5 a,d,e,g. 20 Infrastructure Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 5 b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure
744 S D Huff Member of 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Suffolk Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. Wildlife Trust
745 Hilary Cadman 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 746 Mrs M Wilkinson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 748 Barbara Forsdyke Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Wildlife Trust Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
751 Mr J Last Landseer / 5 e 20 Infrastructure Support East Bank Link Road. Nacton Road Action Group
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 753 Mr F Smy Bob Blastock 5 e 20 Infrastructure Support an East Bank Link Road. & Henry Cooper
754 Mr E W Hardwick 5 e 20 Infrastructure Support an East Bank Link Road.
755 Mr D Ellis 5 e 20 Infrastructure Support an East Bank Link Road.
756 Claire Wray Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Wildlife Trust Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
757 William Barrow Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Wildlife Trust Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
760 Neil Sharman 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 762 Jane Allain 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 764 Gillian Thomas 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 766 Anthony Prichard 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and William Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 767 F J Goulding 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 768 B H Colman 5 e 20 Infrastructure a link road from the east bank of the river to the A14
770 Mr and Johnson 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Mrs Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 772 Ron Kenwright 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 773 K Oliver 5 c,d,e,f. 20 Infrastructure
774 David Siddam 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 777 L Quantrill 5 e 20 Infrastructure Support an East Bank Link Road and also a northern by-pass to take traffic away from the centre and docks. 778 David Toler 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 779 K D Groom 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 780 John Clarke 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure New/upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre, Village and Waterfront; local improvements to help access to Port of Ipswich. 781 Mrs H Hedley 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 784 Alison Bramwell 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 785 Simon Parnell 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 786 P M Gowers 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 787 F Donovan 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 788 Joan Donovan 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 789 George Gowers 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 790 Colin Wedge 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 791 Rachel Wedge 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 792 Trevor Woods 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 793 Margaret Woods 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 794 Lisa McPhillips 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 795 Caroline Hutchison 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 796 Ian Hutchison 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 797 Rebecca Loveday 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 798 Sam Froud 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 799 Catherine Garrard 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 800 David Hebblethwait 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more e f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 801 Jenifer Weanie 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 802 Bernice Bailey 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 803 K McGowan 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 804 James McGowan 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 805 V Lehkyj 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 806 Mr N Lehkyj 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 807 T Lehkyj 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 811 Pauline Taylor 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 812 Dorothy Cartwright 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 813 Andrew J Hardwick 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 814 Phillippa Spens 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 815 A E Mounter 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 816 Marilyn Betts 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 817 Celia Pearce 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 818 Mrs E A Pereira Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
821 Sara Orton 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 822 Phil Archer 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 823 Mr & Mrs Hessey SWT 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more S member f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 827 Andrew Pritchatt 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 828 F & A Groom & 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Hale f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 829 Mrs M Camplin 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 831 R. Read 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental f damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 832 Arthur & Tydeman 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Beryl f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 837 Mrs C Burgess 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 838 Mr D Burgess 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 841 Lewis Paternoster 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 842 P Dearsley 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 843 Mrs S Turner 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 844 Alan Wells 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 863 Mrs A Sams 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 864 A Hart 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 865 K Hart Grantham 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more College f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 866 Alison McGuckin 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 867 Andy McGuckin 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 868 Linda Turner 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 869 S Ishaya 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 870 Rob Atkins 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 871 Darin Osborne 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 872 P Woolger 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 873 T A Bird 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 874 Stephen Haws 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 875 Neil Downing 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 876 Paul Bird 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 877 Michael Stringer 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 878 Ben Clark 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 879 James Woolven 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 880 Vicki Woolven 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 881 Frances Walsa 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 882 Miss H Parkin 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 883 Pauline Charnock 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 884 Simone Cooper 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 885 John Woods 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 886 Adrian Hale 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 887 Kate Exton 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 888 David Exton 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 894 Mrs Hine Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Nancy Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
900 R Duncan 5 2a 20 Infrastructure Developments should utilise the present bus structure more.
900 R Duncan 5 2d and 20 Infrastructure Options d and e: major development in Dock need better access out of town. Use existing bus routes e more before expanding. 902 S Duncan 5 2d and 20 Infrastructure Options d and e: major development in Dock need better access out of town. Use existing bus routes e more before expanding. 906 P Birdsall 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure Options a, b, c, d and f. These essentially upgrade/ modify the existing situation. Opposes e due to d, f wildlife/ habitat impact. 909 Jason White 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 910 Amelia Drayson Green Party 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 911 Mrs Williams 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Victoria f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 912 Mrs R J Southworth 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure
916 Mr Thomas 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Graham f, g needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich, more park and ride sites (Wherstead Road)
919 Stefan Freedman 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more and f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich Bethan 922 C D Lofts Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
923 Rosemary Cann 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Cann f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 924 Mr Derek Treadaway 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 925 V Leslie 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 926 L B Cousins Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
927 Mr M Wright 5 20 Infrastructure Strongly objects to the East Bank Link Road. We do not want a road through this glorious piece of countryside. It cannot be justified. The development of the port is not of overriding national or local importance and the long term future of Ipswich port in the face of competition from Bathside etc must be questionable. Sites such as the Volvo site that the road would access should be used for housing and open space, not industry. The level of trade at the Port does not justify a new road - it managed in far busier times. Also question whether drivers would use it if there were also a West Bank Link. The East Bank Link would lead to loss of ancient woodland and habitat and would also cause damage through habitat fragmentation. Brazier's Wood, Pond Hall carr, Wet Meadows and Pipers Vale are the only remaining native wildlife areas left in Ipswich - they should be afforded the highest protection and preserved for future generations.
928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 5 a,b 20 Infrastructure Malyan Planning 931 D C Harper 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure e,f,g.
932 Ian and Stuart-Box 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Janet f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 933 Lydia Vulliamy 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f, g. needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich; more park and ride.
934 Richard R Pawsey 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 937 David Yaroslaw 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 939 Gillian Bence-Jones 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 940 Sarah Rejman- 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Greene f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 941 Peter Locke Greenways 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Project, f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich Friends of Holywells Park, SWT, Ipswich Wildlife Group
943 J A L & Hammond Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Mrs E Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
944 Michael Davis 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 945 Mrs R Woodward 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 946 Mr and Milner SWT, RSPB 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Mrs f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 947 S Watts Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
949 Nick Wilding 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 951 Rod Cecil 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure f needs 952 Mr S Bretherton 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure All options selected. e,f. 955 Mr C Turland 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 956 Mrs J Turland 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 957 A Fenton 5 a,b,c,f. 20 Infrastructure
961 Janet Phipps 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 963 J Storer Suffolk 5 a,b,c 20 Infrastructure Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 966 Miss H Ormondroy 5 c,f 20 Infrastructure Also increased pedestrianisation of town centre and a big campaign to get people walking and cycling.
972 N Cenci IBC 5 b,c,e,f. 20 Infrastructure Councillor 973 Mr T Goodwin Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
975 Mr T Williams 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure C Group f. 978 Mrs G Ellis 5 a,e 20 Infrastructure
982 P Andrews 5 a,d 20 Infrastructure New bus station and Wet Dock crossing.
984 Mr D M Sargeant 5 e 20 East Bank Link Priority should be given to the East Bank Link Road to relieve access to the dock. It's the best solution to Road traffic flows across the whole of town. 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 5 a,b,c,d, 20 Infrastructure Society e,f
991 Mrs J Daly 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 992 E Ayden 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich 999 Rachel Brett Suffolk 5 a, b, c, 20 Infrastructure New upgraded bus station; enhanced rail access; better links between town centre and waterfront; more Wildlife Trust f needs localised improvement to help access to Port of Ipswich
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 5 d, e, f 20 New Peoples Infrastructure Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 5 All 20 Infrastructure Selects all in list, (a) to (g) inclusive. Preservation Society 608 M Norden Suffolk 5 a,b,c,f 20 Infrastructure Options a,b,c,f. Biodiversity Partnership
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 82 Mr & Mrs Hessey SWT 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to S member Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 87 Ms J Shepherd 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 107 P Horne 5 21 East Bank Link Important wildlife areas must be retained. Riverside area must be preserved for wildlife- EBLR was and is Road a bad idea. 145 J. Merry Suffolk 5 2 21 East Bank Link The smell from the sewage works rules out any development of the surrounding area. Wildlife Trust Road
151 J K & Gillespie 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental C A Gaskell Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 152 R A Radford Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link As well as the unsustainable environmental damage the EBLR would cause, I believe it would add to, not Wildlife Trust Road reduce, existing traffic problems as there would be add on traffic from additional unwanted retail development associated with the road. 153 Messrs Parson & Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Burlinson Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 154 Mr N T & Palk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Ms J Doggett Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 155 C Keeble 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 156 S J Colgan 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 157 M J Oliver - 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Trotter Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 158 Mr James Duncan 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 159 Jo Charlton 5 21 East Bank Link There are so few areas of natural beauty I can get to with my kids within walking / cycling distance. It Road would be a tragedy to whittle away at them. 161 Peter Howe 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 163 J Earwaker 5 21 East Bank Link New highways and relief roads to the whole of the dock and waterfront areas must have the highest Road priority. 164 Mr & Mrs Hollis Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental G Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 165 Mr D A Clarke Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 166 Mr & Mrs Beggs 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental S Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 167 Mr D Atkins Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 168 D G Heckels 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 169 Mr D Riseborough 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 171 Barbara Gutowska Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 172 Mr C A Groom Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 173 Mr & Mrs Piotrowski Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental M Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 174 Angela & Bradbrook Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The Orwell Country Park would be totally fragmented with huge impact on wildlife and on the many many Neville Wildlife Trust Road people who use and love this fantastic area which should be protected and preserved for future generations
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 175 Eugene Mullan 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 176 Nicholas Tebbs 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 177 Mrs M J Long Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link Wildlife Trust Road
178 Helen Jacobs 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 179 K Dunnett 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 180 D Caulfield 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 183 A Fuller 5 21 East Bank Link Without the EBLR and northern by pass it is likely that at times the town could come to a standstill. Road 188 Mr D & Abbott 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Mrs A Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 191 Paul E R Brown Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 193 John Ireland 5 21 East Bank Link Need to link various parts of town. But keep new roads to a minimum. Road 194 Pam Ireland Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The EBLR would be an environmental and social disaster, please don't do it. Wildlife Trust Road
196 Marian Edwards 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 197 Mr & Mrs Robertson 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Charles Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area and designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated Elisabeth for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 200 Annette Lloyd 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 201 Paul Izzard 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 203 Yoko Watanabe 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Penaluna Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 205 Mrs J Stannard 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 206 T R Oliver 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 207 R H Garnett 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 208 Neil Gulliver 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 209 David Smith 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 210 A J & R Gaylard Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 212 Ms E Webb 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 213 Jane Shepherd 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 214 Mr Brown 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Anthony Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 216 Marianne White Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 217 Lorraine West 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 218 Maggie Dooley 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 219 Mr R A Chequer 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 220 Ms M L Stone Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 221 Mr & Mrs Leatham Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Bernard Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 222 Mr David Pitt 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental E Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 223 R Mudhar 5 21 East Bank Link Rail access is not ideal in the town but the river limits what can be done. The one way system in town is Road ugly and another river crossing would help this, possibly easing traffic past the Waterfront development.
224 Keith Morrill Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 225 Yvonne Smart Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 226 Brian Williams Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 227 Beryl Harding Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 228 P Read Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 229 Michael Hammond 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 230 Mrs V Horne 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 231 Jill Page Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Wildlife Trust Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 232 H S Clayton 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 233 Celia Miller 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The EBLR (Option E) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to area designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the Borough. 235 S Brocklehurst Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The proposed EBLR would exacerbate the fragmentation of the County Wildlife Site. which has taken Wildlife Trust Road time to recover from the building of the Orwell Bridge and existing road. The damage to the wildlife sites is not justified in the short or long term. 236 A. Nette- 5 2 21 East Bank Link The full environmental impact/damage has not been taken into account in relation to Option e. Policy Thomas Road should preserve the environment. Not destroy it. 238 S. Watson 5 2 21 East Bank Link Horrified by resurrection of EBLR plans- it is an irreplaceable wildlife conservation area. The inevitable Road retail development associated with a new road could add to, not reduce, traffic congestion.
239 R. & A. Wolfe 5 2 21 East Bank Link Option d is better than option e- it would reduce )or even eliminate) through traffic from Key Road Street/College Street, linking the Waterfront and the Town Centre. 244 M. Cresswell 5 2 21 East Bank Link Pipers Vale and Braziers Wood are nature reserves and should not be interfered with. Road
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 255 D. Munday 5 2 21 East Bank Link Questions whether the EBLR would really help congestion. The EBLR would add to traffic problems in the Road direction of North and West Ipswich.. It would also severely damage an important and valuable open space and wildlife area. 285 Ms A Plumb 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
288 Mrs J Seaton 5 21 East Bank link Reduce traffic congestion. Road 290 Su Fox 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The community has no need of a link road. Whilst Ipswich has parks, it has few wild areas. The road would affect the water table. Planting replacement trees will not compensate for the loss of ancient woodland. The Council should celebrate special places like this.
291 Ms D Baker 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
293 B H Andrews Suffolk 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
295 Tak Cheung 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
296 G Grieco 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 297 Sarah Fitch 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
298 N Neale 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
299 Ms C Smy 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
300 Ms N Denny 5 21 East Bank link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
303 Mr & Mrs Brockman 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
304 Carol Clemons Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
305 Peter Mills Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 306 M. & C. Miller 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
308 M & M. Luetchford 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
309 Mr M Smith 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
312 Cheryl Lee 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
313 Terry Miles 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
319 K D Brown 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
323 B L Partridge Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 324 M Last 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
326 Mr Brander 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
328 Mrs M Smith Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
329 Ann Havard 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
330 John Moore 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
331 Diana Grace 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
332 C Hayward Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to D Rowley Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 334 L Willis 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
335 Dr Sutton 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
336 T Rice 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
337 J Booty 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Nature reserves need to be protected because they are one of the few areas of beauty that the public can enjoy, as we do not have the right to roam on private land like they do in Sweden.
338 J and P Hudis Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
339 E Jeyasingh 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
340 D Hindmarch 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 343 J Morcom 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
345 R J Woollett 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
346 C Rutt 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
347 P Cansick 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
348 M Jackson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
349 L Driver Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Ipswich needs to keep some of its original countryside, after all it is the county town of Suffolk which is known for its beauty.
353 Mrs Ashby 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 354 Dr Doshi 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
355 P & B Lay 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
358 W Ashby 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
361 C & M Tracy 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
365 C & P Gray 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
367 D McHardy 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. What problem is the East Bank Link Road meant to solve? If it is congestion in Cliff Rd/Duke St or College St/Stoke Bridge, how would this be reduced by dragging more traffic onto the Cliff Quay end of Landseer Rd? Why would "local improvements" coupled with the EBLR be superior to local improvements coupled with a Wherstead Rd solution that would provide more direct access to transport routes? In sustainability terms, a public transport solution is best. Concerned that the EBLR is just a means to overcome access objections to out of centre retail development at the old Volvo site. The EBLR junction with the A14 would also be fraught with difficulties.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 368 D Sparkes 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
369 Glenys Wright 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
370 Ron Vincent 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Option (d) would be of direct benefit to commercial traffic movements to/from major employment areas (docks, etc) and the A14 without major disbenefit to "sensitive" areas of land use.
371 R Thurlow 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
372 H Cufley 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
373 S Thurston 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
374 Marie Smith 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 375 E Chandler 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
376 G Bernthal 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
378 A Daley 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
380 D Bale 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
382 Mr A Moore 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
383 C J Pollard 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
387 Cerne Deverell Woodland 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 388 Carys Swinger 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. My views have not changed since last time. 389 Peter Coltham 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
390 Sarah Greenacre Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
392 David Bellamy Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
394 V & D Pauley 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
394 Jane Southall 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The potential threat of land adjacent to the road being bought by developers at some future date is worrying.
396 Mr & Mrs Steward 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 397 K & V Watson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
401 J H Stroud Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
404 A & M Wilson Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
406 Mary Kaye 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
408 Mr & Mrs Arbon 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
409 Mr & Mrs Dent 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
410 Mr & Mrs Padman 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 411 Mr R F Wragg SWT/Ipswich 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent Group damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Object to going through this loop again as nothing has changed since last time. 412 A Petty Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
413 T C Elliot 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The Council must not do permanent environmental damage to nature reserves in return for a tiny, short term, narrow benefit.
415 Mr P Osborne Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
417 Mr M Groom 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
418 Mrs M Groom Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 419 A Moss 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The EBLR will not solve Ipswich's traffic problems (small as they are). It will divert relatively little traffic from Nacton Rd whilst generating a great deal of new traffic of its own. The Lairds/Pipers Vale is one of the few wild areas accessible to the people of Ipswich. It has been used for generations for informal recreation and should be protected. It is home to heathland plants and heathland is scarce. Ancient woodland is also specialand destroying it would be an environmental crime. Reduce car use, don't build roads that generate more traffic. Start by halving bus fares.
420 T E Chalklen 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
424 Mr & Mrs Foster Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
426 Peter Ling Sustrans; 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to CTC; SWT Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
428 P Atkin 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The EBLR has already been rejected once. How many times do we have to say no? 431 Mr & Mrs Cable-Davex 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 434 J S Turner 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
435 F Simpson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
436 S Brame 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
437 J McNabb 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
440 S Bradbrook 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
441 B J Green Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
442 Mrs Snook 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 443 R Warner 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. More roads causes more traffic - it has been proved. 444 T Wilmshurst 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Protecting important wildlife areas should be a top priority and other issues resolved without damaging them
446 Mrs Birdsall 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
448 R Kitson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
449 T Kitson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
452 C Peartree 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas.
456 D Henry Savills Samuel 5 21 East Bank Link Regional, county and local policies all support the need to improve accessibility in this area. Beadie Road (Developmen ts) Ltd
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 460 A & R Stewart 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The current County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve give a vital and precious green lung to this part of Ipswich, particularly after the Ravenswood development. 464 Mrs J Smith 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
466 Mrs Roots 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
466 D Fincham 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
467 J Powell 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
468 C Sheehan 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
469 C Sherrod 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 470 O Russell 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
471 C Overbury 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
472 I McIvor 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
473 Mrs S Jackson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
474 A Boyle 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
475 Captain Usherwood 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
476 Ms J Jousiffe 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Building more roads is not a sensible way to improve the town. Build more cycle lanes and pedestrian routes.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 477 R Sideaway 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Options that develop cycling and public transport are much better than building new roads. The emphasis should be on getting people out of their cars. 478 R Sideaway 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
479 G Boucher 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
480 B Hall Greenways 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
481 V Willis 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
482 R Curtis Greenways 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
483 Nigel No surname 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to provided Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 484 W Haigh 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
485 S P Thorpe 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
486 S Coulstock 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
487 J Walsh 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. An East Bank Link Road is not required as there is not that much traffic to justify it. Most of the industrial traffic that justified it many years ago no longer exists. 488 M Regnault 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
490 A C Raworth 5 21 East Bank Link I think they will be needed. Road 491 Mrs V Andrews 5 21 East Bank Link New Orwell crossing would take traffic away from Star Lane which would relieve traffic pressure from all Road the new housing.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 492 N Gooding 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas. 494 P Gooding 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas. 495 M Gooding 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas.
496 L Anderson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas.
497 I Murray 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 498 S Anderson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas. 499 D Anderson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas. 500 J Gooding 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Orwell Country Park is a gem and its loss would be irreversible. Ipswich is more geared to tourism and leisure now than to heavy industry. Ipswich is richer for its parks and natural environment and it would be a tragic mistake to lose these areas.
502 C Wilding 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
507 T Beaven 5 21 East Bank Link Public transport links to the railway station are poor. Road 513 P Miller 5 21 East Bank Link To encourage shift away from private car use in Ipswich. Road 518 Mrs Finch Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent Trust; damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation Ipswich value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The great expansion of Society population in and around the Borough boundary makes preservation of green breathing spaces vitally important. These rare wetland sites support plants, insects, butterflies, amphibians and birds. It is calming and refreshing to walk there. Once destroyed they cannot be replaced.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 519 N Lathom- 5 21 Infrastructure/ The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Sharp East Bank Link environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent Road damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
522 A Shirley 5 21 East Bank Link These are more sustainable options that would not lead to high environmental damage.Objects to option Road e. 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 5 b,c,d 21 East Bank Link Schools, hospital capacity, dentists - light railway to waterfront/town/university - cycle network away from L Road road - improve theatre 525 Mrs E Cooper 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 528 Mr R M Collins Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to member County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 529 Mrs J Dunnett Ipswich 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to Group County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 530 Mr R Dunnett Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to member County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 531 Isla Budgen White House 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Community Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to Infant School County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
532 T A Stamp 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 533 Scott Osborn 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 5 21 East Bank Link Over the next 15 years the role and importance of public transport will increase. Providing quality Malyan 928 Road environments at transport nodes is essential. Accessibility and linkages are key components of creating a more sustainable and viable town with high vitality. The list should be increased to consider linkage to the north of the town integrating the town with Christchurch Park and the proposed growth areas.
541 Julian Dowding 5 21 East Bank Link These options are more sustainable in their approach to the issues of growth and would not result in any Road serious environmental damage. The East Bank Link Road (Option E) would cause serious negative and permanent impacts on Ipswich's wildlife and further disrupt the green corridors into Ipswich. If Ipswich is serious about protecting wildlife (Landscape and Wildlife Strategy) and improving and enhancing biodiversity, then the East Bank Link Road should not be included in the Core Strategy nor any other within the Local Development Framework. The ticked options would help to achieve growth and not seriously impact the Council's commitment to preserving and enhancing biodiversity. They would also send out a strong message that Ipswich is forward thinking about the issues and that it takes a sensible approach to growth with sustainability.
541 Bev Dowding 5 21 East Bank Link These options are more sustainable in their approach to the issues of growth and would not result in any Road serious environmental damage. The East Bank Link Road (Option E) would cause serious negative and permanent impacts on Ipswich's wildlife and further disrupt the green corridors into Ipswich. If Ipswich is serious about protecting wildlife (Landscape and Wildlife Strategy) and improving and enhancing biodiversity, then the East Bank Link Road should not be included in the Core Strategy nor any other within the Local Development Framework. The ticked options would help to achieve growth and not seriously impact the Council's commitment to preserving and enhancing biodiversity. They would also send out a strong message that Ipswich is forward thinking about the issues and that it takes a sensible approach to growth with sustainability.
543 Tom Clayton 5 21 East Bank Link Frankly, not impressed with any of the suggestions. I would like to see co-ordinated and affordable public Road transport sufficient to make this a preferred choice rather than a last resort, together with a northern bypass and other improvements to the main routes around the town. 552 Ms J Overett 5 21 East Bank Link These examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental Road damage. The East Bank link Road (Option e) would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to areas designated as County Wildlife Site and also Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the critical natural resource of the Borough. Option e: The East Bank Link Road should not be included in the Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan document, nor any other document in the Local Development Framework.
558 P R Richards 5 21 East Bank Link These are the most effective solutions which are fewest detrimental effects. More park and rides or an Road east bank link would damage the environment and reduce the quality of life for people in Ipswich and in the areas affected.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 560 R Gravell 5 21 East Bank Link Permanent damage to woodlands and wildlife. Road 567 R Gape 5 21 East Bank Link Because the simple addition of individual vehicles for the transport needs of new households is not Road sustainable and will lead to environmental damage. Option e would be particularly unfortunate. An EBLR would split an area of bio-divers habitat, including the Orwell Country Park, Alder Carr Fen local nature reserve and Pipers Vale local nature reserve. It would also affect wet grassland, dry grassland and Braziers Wood Ancient Woodland. The road would be routed clost to the bank of the Orwell. Infractions on bio-diversity would be very hard to avoid, probably impossibly so. Essentially, the road would split a single ecology into 2 or more separate ecologies, each of which would be less likely to survive than the original. The road would weaken by dividing and remove resilience. This is incompatible with adherence to the County bio-diversity action plan. This option (e) should not be included in the Core Stategy and Policies document of the LDF nor any other LDF document. The joy of Suffolk (a number of other English Counties , the pleasure of living here is the mixture of urban and rural in some degree of harmony. The EB
569 B Wilding 5 21 East Bank Link These represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental damage.Option e Road would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to areas designated as Country wildlife sites and also local nature reserves. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the critical nature resource of the Borough. Option e the EBLR should not be included in the Core strategy and policies Dev Plan document nor any other document in the LDF.
570 S Read 5 21 East Bank Link Objects to EBLR being listed in future plans. Also I would like your assurance that all new planning Road applications will include provision for cycling and walking. 571 G Sayers 5 21 East Bank Link These represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental damage.Option e Road would result in severe and permanent adverse impacts to areas designated as Country wildlife sites and also local nature reserves. These sites have been designated for their substantive nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the critical nature resource of the Borough. Option e the EBLR should not be included in the Core strategy and policies Dev Plan document nor any other document in the LDF.I object to the renewed proposal to plough a new road spewing out fumes and pollution through the heart of one of Ipswich's most loved wild places.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 577 Michael Brain 5 21 East Bank Link a) the Old Cattle Market bus station is hopelessly stranded in the middle of a heritage site; and a single Road bus station would obviously provide a more convenient passenger interchange; b) much of the new population is assumed to compromise commuters, yet the rush hour trains are already full, and transport links to the station and parking facilities there are inadequate; c) I would like to see much town-centre congestion removed by building on pedestrianisation combined with further development of the shuttle bus approach. If the Waterfront development succeeds, then good public transport will be essential to access the new facilities; d-f) roads on the eastern side of the town generally are inadequate. While I would not wish to see heritage sites bulldozed, I do believe that much of the present congestion arises needlessly from traffic being unable to flow freely through this part of the town; g) in principle I suspect that this would be a good thing, though providing more sites suggests that there are more routes into town where they could usefully be provided, which may not be the case in practice.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link All options need to be looked at as a whole. Constabulary Road
593 R Dobson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 5 21 East Bank Link In order to provide better access to in and around the Wet-dock and the port areas it may be necessary S Group Road to provide an additional crossing of the Orwell close to the town centre. If so, it should only be done as a measure to divert traffic, and should not be simply in addition to existing road provision. Ipswich, as a densely populated town with a clearly-defined centre, will only be able to grow in an acceptable way if traffic growth is minimised, which is why all the possible public transport and pedestrian/cycling measures need to be taken. 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 5 21 East Bank Link Any perceived congestion cannot be immediately resolved through a new crossing of the Orwell and in Green Road particular a Wet Dock crossing. Equally new/upgraded bus stations will not cure the infrastructure issues Properties in the town. The town would benefit from enhanced rail access and equally better links between the town, Ltd Village and Waterfront will assist in making a more dynamic and sustainable community at the centre of the town. 613 Mr Chris Mole MP 5 21 East Bank Link Sustainable travel. Road 614 Mr N Blake 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 616 Mr D Watts 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
617 S Rosenberg 5 21 East Bank Link Opposed to East Bank Link Road - it would kill ancient woodlands and wildlife habitats. Road 619 Mrs C Davies 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
620 J A Evans 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
621 Mrs J Edwards 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
622 Mr T Edwards 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
623 Mr J Edwards 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
625 Mrs B Robinson 5 21 East Bank Link Don't feel we have been given long enough to answer responsibly. Road
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 630 R Wright 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q. 20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
631 Mr P Andreasen Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would don't lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
636 M Thurston 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would don't lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
637 Mr J Gobbitt 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
638 Mr R Johnson Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
639 P Andrews 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
640 J W Capon 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 642 Jane Bradburn 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
645 Jane Hall 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
646 Paul and Newton 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Linda Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
647 Mr and Grimwade 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Mrs Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
648 Sheila Hancock 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
650 Ms J Haggar 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
651 Mr and Kite 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Mrs Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. We think it is disgraceful to consider violating such a precious area. Perhaps if the flood of apartment building in Ipswich was stemmed, we would not need it anyway.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 652 J A Smith 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Cutting area in half with a link road would fragment the habitat with disproportionate effect
653 Tim Chapman 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
656 Carol Ward 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
657 Richard Ward 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
658 I M Maeers 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
662 Sharon Giles 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
663 Ann Bryant 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Link road would destroy part of the environment which makes Ipswich a pleasant place to live
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 665 Sandra Tricker 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
666 Mrs B Woods 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Over past 15-20 years much of wildlife site have been lost to development and those remaining are fragmented.
667 Shirley Ball 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
668 Mrs E J Broom 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
669 Barbara Smith 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
670 John Bailey 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
673 G K Thurlow 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 675 Carol Duncan 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
676 Louis Phillips 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
677 James Smith 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
678 Mrs E Leeder 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
679 Rachel Cronin 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
680 Michael Carter 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
681 Mrs V M Curtis 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 682 Mrs E Carter 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
683 Peter Mann 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
684 Gary Curtis 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
685 S Sneddon 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
686 Julie Pearson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
687 Verina M Dumford 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
688 Colin Loveday 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 689 Dr Stephens 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Elizabeth Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Uses the Orwell Country Park - would be devastated if any changes were made - such a beautiful area - we haven't got enough
690 Lee Perter 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Uses Country park regularly for dog walking, relaxing and escaping busy town/roads
691 Geoff Sinclair 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Particularly objects to damage to Brazier's Wood 692 Stephen Beaumont 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
693 Helena Mecrow 5th 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Woodbridge Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent Sea Scouts damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
694 Dave Tricker 5th 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Woodbridge Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent Sea Scouts damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
695 Lee McGuire 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 696 S McGuire 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
697 L Powell 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
698 N Chilvers 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
699 L R Howard 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
700 D Hewitt 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
701 Mark Prior 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
702 Charlotte Downing 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 703 C Houford 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
704 Colin Girling 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
705 Simon Lee- 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Frampton Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
706 Lydia Vulliamy 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
707 Justin Brown 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
708 Lisa Brown 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
709 D Thackeray 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 710 Shaun Hirsy 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
711 Paul Smith 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
712 Mrs Dyble 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
713 Zoe Dann 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
714 Mr A W Weston 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
715 Rob Hall 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
716 B J Wilkinson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 717 Linda Wilkinson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
718 Rebecca Barry 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
719 Andy Collins 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
720 Tracey Pennock 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
721 M Russell 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
722 S Kidd 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
723 D R Kidd 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 724 Mrs Turp 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
725 S Turp 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
726 Mr C M Samms 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
727 T E S M O Payne Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
729 Robert Cooper 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 5 21 East Bank Link Any perceived congestion cannot be immediately resolved through a new crossing of the Orwell and in Development Road particular a Wet Dock crossing. Equally new/upgraded bus stations will not cure the infrastructure issues s Ltd in the town. 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 5 21 East Bank Link Traffic congestion and density will be the main problem - we need an integrated transport system. These Road examples represent more sustainable options which would not lead to high environmental damage. The East Bank Link Road option would result in severe and permanent adverse impact on a County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These sites have been designated for their wildlife value and represent a quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 738 Mr R Day 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 5 21 Infrastructure Bus and train stations should be together. All examples would help ease congestion. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 5 21 East Bank Link Opposed to East Bank Link Road. It would degrade the nature reserves which represent one quarter of Road the natural resource of the borough. 744 S D Huff Member of 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Suffolk Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent Wildlife Trust damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
745 Hilary Cadman 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
746 Mrs M Wilkinson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
748 Barbara Forsdyke Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
751 Mr J Last Landseer / 5 21 East Bank Link Support East Bank Link Road and request a definite programme to carry it out. Our Group has long Nacton Road Road campaigned for a solution to the problem of heavy goods vehicles using Landseer Road and Nacton Action Group Road. Local surveys demonstrate support for the link road. The link road would also make easy access for Waterfront regeneration and the port, thus leading to more efficient operation of the port. This would improve quality of life for all in Ipswich thus creating a prosperous, healthy and accessible Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 756 Claire Wray Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
757 William Barrow Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. This is the thin end of the wedge. Once the road goes in to theoretically reduce congestion, all it will do is move it to Raeburn Road South and the downgrading of the nature reserve and an eventual zoning change and development which then leads to an increase in traffic. Result no Nature Reserve. This option should under no circumstances be allowed
760 Neil Sharman 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
762 Jane Allain 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. The development of housing in Ipswich has not been matched by infrastructure, car is still the main form of transport.
764 Gillian Thomas 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
766 Anthony Prichard 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to William Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 767 F J Goulding 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
768 B H Colman 5 21 East Bank Link In favour of the EBLR. It will improve the environment of people living on Felixstowe Road and Landseer Road Road. Also relieve traffic through docks and West End Road. Country Park is under the shadow & noise of the bridge. Area would still be a picnic spot and viewpoint of the river traffic.
770 Mr and Johnson 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which woul dnot lead to Mrs Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
772 Ron Kenwright 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
773 K Oliver 5 21 East Bank Link To cope with additional traffic from new developments (as Q. 18). Road 774 David Siddam 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
778 David Toler 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
779 K D Groom 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 780 John Clarke 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link Road - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
781 Mrs H Hedley 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 784 Alison Bramwell 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 785 Simon Parnell 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 786 P M Gowers 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 787 F Donovan 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 788 Joan Donovan 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 789 George Gowers 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 790 Colin Wedge 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 791 Rachel Wedge 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 792 Trevor Woods 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 794 Lisa McPhillips 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 794 Margaret Woods 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 795 Caroline Hutchison 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 796 Ian Hutchison 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 797 Rebecca Loveday 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 798 Sam Froud 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 799 Catherine Garrard 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 800 David Hebblethwait 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to e Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 801 Jenifer Weanie 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 802 Bernice Bailey 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 803 K McGowan 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 804 James McGowan 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 805 V Lehkyj 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 806 Mr N Lehkyj 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 807 T Lehkyj 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 811 Pauline Taylor 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. These examples would lead to environmental damage. Please consider seriously the responses of the Ipswich Wildlife Group
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 812 Dorothy Cartwright 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 813 Andrew J Hardwick 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 814 Phillippa Spens 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. This is a beautiful site, used by lots of local people. Precious resource for the town 815 A E Mounter 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 816 Marilyn Betts 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Nacton Shore is favourite spot
817 Celia Pearce 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 818 Mrs E A Pereira Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Pipers Vale should be retained for future generations 821 Sara Orton 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 822 Phil Archer 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 827 Andrew Pritchatt 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 828 F & A Groom & 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Hale Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 829 Mrs M Camplin 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 832 Arthur & Tydeman 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Beryl Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 837 Mrs C Burgess 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 838 Mr D Burgess 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 841 Lewis Paternoster 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 842 P Dearsley 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 843 Mrs S Turner 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 844 Alan Wells 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 863 Mrs A Sams 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 864 A Hart 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 865 K Hart Grantham 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to College Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 866 Alison McGuckin 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 867 Andy McGuckin 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 868 Linda Turner 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 869 S Ishaya 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 870 Rob Atkins 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 871 Darin Osborne 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 872 P Woolger 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 873 T A Bird 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 874 Stephen Haws 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 875 Neil Downing 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 876 Paul Bird 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 877 Michael Stringer 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 878 Ben Clark 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 879 James Woolven 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 880 Vicki Woolven 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 881 Frances Walsa 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 882 Miss H Parkin 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 883 Pauline Charnock 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 884 Simone Cooper 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 885 John Woods 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 886 Adrian Hale 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 887 Kate Exton 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 888 David Exton 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 894 Mrs Hine Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Nancy Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 909 Jason White 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 910 Amelia Drayson Green Party 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 911 Mrs Williams 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Victoria Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 912 Mrs R J Southworth 5 21 East Bank Link My own experience of the current situation. Road 916 Mr Thomas 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Graham Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 919 Stefan Freedman 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to and Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to Bethan County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 922 C D Lofts Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 923 Rosemary Cann 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Cann Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 924 Mr Derek Treadaway 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 925 V Leslie 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 926 L B Cousins Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 5 21 East Bank Link Over the next 15 years the role and importance of public transport will increase. Providing quality Malyan Road environments at transport nodes is essential. Accessibility and linkages are key components in creating a Planning more sustainable and viable town with vitality. The list should be increased to consider linkage to the north of the town integrating it with Christchurch Park and proposed growth areas.
931 D C Harper 5 21 East Bank Link Because all are vital. Road 932 Ian and Stuart-Box 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Janet Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 933 Lydia Vulliamy 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 934 Richard R Pawsey 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 937 David Yaroslaw 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 939 Gillian Bence-Jones 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Once you lose birds, flowers, trees you've lost them forever and most intelligent people feel it was not worth it.
940 Sarah Rejman- 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Greene Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Option E has been put forward many times before and has been rejected. Please do not keep trying to go against democratic wishes. We need our natural environment, short term decisions ignoring environmental issues has led to global warming.
941 Peter Locke Greenways 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Project, Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to Friends of County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and Holywells represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Large number of dwellings already Park, SWT, built are empty or for rent. Indicates more building should be stopped to ease pressure on infrastructure Ipswich Wildlife Group
943 J A L & Hammond Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Mrs E Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 944 Michael Davis 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 945 Mrs R Woodward 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 946 Mr and Milner SWT, RSPB 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Mrs Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 947 S Watts Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 949 Nick Wilding 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 951 Rod Cecil 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 952 Mr S Bretherton 5 21 East Bank Link There has been an investment deficit in Ipswich over the past 20 years which will need to be arrested and Road reversed for the development to be sustained. In addition to the 15,000 there will also be another several thousand homes built on the edge of town outside the boundary, and the town's hinterland will grow as well. It is unrealistic to expect this to be accomplished without significant infrastructure improvements.
955 Mr C Turland 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent three quarters of the critical natural resource of the borough.
956 Mrs J Turland 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent three quarters of the critical natural resource of the borough.
957 A Fenton 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 961 Janet Phipps 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 963 J Storer Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. Options a to c would provide much needed improvement to local transport and help keep cars out of Ipswich. Also they would not lead to traffic congestion and would not impact on Orwell Country Park.
972 N Cenci IBC 5 21 East Bank Link Unless park and ride sites are fully used we need to accommodate motorists and rail users and ease Councillor Road town centre at same time. 973 Mr T Goodwin Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 975 Mr T Williams 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 5 21 East Bank Link Re option d - yes to a Wet Dock crossing but no to a second Orwell Bridge. The options chosen are the C Group Road most sustainable and backed by the Felixstowe/Newmarket Transport Study. 991 Mrs J Daly 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 992 E Ayden 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Road environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 999 Rachel Brett Suffolk 5 21 Infrastructure The options chosen under Q20 represent the more sustainable ones which would not lead to Wildlife Trust needs/East environmental damage. Opposed to East Bank Link - would result in severe and permanent damage to Bank Link County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. These habitats have nature conservation value and Road represent one quarter of the critical natural resource of the borough. 1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 5 21 New Dock area is proving a serious access problem already Peoples Infrastructure Alliance - Ipswich Branch
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 1002 R Ward Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link Because all are necessary to support the town in the future and to enable it to sustain the level of Preservation Road development now proposed. Society 608 M Norden Suffolk 5 21 East Bank Link The options chosen are compatible with sustainability principles. The Suffolk BAP Partnership strongly Biodiversity Road disagrees with option E, the East Bank Link Road, as it would result in direct negative impacts on a Partnership County Wildlife Site and Local Nature Reserve. A road would have significant negative ecological impacts affecting Suffolk Local BAP species and habitats. If the road dissected the site the ecological impact would be even more signficant, as species would no longer be able to move throughout the area. There would also be negative impact from noise, disturbance and run-off. The borough supports the Suffolk LBAP and is signed up to its objectives. The following BAP habitats and species would be negatively impacted upon: heathland, wet woodland and ancient woodland, and stag beetle and bats. Further ecological survey could reveal other BAP species. Currently these important habitats are buffered by allotments increasing the total area of semi-natural green space. The link road may also cause indirect negative impact on the SPA and RAMSAR site of the Orwell Estuary, and contribute to negative cumulative impact on it.
1 I Wedd 5 22 Cycling The Council should give cycling greater consideration. It is very cycling unfriendly. Why is it banned in parks, where it should be encouraged. Off road provision is wholly inadequate. 9 Vincent 5 2 22 Transport Option B not 3. We have enough Park and Rides & Why do all the bus services go into town - clogs up the system? No bus service along Norwich Rd/Valley Rd/Colchester Rd to the hospital. Need enhanced rail access plus 4( wet dock crossing) and 5 (east bank link rd). 10 M Selfe 5 22 Transport Need more properly segregated cycle routes 14 B Samuel 5 22 Transport Enhanced public transport and cycle lanes should be the priority but there are sufficient park and ride sites. Wet Dock Crossing would be helpful but money could be better used elsewhere. Cycle lanes need to be improved so they don't stop-start and switch between pavement and road. Improved service to London should be a priority. Takes 1h20min Ipswich-London (60m) but only 2h30m London -Liverpool (280m). 16 K Fairbrother 5 22 Transport Wants to get rid of 2 tier bus system. Non stop P&R service and a 2nd class service for rest of town - is a system which favours car owners outside the town. New bus stop at the hospital is a waste. Wants single main bus operator, interchangeable tickets, standard design of bus stop with all relevant info. Also a single large bus station in Princes St area nearer to rail station to reflect shift in TC towards commuters.
18 A Kleissner 5 22 Infrastructure Need more evening buses, the planning of new services as the town expands, further development of P&R (possibly at Wherstead?). 41 J E Trowell 5 22 Cycle lanes Incorporate cycle lanes in any new development. 54 Mr & Mrs James 5 2 22 Bus links A bus link to Ipswich railway station from the east side of Ipswich would be appreciated- there could be a W F circular bus route linking the Waterfront, Ipswich Village, the railway station and the shopping centre.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 55 Mrs Buckle 5 22 Car use Possibly charge people driving into the town centre. 55 Mrs Buckle 5 22 Cycle and Top priority to cycle and walking routes. walking 58 S Scott Forestry 5 2 22 Green Green infrastructure should be given equal weight and billing to the other infrastructure required to Commission infrastructure develop the expanding and new sustainable communities.
58 S Scott Forestry 5 2 22 Partnership Work with partner organisations to develop approaches to the funding of infrastructure and facilities via Commission working to fund an up-front single infrastructure pot to provide infrastructure in advance of, or at least in parallel with infrastructure development.
60 R G & R Free 5 22 Infrastructure - To support major extra development on the Northern Fringe, the approach by road from Copdock M transport roundabout will need redesigning and a major new ring road installed- how much would this cost?
61 N Blaken EEDA 5 22 Infrastructure Improve transport and freight infrastructure,
61 N Blaken EEDA 5 2 22 Intra-regional The Core Strategy should promote stronger links to Stansted Airport and along the Ipswich-Cambridge links corridor. 105 W Last 5 2 22 Public There is a great need to get people onto public transport - need more frequent buses and improved transport routes to get people onto town and to the hospital. 106 P Stephenson 5 2 22 Other transport Better road infrastructure to cope with growth and easy access to town centre/parking. schemes needed
109 J Welsh Green Living 5 2 22 Integrated Need for smooth transition in transport means to get from a to b. Centre transport infrastructure
118 D Harper 5 2 22 Town centre reduce town centre parking. parking 120 Edwards 5 2 22 Trams Bring back trams. Roads need reviewing to cope with increased pressure. 130 E. Hill 5 2 22 Cycle routes Provide better and safer cycle routes. Deal with infrastructure first. 131 M. Hill 5 2 22 Cycle routes Need better and safer cycle routes. 137 A. Price 5 2 22 Transport Need to address road access and congestion around the borough. infrastructure
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 139 S. Ion Councillor for 5 2 22 Northern Supports Northern Bypass. Rushmere Bypass
144 S. Fox Suffolk 5 2 22 Transport Better bus services to outlying villages (i.e. Eyke, Tunstall, Rendlesham), especially with new Wildlife Trust infrastructure development.
145 J. Merry Suffolk 5 2 22 East Bank Link Make public transport more reliable and punctual and make bus shelters more comfortable to wait in- Wildlife Trust Road then more people would use it.
146 A. Smith 5 2 22 Cycle routes More safe cycle routes (I.e. not part of existing roads as these are largely ignored by motorists.
154 Mr N T & Palk 5 22 Infrastructure We believe that what limited wildlife habitat exists in the Borough (and particularly Local Nature Ms J Doggett Reserves) should be protected and not fragmented.
155 C Keeble 5 22 Infrastructure Safe access routes for school run e.g. cycle path, underpass etc.
163 J Earwaker 5 22 Infrastructure A north bypass.
176 Nicholas Tebbs 5 22 Infrastructure More cycle paths away from the road system and better footpath maintenance.
177 Mrs M J Long Suffolk 5 22 Infrastructure Please put double decker buses on Copdock P&R - NOT JUST WHEN FOOTBALL IS ON! Your Wildlife Trust customers prefer a more comfortable journey. ASDA P&R is usually empty! Copdock is a huge catchment area. Clacton, Harwich, Colchester, Chelmsford and all places between. HELP!!
183 A Fuller 5 22 Infrastructure New rail link from Felixstowe to Peterborough. This would free up the Ipswich to Felixstowe line for more passenger trains. 188 Mr D & Abbott 5 22 Infrastructure Improve dock access via Wherstead Road which has quick easy access to A14 also to have a northern Mrs A bypass to ease the gridlock every time there is a southern accident and reduce traffic always entering Ipswich via south A14. 193 John Ireland 5 22 Infrastructure Simplified bus routing and fare structure.
194 Pam Ireland Suffolk 5 22 Infrastructure Dedicated cycle routes wherever possible. Timetables at all bus stops for all buses stopping there. Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 198 Paul Remblance 5 22 Infrastructure Orwell Crossing - how about a tidal electricity dam from West Bank to old power station with road. All dock access via Primrose Hill, A137. The waterfront will only work if Key Street, College Street, Star Lane is limited to deliveries, public transport and mobility impaired. It would be very interesting to know the origin and destination of single occupancy users at the moment.
200 Annette Lloyd 5 22 Infrastructure Cheaper buses - especially for students. Use park and ride to BT as well as Martlesham (i.e.. taking passengers out of town AM and return to town PM. 201 Paul Izzard 5 22 Infrastructure Improve cross-town road links as not all workers can use buses because of lack of routes and wrong timing. Why not send out work/time survey to all local 'ratepayers' to compile a 'pepper plan' of all bus movements?! 204 Anne Dunn 5 22 Infrastructure Better bus stations; better rail access; better links between town centre and villages and waterfront. Better community facilities and cultural. 208 Neil Gulliver 5 22 Infrastructure Adequate bus services.
212 Ms E Webb 5 22 Infrastructure Better public transport and cycling routes that are totally car free.
218 Maggie Dooley 5 22 Infrastructure Discouraging use of private cars in town centre at peak times. Improved public transport (e.g.. free hop on / hop off buses in town centre. 219 Mr R A Chequer 5 22 Infrastructure As Ipswich grows it is important to retain green spaces towards the town centre. Road development should be by improving the capacity of current roads or using brownfield sites. 220 Ms M L Stone Suffolk 5 22 Infrastructure An improved and reliable public transport service. Wildlife Trust
239 R. & A. Wolfe 5 2 22 Infrastructure Extend and upgrade cycle and pedestrian network routes, linking the town centre and peripheral estates and open countryside. 250 Mr&Mrs Jensen 5 2 22 Extra Light rail services. Infrastructure
252 J.&M. Skellorn 5 2 22 Infrastructure Northern route around Ipswich to prevent traffic going through the town when the Orwell Bridge is blocked. 255 D. Munday 5 2 22 Cycling Segregated cycle routes are piecemeal and often not wide enough. There needs to be a well thought infrastructure out, integrated cycle system to reduce pollution/CO2 emissions and promote healthier lifestyles.
258 J. Gordon 5 2 22 Infrastructure Promotes flat bus fares of 50p for adults and 20p for pensioners/children.
259 M. Duhm 5 2 22 Infrastructure dual line to Felixstowe to alleviate reduce lorry traffic on A14 and Orwell Bridge. Low noise road surfaces on major roads around the town.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 261 L. Williams 5 2 22 Infrastructure Further restrictions on car use, major infrastructure improvements for cyclists (east-west), no more major road building. Better enforcement of parking offences. 264 D. Seaton 5 22 Infrastructure Protect smaller roads from use as rat runs using traffic calming or other devices.
268 J. Jones 5 2 22 Infrastructure Traffic problems could be alleviated by a new link to the A14.
284 M. Bowen 5 22 Infrastructure Park and ride. Rail stations on the edge of town.
288 Mrs J Seaton 5 22 Infrastructure Bear in mind traffic lights on main roads cause short cut taking and cause congestion on small roads.
326 Mr Brander 5 22 Transport A park and ride site and rail halt at Warren Heath/Ransomes has been suggested by Purdis Farm Parish Council. 332 C Hayward Suffolk 5 22 Transport More safe cycle routes needed. D Rowley Wildlife Trust
346 C Rutt 5 22 Transport Real concern about lorries travelling to the new ASDA at Stoke Park and passing through residential areas. 348 M Jackson 5 22 Transport Better provision should be made for cycling into and within Ipswich. Existing cycle lanes should be joined up and new ones created. Also road surfaces improved so that more cycling is encouraged, on the Netherlands model. This would benefit health and the environment. Why not change the proposed link road into a cycle track to relieve traffic and give people the choice to leave their car at home?
360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 5 22 Infrastructure As part of north Ipswich proposal, a new superoute bus service to the town centre and for improvements Planning Kesgrave to Westerfield Station facilities. Covenant Limited 370 Ron Vincent 5 22 Transport Early resolution/construction of a northern by-pass. 378 A Daley 5 22 Transport What plans are there to improve traffic conditions around Duke St, Key St and College St in view of the dock developments and the Suffolk College expansion? 383 C J Pollard 5 22 East Bank Link Disregarding previous objections to the EBLR is unreasonable. Road 395 Jane Southall 5 22 Transport Promotion and utilisation of greener transport. 413 T C Elliot 5 22 Transport The world tipping point for oil supply will arrive in 10 years or no more than 20 years. The Council must take this fact into account in its transport policy. 426 Peter Ling Sustrans; 5 22 Transport More safe cycle routes to out of town areas. Allow a mix of pedestrians and cycles in Westgate/Tavern CTC; SWT St. Promote safe and sensible cycling in these areas. 446 Mrs Birdsall 5 22 Transport Need an east west rail link to get more lorries off the roads.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 447 B C Pinner 5 22 New Car parking. infrastructure
448 R Kitson 5 22 Transport Improved facilities for cyclists which link existing cycle lanes better. 449 T Kitson 5 22 Transport Easier train travel with cycles. 456 D Henry Savills Samuel 5 22 Infrastructure Transport solutions should include all modes, improved public transport provision alone will be Beadie insufficient. Strategic road improvements are also required. (Developmen ts) Ltd 476 Ms J Jousiffe 5 22 Transport Pedestrian access between the town centre and waterfront is poor - cars are given too much priority. Cycle lanes that are not shared with other traffic are needed. 477 R Sideaway 5 22 Transport More dedicated cycle lanes, and safer pedestrian links between parts of town. 490 A C Raworth 5 22 Infrastructure A free shuttle bus service between the station and the town.
491 Mrs V Andrews 5 22 Infrastructure There will be a huge influx of traffic with the university development and the building around the docks. I use that road to travel to work and have to leave ever earlier to allow for the traffic.
508 R Paddison Babergh 5 22 Transport There is a major need to improve the Copdock interchange and Orwell Bridge, as well as east-west rail District links, especially for freight. Council 513 P Miller 5 22 Transport Improve cycling and walking provision across Ipswich. Reduce parking provision in centre. Encourage car club operators. 514 R & C Thomas & 5 22 Transport Introduce congestion charging in the town centre, and provide a better bus service and public transport Clark structure - then people would not use a car. 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 5 22 Infrastructure Using village stations outside Ipswich as a way of getting into town connected with good parking for bikes L and cars. Waterfront light railway. 541 Julian Dowding 5 22 Infrastructure I believe the Council should further improve the bus services (they have already done a good thing by providing free fares to senior citizens and disabled) and now consider offering subsidized fares at a nominal charge - say 20p/50p - for every bus journey made by well bodied persons. This would help get people out of their cars and back on public transport - a kind of 'born again bus user' effect - and would further improve the ability of the town to cope with growth and sustainability, without adverse effect on the environment. I think cycle routes should be improved. One area I see for improvement would be to utilise as a cycle way, the land adjacent to the south western bank of the canal in Holywells Road. This could link with a similar path through Landseer Park and carry much cycle traffic from East Ipswich into and out of the town.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 541 Bev Dowding 5 22 Infrastructure/ I believe the Council should further improve the bus services (they have already done a good thing by East Bank Link providing free fares to senior citizens and disabled) and now consider offering subsidized fares at a Road nominal charge - say 20p/50p - for every bus journey made by well bodied persons. This would help get people out of their cars and back on public transport - a kind of 'born again bus user' effect - and would further improve the ability of the town to cope with growth and sustainability, without adverse effect on the environment. I think cycle routes should be improved. One area I see for improvement would be to utilise as a cycle way, the land adjacent to the south western bank of the canal in Holywells Road. This could link with a similar path through Landseer Park and carry much cycle traffic from East Ipswich into and out of the town.
543 Tom Clayton 5 22 Infrastructure As above
558 P R Richards 5 22 Infrastructure The council should consider light-rail or tram systems
567 R Gape 5 22 Infrastructure The high dwelling (and thus population) densities suggested in 3.7 Option 6 are unsustainable without an integrated public transport strategy of a sort which Ipswich has not recently had to consider. The new University and college campuses will also add stress. All options should be considered, including light rail. Integrated transport will require continuous review and re-review. The German experience is very favourable, and lessons should be learned from these and other locations.
571 G Sayers 5 22 Infrastructure Why isn't there a bridge from Sproughton Rd across the river to Hadleigh Rd?
573 Lynn Anderson 5 22 I would like to register my views/concerns, briefly, in relation to the proposed destructive route through Orwell Country Park on the outskirts of Ipswich. This is a gem place and would be an irreversible loss to the County, the Nation, as well as the locals and tourists who visit such areas, and of course future generations, (lets not forget the wildlife) if such a building structure were to take place. Ipswich is fast becoming leisure/tourist geared, rather than traditionally heavy industries. This should be taken into account, Ipswich, the County Town of Suffolk, is so much richer for its parks and natural environment, it would ba a tragic mistake to lose such places, otherwise over the years it would be transferrred into another industrial site, lost forever.
576 Adrian Manning 5 22 East Bank Link I wish to register my 100% objection to the potential granting of planning permission for an East Bank Road Link Road through Pipers Vale linking the Docks to the A14 at the Felixstowe side of the Orwell bridge.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 577 Michael Brain 5 22 New Transport is absolutely crucial to the future development of Ipswich, yet it is perhaps the most Infrastructure imponderable factor because we take cheap motoring for granted when clearly we cannot assume that it can be sustained indefinitely. I would suggest a thorough review of transport in Ipswich, by considering the journeys which people need to make, and providing for them to make those journeys with a minimum of impediment. Ipswich has a valuable heritage, but it is not a museum. We should therefore seek synergies with the past, for instance by having an essentially pedestrianised centre supplemented by free shuttles, ringed by free-flowing peripheral through-routes which provide unimpeded transit for through traffic and access to car parks for terminal traffic. Opportunities to encourage greater use of public transport should of course be sought, but by positive incentive rather than by the neglect of the alternatives. A northern by-pass seems to me to be essential in present circumstances to relieve the dangerous levels of congestion and when the A14 is blocked by an accident.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 5 22 Infrastructure Any public facility ie car parking, cycle paths, must be designed and managed in a way that promotes a Constabulary reduction in crime and the fear of crime, improving public safety.
579 R Henderson RSPB 5 22 Infrastructure Support for measures to reduce transport congestion and assoc greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Supports improvement of public transport and promotion of sustainable/green transport schemes in workplaces and schools. Reduced reliance on cars and less traffic pressure, with improvements in road safety and minimisation of need for road improvements. Also supports and seeks promotion of cycleways and footpaths. Safe access for pedestrians and cyclists and appropriate cycle parking facilities should be incorporated into all new devs. Cycling and walking combine enjoyment of green space with quiet recreation. Visitors to the Region should be encouraged to travel by sustainable means - public transport/cycling/walking. The env benefits of sustainable transport methods should be promoted and transport links to countryside locations provided.
584 T & S Groot- 5 2 22 Infrastructure Need a close knit bus network, with a charging scheme like Oyster in London, with good links to the train Wassink station. Safer cycle routes, limit vehicles too goods transport in selected inner areas, or limits to a few car parks only. Provision of facilities such as sport,. theatre and education can be allocated once traffic planning has been organised. 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 5 22 Transport Promote regional transport links to A12/A14 and ports of Ipswich, Harwich and Felixstowe. Salter infrastructure
599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 5 22 Transport Promote regional transport links to A12/A14 and ports of Ipswich, Harwich and Felixstowe. Campus infrastructure Suffolk 602 A Bush (personal 5 2 22 Transport With the expansion of Ipswich and current congestion problems, it might be necessary to make the town capacity) infrastructure centre car-free.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 5 22 Transport Promote regional transport links to A12/A14 and ports of Ipswich, Harwich and Felixstowe. British Ports infrastructure
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land5 22 Transport Promote regional transport links to A12/A14 and ports of Ipswich, Harwich and Felixstowe. infrastructure
610 Councillor Martin SCC Labour 5 22 Infrastructure - The key to minimising traffic growth in the town centre will be limiting the amount of available car-parking S Group transport space, both municipal and private.
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 5 22 Infrastructure Promotion of regional transport links to the A12/A14 and ports of Harwich and Felixstowe. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 5 22 Infrastructure No.
614 Mr N Blake 5 22 Infrastructure - Better use of existing urban traffic management infrastructure and improvement where it is not installed transport and in place. E.g. more innovative use of traffic light control. 625 Mrs B Robinson 5 22 Infrastructure - Opposed to a northern by-pass. It will merely generate more congestion and cause environmental northern damage. bypass 636 M Thurston 5 22 Infrastructure No infrastructure put in place before building waterside. Why no bus lane on Duke Street? Why not more green space left at waterside? 640 J W Capon 5 22 Infrastructure Planning permission to include wider access routes into Ipswich, not housing before roads. Several bottlenecks have been created because of this lack of forethought, egg. Duke Street area.
652 J A Smith 5 22 Transport Consider light rail from station to town centre 662 Sharon Giles 5 22 Transport Big lorries should be banned from town centre - should park on outskirts with vans to bring into town
664 Mrs S Humphreys 5 22 Infrastructure Bus services need improving and rerouting along main roads to avoid access problems on congested residential roads. 665 Sandra Tricker 5 22 Transport 1. Foot/cycle bridge across the River Gipping from Fairview devt to enable people to walk/cycle to town centre. 2. Cycle path along wide verge beside Hawthorn Drive to encourage local journeys to be made by bike 667 Shirley Ball 5 22 Transport Too many apartments being built near the town centre without any thought for the eventual gridlock of the town 728 Mr & Mrs Coley 5 22 Infrastructure Roads must be improved and bus services. ; Need improved cycleways; better phasing of lights on St Helen's Street/Crown Street and Valley Road/Colchester Rd to improve flow.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 5 22 Infrastructure The town would benefit from enhanced rail access and equally better links between the town, Village and Development Waterfront will assist in making a more dynamic and sustainable community at the centre of the town. s Ltd 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 5 22 Infrastructure Promotion of regional transport links to the A12/A14 and ports of Harwich and Felixstowe. Development s Ltd 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 5 22 Infrastructure No. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 5 22 Infrastructure The town centre pedestrian area should be a real pedestrian area and not have trucks going through during shopping hours. Would like to see fewer helicopter flights over the town particularly between 10pm and 7am, and an end to commercial flights between midnight and 6am.
745 Hilary Cadman 5 22 Transport Bus routes should be open to all transport outside busy hours at beginning and end of day 747 Mrs J Rosher 5 22 Infrastructure Roads are important - there are traffic jams all the time in Ipswich now. Tuddenham Road is particularly busy, and fast. 757 William Barrow Suffolk 5 22 Transport More park and ride schemes, more links to the bus, railway, subsidised bus tickets Wildlife Trust
761 J E & P F Bickerdike 5 22 Infrastructure - Priority should be given to obtaining agreement for a northern by-pass. This would substantially help R northern solve the traffic problems in Ipswich and beyond. bypass 762 Jane Allain 5 22 Transport Better cycling paths and access without cars 764 Gillian Thomas 5 22 Transport The flow of traffic in rush hours gets increasingly worse at particular bottle necks - need investigation and solutions found 769 Mrs S Brown Inland 5 22 Infrastructure It is an objective of the IWA Ipswich Branch to restore the Rive Gipping Navigation, and we want Waterways consideration of this included in any scheme so that new development does not preclude the restoration. Association 773 K Oliver 5 22 Infrastructure More and cheaper public transport. Improve links between Ipswich and coastal resorts, and with rural areas especially in the evenings. More cycle routes and designated paths needed and more pedestrian routes. 781 Mrs H Hedley 5 22 Transport when a site is concreted over you can never restore it to the same state. People need open spaces
782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 5 2 22 Infrastructure Other issues- siting and layout of bus stations is vital- present ones too far apart and uncoordinated. International
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 783 E Phillips 5 22 Infrastructure Increase road capacity by removing bus lanes. Retain gyratory system- do not remove west-bound route/ using Star Lane. Replace pedestrian crossings with bridges in the gyratory/waterfront area.
810 J Lusardi 5 2 22 Infrastructure Better provisions for cyclists.
832 Arthur & Tydeman 5 22 Transport Building more roads will not cure the problem. Make single person car use unattractive by providing Beryl integrated efficient and comfortable public transport system 856 J. Jones 5 22 Infrastructure Wider issues are important, such as quality, service coverage and hours of operation of public transport services. 857 A. Jones 5 22 Infrastructure Wider issues are important, such as quality, service coverage and hours of operation of public transport services. 858 M. Gray 5 22 Infrastructure Northern bypass needed if Northern Fringe is developed- current A12/A14 access is inadequate.
859 D. Witherley 5 22 Infrastructure Current road infrastructure could not manage proposed growth. Current problems experienced around Tuddenham Rd/ Colchester Rd- a northern bypass is essential before any new housing is considered.
860 A. Witherley 5 22 Infrastructure Current road infrastructure could not manage proposed growth. Current problems experienced around Humber Doucy Lane/ Colchester Rd- a northern bypass is essential before any new housing is considered. 861 D. Witherley 5 22 Infrastructure Current road infrastructure could not manage proposed growth. Current problems experienced around Tuddenham Rd/ Colchester Rd- a northern bypass is essential before any new housing is considered.
894 Mrs Hine Suffolk 5 22 Transport No development to the north of the town - Henley Road cannot take an increase in traffic - already Nancy Wildlife Trust reached saturation point
897 M. Allison IBC 5 22 Infrastructure Revise cycle, pedestrian and car parking strategies. Produce a definitive rights of way map. Environment Protection Panel 898 B Glover 5 22 Infrastructure Make the town pedestrian-friendly.
898 B Glover 5 22 Infrastructure Better pedestrian accessibility.
900 R Duncan 5 22 Infrastructure Better cycle routes and more timed bus lanes, as at London Road.
900 R Duncan 5 22 Infrastructure Remove bus lanes. Remove speed cameras.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 901 V Duncan 5 22 Infrastructure More timed bus lanes, better cycle routes.
902 S Duncan 5 22 Infrastructure Safer cycle routes and more timed bus lanes.
906 P Birdsall 5 22 Infrastructure Cheaper buses. Derby Road Rail service.
910 Amelia Drayson Green Party 5 22 Transport increased cycle lanes, introduce foot-bus schemes in all borough primary schools, widen pavements and add crossings where necessary 912 Mrs R J Southworth 5 22 Infrastructure See Q 18 (Public transport to and from Stanstead Airport, subsidised if necessary).
913 S Blything- 5 22 Infrastructure Need a northern by-pass before major development should be considered. Also wish to see A140 Smith dualled. 916 Mr Thomas 5 22 Transport Wherstead Park and Ride Site within Babergh District Council area Graham 931 D C Harper 5 22 Infrastructure Increase the traffic free area in the town centre. Rationalise bus routes radically and keep all radial roads free of parking at all times. 935 Mr & Mrs Amphlitt- 5 22 Infrastructure There should be a ring road around the Wherstead / Quay side of Ipswich. Lewis 943 J A L & Hammond Suffolk 5 22 Transport More goods sent by rail, less lorries on road. No lorries to overtake at peak times on main roads Mrs E Wildlife Trust
952 Mr S Bretherton 5 22 Infrastructure A primary transport network should be created between major roads in and around Ipswich to facilitate trips between residential, employment, retail and leisure areas. This would require the creation of new multi-modal interchange centres at key locations, eg. district centres, railway station, University. It might include new railway stations at Norwich road, Warren Heath etc and a new transit link between Ipswich railway station and the Waterfront/University linking into the town centre. A novel rapid transit system eg. tram or monorail would provide a major image boost to that area of town and act as a catalyst for regeneration, tourism and business. Also a northern by-pass should be created.
964 Mr D Dufty 5 22 Infrastructure Opposed to a northern by-pass as it would create a doughnut effect and empty the town centre of services. 971 Mr D Kidney English 5 22 Infrastructure Any option chosen by the Council should take into account sustainable public transport and sustainable Nature energy issues. 972 N Cenci IBC 5 22 Infrastructure Increased traffic from Snoasis on west side of town. Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 5 22 Infrastructure Integrated cycling network across the Borough. C Group
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 977 Mr T Scott 5 22 Infrastructure Need to design in more bus lay bys with new developments, eg. at Ranelagh Road where the road need straightening and buildings setting back to make space for a bus lay by. With the emphasis on public transport you should make adequate provision for it. Also need to sort out the Copdock junction (A12/14) as it has the largest container port in the UK on the end of it. 980 Mrs & Mrs Wand 5 22 Infrastructure The car should be kept out of the town centre to avoid grid lock if the envisaged development takes R & M place. Development of green alternatives eg. trams and cycling should be included in any development plans. 981 Mr D A Cooper 5 22 Infrastructure Cycleways are inadequate and at Bishops Hill/Felixstowe Road there is a bottleneck with too many traffic lights at the Derby Road junction. Traffic should not go right at Derby Road/Felixstowe Rd from the Felixstowe direction. 982 P Andrews 5 22 Infrastructure Need to reduce car use, through any possible methods.
983 K MacFadyen 5 22 Infrastructure Copdock interchange needs radical redesign to cope with demands. What happened to the northern by- pass? 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 5 22 Infrastructure The Society is strongly of the opinion that a conclusive traffic plan is researched and agreed to solve road Society transport problems around the waterfront area.
992 E Ayden 5 22 Infrastructure Have enough Park and Ride. Need smaller, higher frequency buses needs 1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 5 22 New Better cycle ways, prohibition of large vehicles within town centre area except for early morning/late Peoples Infrastructure evening Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 5 22 Infrastructure The Council must commission a study of the impact of development on the traffic in the town centre, and Preservation implement sensitive and sensible traffic management measures to address existing and future Society congestion. This is likely to include a move away from reliance on the private motor vehicle and greater use of public transport. 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 5 22 Infrastructure Proposal (e) involving a link road from the east bank of the river to the A14, would have direct negative County impacts on a Local Nature Reserve and County Wildlife Site, including Suffolk Biodiversity Action Plan Council priority habitats and species. There could also be indirect negative impacts upon the internationally important SPA and RAMSAR site of the Orwell estuary. Pipers Vale is also a very important area of natural accessible green space for the residents of SE Ipswich; a link road through Pipers Vale would result in a direct loss in the area, quality and accessibility of public open space.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 416 Mrs D Longden Nacton Priory 5 24 Conservation/ The Council should do its utmost to protect SSSIs from environmental damage to be caused by the Court East Bank Link proposed East Bank Link Road from Ipswich docks to the A14. Residents' Road Association 416 Mrs D Longden Nacton Priory 5 25 Conservation/ The Council should protect Brazier's Wood and Orwell Country Park from the proposed East Bank Link Court East Bank Link Road. Residents' Road Association 33 N Brigham Sustrans 5 1 18, Infrastructure Q18. Improved & extended cycle provision. Q19. Option 1. Q22. Option 1 is achievable with reallocation 19 & of road space and parking restrictions. 22 4 L H Barton 5 2 Infrastructure Infrastructure improvements should match growth in hsg
6 N Bateman 5 Transport More cycle lanes & as part of all new roads. Lots more public transport to and from Chantry and Whitton areas & town centre 15 L Caudle 5 Transport Concern about rise in cars and pollution 17 K Holley 5 Infrastructure b) growth will need to be matched by infrastructure. Focus on enhanced rail access, better links between TC, Ipswich village and the waterfront, a new Orwell crossing, improved access in areas where new dev takes place. 18 A Kleissner 5 2 Infrastructure Infrastructure is vital - particular concern about the Waterfront road system. Henley Rd and Westerfield Rd & Valley Rd would have issues if the northern fringe goes ahead. The East Bank link Rd and Wet dock crossing are worth considering. 18 A Kleissner 5 Infrastructure Rail transport cannot really be improved except Lower Yard which may provide footpath to Waterfront. The Forecourt arrangements at Ipswich station are inadequate. More parking at Westerfield would be beneficial. 21 Evans 5 2 Infrastructure Wants new wet dock crossing
22 T Roberts 5 Infrastructure b) links to the waterfront
25 T Leggatt 5 Infrastructure Too many car parks in central Ipswich. People should not be encouraged to drive, should make them use bikes or public transport. 26 M A Bolton 5 Infrastructure Tramway system to link the TC to Waterfront. New crossing of Orwell needed. Option b preferred.
29 D Kergon 5 Infrastructure Is 15,400 negotiable? Is there water and sewerage resource to match? Will above and below ground history be conserved? Will need to plan for extra facilities (inc. shops doctors vets, religious centres, recycling facilities, recreation areas, traffic).
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 29 D Kergon 5 Infrastructure Need a town centre hop-on, hop-off system. Could be electric driverless circulating system, linked to existing rail station, giving access to waterfront, town centre & the Village. Dev should be built around this. Support for suggestions 4,5,6,& 7 to improve eastern access to town centre. Should impose a 20 mph speed limit within a town centre zone to speed up rush hour traffic. Need to provide friendly fuelled public transport in advance of major dev. 31 D Hindmarch 5 Infrastructure Transport must be an incentive to leave cars at home. Policing need to be better and parking maintained. Cycle routes must be made safer or abolished. 32 S Brinkley 5 Infrastructure Option a, although a new crossing of the dock would relieve that area
35 I Broom 5 Infrastructure Will need new roads and water with dev of new houses.
36 C W Smith 5 Infrastructure Infrastructure requires commitment of the Gov & County
37 K Pierce 5 Infrastructure Enhance rail access( & trams), build new Orwell crossing, more P & R. More renewable fuel centres.
38 S Steward 5 Parks/ play Keep safe play areas and parks areas 38 S Steward 5 Need for soft With extra homes there is a need for schools, and health care. infrastructure
38 S Steward 5 Need to get The right infrastructure is key to the success of delivery of growth. infrastructure right 39 A Nesus 5 Congestion Roads in the town are already overcrowded. 39 A Nesus 5 2 Northern Before there is any development on the northern fringe there needs to be a northern bypass. Traffic bypass should be diverted away from the town- there is congestion around Valley Road. 39 A Nesus 5 2 Supports options 1 and 2. With the development of the Waterfront and Suffolk College there needs to be a big car park in that area. 40 C S Restall 5 3 Flats v houses Brownfield land should particularly be used for flats and accommodation over 2 storeys.
43 N Gibbons 5 2(d) East Bank link There is a need for a river crossing- away from the Waterfront if this is to be successful. road 44 Anon 5 2 Green Ipswich has excellent public transport- but more low emission/ green fuel/ electric vehicles would be Transport better. 49 M Neale 5 2a Bus station The bus stations need urgently to be combined into one, preferably as part of the railway station. combination 49 M Neale 5 2d River Gipping There urgently needs to be another crossing of the Gipping between Norwich Road/ Bramford Road and crossing Hadleigh Road.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 53 M Lunn 5 2 Need for We must have growth in infrastructure now. infrastructure
55 Mrs Buckle 5 2 Water The amount of water needed to serve housing growth should be considered. resources 55 Mrs Buckle 5 2a/b Public Improve all public transport transport 59 Mrs Williams 5 2d New crossing New crossing across docks. across docks
62 J Offord 5 2 Extra Infrastructure is needed to support growth. Congestion (especially in the centre) is a problem. infrastructure needed 62 J Offord 5 2 Waterfront Traffic flow around Star lane must be improved and a new wet dock crossing would link the Waterfront infrastructure into the town better. There should be a bus link (extend shuttle bus?) linking the Waterfront to the town centre and train station- there is none at present. 65 D Morgan 5 Infrastructure Ipswich is compact enough to ensure that infrastructure is concentrated on the town centre and its immediate environments. 65 D Morgan 5 2e East Bank Link To address Star Lane/Salthouse Street traffic dilemma build east link road from Nacton, cutting through Road Pipers Vale to Cliff Quay and build road crossing of Orwell. 65 D Morgan 5 2 Access Q20- a,b,c and g- bus, park and ride and train use must be extended. Safe town centre pedestrian routes Infrastructure must be extended and improved i.e. Princes Street.
70 T Cocker 5 2c, g Waterfront Congestion around the Waterfront is a consideration. More park and Ride and charging for town centre traffic parking. 73 M Crook 5 2c Links to Better access to the Waterfront for pedestrians is needed. Waterfront 74 J Melton 5 2b Links to 2b- the current one-way system needs to be reviewed. The current system could not cope with further Waterfront traffic from development on the Waterfront. 77 I Maitumbi EERA 5 2 Need for Option 2: growth of the scale allocated to Ipswich will require investment in new infrastructure. The infrastructure Regional Transport Strategy (see RSS) sets out strategic transport infrastructure improvements. The Panel recommends replacing the list of schemes with a list of outcomes.
79 J Pettican 5 2e East Bank Link Objects to proposed new road through the nature reserve at Pipers Vale. Road
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 80 S Pinder- 5 2 Traffic Need better traffic management. Should strongly consider an inner ring road to relieve congestion around Banthorpe infrastructure Waterfront. Supports new wet dock crossing. Also consider putting lock gates at the Stoke end of the River Gipping- so that the river actually looks good and could be developed as an amenity for Ipswich citizens. 80 S Pinder- 5 2 Infrastructure In order of priority: 4 (wet dock crossing), 5 (East bank link Road), 7(park and ride),2 (Rail), 3(town centre Banthorpe priorities links), 1(bus), 6(port). The top priority should be to provide new community facilities
100 D Hindmarch 5 2 Access to town Improve access to the town without increasing congestion and pollution. centre 103 L Cunningham 5 2 Infrastructure Lack of capacity for traffic growth. Agree with options d (Orwell Crossing), e (East Bank Link Road) and f schemes (localised port access improvements). needed 104 R Garrod 5 2 Infrastructure Option 2: Supports provisions a, b, c and f. They are more sustainable. Options 105 W Last 5 2 Infrastructure Options a, b, c and g.
105 W Last 5 2 East Bank Link East Bank option would destroy valuable County and Local Wildlife Sites. Regulation of traffic flow within Road existing road structure would negate the need for it. 106 P Stephenson 5 2 Infrastructure Option 2: Provision d, e, f and g supported. These would help to address the main problems.
107 P Horne 5 2 Infrastructure Q. 20: Options a, b, c and f.
109 J Welsh Green Living 5 2 Green Upgrade green transport routes through the existing built area. Centre Infrastructure
111 S Young 5 2 Infrastructure 2, 3 and 7 important. Plus walking, cycling and bus provision. Extra infrastructure necessary but should not require car use. 114 T & M Clark Suffolk 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Wildlife Trust Options
114 T & M Clark Suffolk 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Wildlife Trust Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 115 G Clapp Suffolk 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Wildlife Trust Options
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 115 G Clapp Suffolk 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Wildlife Trust Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 116 T McLaven 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 116 T McLaven 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 117 J Boxall Suffolk 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Wildlife Trust Options
117 J Boxall Suffolk 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Wildlife Trust Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 117 J Boxall Suffolk 5 2 Public Encourage residents to use public transport instead of the car. Need better transport into town and more Wildlife Trust transport realistic fares. More joined-up thinking between bus companies promoted.
118 D Harper 5 2 Transport Supports a, b, d, g. infrastructure
119 B Noll 5 2 Transport Better bus routes. Cycle lanes and park and ride to Northern Fringe. infrastructure
119 B Noll 5 2e East Bank Link Opposed to EBLR. Road 120 Edwards 5 2 East Bank Link Against EBLR- environmental concerns. Road 121 M Graves 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 121 M Graves 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 122 D J & W J Jewhurst 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 122 D J & W J Jewhurst 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 123 V Hems 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 123 V Hems 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 124 I Lane 5 2 Transport More frequent buses, better provision for cyclists and make areas more pedestrian friendly. infrastructure
125 M Pike 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 125 M Pike 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 126 K Stranix 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 126 K Stranix 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 129 R. Wilson 5 2 Northern No to the Northern Bypass. Bypass 135 J. Woodall 5 2 Transport Promotes low-cost measures such as improved cycle access, pedestrian access and clean public infrastructure transport (against Northern Bypass).
139 S. Ion Councillor for 5 2 Transport Supports options a-f- they will be needed for a bigger Ipswich. Rushmere infrastructure
142 D & E Francis Suffolk 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Wildlife Trust Options
142 D & E Francis Suffolk 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Wildlife Trust Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 143 P. Harris 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 143 P. Harris 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 143 P. Harris 5 2 East Bank Link Quality of life in the Borough is already significantly reduced by roads and traffic- another road would Road make this worse still. Emphasis should be given to improvements to cycle and pedestrian routes throughout the Borough. 144 S. Fox Suffolk 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Wildlife Trust Options
144 S. Fox Suffolk 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Wildlife Trust Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 145 J. Merry Suffolk 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Wildlife Trust Options
145 J. Merry Suffolk 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Wildlife Trust Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 146 A. Smith 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 146 A. Smith 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 147 C. Bischoff 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 147 C. Bischoff 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 148 R. Mills 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 148 R. Mills 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 149 P. Stanley 5 2 Infrastructure Support a, b, c and f. these represent more sustainable options. Options 149 P. Stanley 5 2 East Bank Link Oppose option e . It would negatively impact on a County Wildlife Site and a Local Nature Reserve. Road These areas are designated for their nature conservation value and represent 1/4 of the Borough's natural resources. 160 J F Ireland 5 Infrastructure The EBLR would be counter-productive in terms of traffic congestion and would lead to a serious loss of amenity for Ipswich people and others as well as permanent and irreversible damage to the wildlife habitat. This route should therefore no longer be considered an option.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 185 Daniel Sanford 5 2 Infrastructure Transport: (b): but only 1 + 2 + 7 - including proper co-operation with SCC as needed.
192 Wendy Brown 5 2 Infrastructure/ I was very disappointed to find the EBLR back in the Local Plan. For all the reasons it was rejected a few East Bank Link years ago, nothing has changed. A road is necessary to relieve congestion on the west side to the river Road and also the Star Lane / Quay Street area but not one that cuts through the open spaces of the Orwell Country Park and the ancient woodland on the other side of the road. There has to be another solution and it is very sad that the decision on infrastructure was not taken before the dock and airport redevelopment happened. The bridge needs to be built from the West Dock to join up with Bourne Bridge area, not over the wet dock.
243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 5 a, b, c, Infrastructure the Earth, f Suffolk Wildlife Trust
256 G. Knight 5 2 Infrastructure Opposed to options d and e. Opposes EBLR for nature conservation reasons.
261 L. Williams 5 a, b, c Infrastructure Options a, b and c offer sustainable travel, avoiding excessive car use.
263 M. Sheppard 5 2e Infrastructure/ Objects to the EBLR due to its impact on the nearby Pipers Vale and effect on local wildlife. East Bank Link Road 264 D. Seaton 5 2g Infrastructure Option g: to discourage car use.
273 A. Cordon 5 2e Infrastructure/ Objects to the fact that the EBLR is on the agenda despite being dropped 4 years ago, to the fact that East Bank Link people's views then are not being taken into account, and thus concerned citizens are being made to Road work to object the proposal once again. 284 M. Bowen 5 2(all) Infrastructure All options are necessary to cater for growth.
286 Mr C Edmondson 5 Infrastructure/ Bus services are poor - must be made more direct and reliable. Should not build a relief road through a East Bank Link wildlife area and nature reserve. Should not build too much housing before infrastructure is provided. Road 325 Ann Chadwick 5 Infrastructure Do not allow the Government to push you into providing housing without insisting on road planning and improvement. 339 E Jeyasingh 5 Transport All bus fares should be cheaper and buses more frequent to encourage greater use. People working in the town centre should be given free or subsidised bus passes as part of their salary package and discouraged from taking cars into work.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 341 R Fletcher 5 Infrastructure Northern Fringe must not be developed until there is a northern by-pass. Traffic will increase greatly and needs most people will still use their cars. 342 Mrs Birch 5 Infrastructure Infrastructure will need to grow. Need new community facilities and sports facilities. needs 344 Mrs I Wen 5 Infrastructure More public transport and more cycle lanes, please.
350 Mr CC Girling 5 Infrastructure Ipswich needs health provision, schools and transport.
351 Mrs G Girling 5 Infrastructure Allotments should be provided and people encouraged to use their gardens for vegetables.
352 Mr Byrne 5 Transport Need a better road system in and out of Ipswich, especially the Copdock junction, and greatly improved public transport. 357 Chris Pollard 5 Infrastructure Less than 4 years ago the people of Ipswich made their views known in their overwhelming opposition to the building of a link road through the Orwell Country Park. There has been no change in the economic circumstances of the town and the issues are the same as they were then. The status and importance of the country park has not diminished. It is disgraceful that previous objections to the road, and the inevitable retail development that will accompany it, have been swept aside. I am opposed to any access development that would damage the Park. I believe such developments to be permanently detrimental to the environment. The economic case for a link road is far from proven.
359 Mrs C Reeve 5 Infrastructure The development would have an important impact on public services that are already under pressure. Consultation with service providers should include statements on additional resources at Ipswich Hospital, additional GPs needed, additional dentists needed, and additional primary and secondary schools. There also needs to be commitment to a timeframe showing when these additional services will be provided. The EERA panel talked about the need for funding for public services.
360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 5 2b Infrastructure Option b: Any significant new development must be accompanied by improved public transport- a strong Planning Kesgrave driver of the proposed North Ipswich development. Covenant Limited 362 Mr B Reeve 5 Infrastructure The development would have an important impact on public services that are already under pressure. Consultation with service providers should include statements on additional resources at Ipswich Hospital, additional GPs needed, additional dentists needed, and additional primary and secondary schools. There also needs to be commitment to a timeframe showing when these additional services will be provided. The EERA panel talked about the need for funding for public services.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 363 R D Paterson 5 Infrastructure Need a plan for a northern by-pass because of: steady growth in traffic on all roads in Ipswich; the need for an alternative route to the southern by-pass to cater for problems with the Orwell Bridge and elsewhere on the A14; the conversion of the old 1930s by-pass into a local service roads that make it an unsuitable alternative; and the apparent desire to increase the population and housing in north Ipswich.
381 Mrs F M Green 5 Infrastructure Ipswich could not cope with the development because the roads, water supply, and health service are inadequate. 398 Mrs J Halstead 5 Infrastructure Conservation of water and power are paramount. The Council must not be dictated to by those unfamiliar with this dry area. 402 Mr Chambers 5 Infrastructure Need better provision for secondary education, better hospital, public transport infrastructure and better road infrastructure in and around the north of Ipswich. 403 Mr Chambers 5 Infrastructure Need hospitals, schools and road infrastructure.
405 Mr & Mrs Caldwell 5 Infrastructure Improving transport infrastructure and public transport is vital. The target to stabilise traffic at 1999 levels is nonsense given today's dispersed society. Unless draconian and socially destabilising taxation policies are pursued and public transport becomes as convenient as using a car, traffic congestion will not decrease . Cycling is not a realistic alternative to the use of the car for people living in rural areas, nor is public transport. Public transport needs to be improved drastically if a serious attempt to reduce congestion is to be made. Frequency, hours and coverage of bus services need to be improved. The Government should spend more on reducing congestion.
423 Mr & Mrs Jackson 5 Infrastructure Need a more extensive and better surfaced cycle way network. Pressure should be put on the highway authority. We all need to reduce the impact of our own actions on global warming, and protect the environment. 425 Colin Campbell 5 Infrastructure Improve provision for cycle traffic (students) and small electric vehicles (the elderly). Both will need special provision. 431 Mr & Mrs Cable-Davex 5 Urban Should maintain parks better, and create more natural green belt areas, instead of proposing plans for greening link roads that damage or destroy our countryside. Need to find ways to expand communities without having adverse effects on the environment. 445 Mrs Grant 5 Infrastructure Improved bus shuttles to connect all areas. Possible wet dock crossing but NOT the East Bank Link Road on environmental grounds. 458 S Speight 5 Infrastructure Infrastructure needs to be addressed before developments happen, including roads and access for each new development, more buses to the railway station and a wet dock crossing to open up the south of Ipswich.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 459 A Stewart 5 Infrastructure The hospital and emergency services cannot cope at present and will clearly need to be expanded or new facilities built. The schools in northern Ipswich are also full. Building on brownfield sites would not only help schools with falling registers, but also mean no new ones were needed. It would be impossible to maintain car traffic at 1999 levels from northern Ipswich even with better bus services - they are poor at present. Another 15,000 homes will cause traffic chaos. A northern by-pass is not an option as it would ruin the Fynn Valley. 463 Mr Studd 5 Infrastructure/ Combine all the bus companies and services onto one bus station on Commercial Road by the River, Town centre thereby freeing up the Old Cattle Market site for development to link the town centre to the docks, and vision create a square at the site of Electric House. It could potentially remove all the large buses from the town centre which could instead be served by (free?) minibuses. The new bus station at Commercial Rd would be near the docks, railway station, new public buildings and ITFC and an easy walk into the town centre. The bus station building could combine waiting area, cafe, staff and administration areas, and the river side could be hard landscaped. The new square could stretch from Crown Street to Tower Ramparts, and from Yates' to the old Electric House building. This would be an open area with restricted access. It could be used for the market and special events.
501 C Cox Barton Threadneedl 5 Infrastructure/ Policy on developer contributions should reflect the tests in C5/05. Support negotiation of contributions to Willmore e Property Planning ensure that the provision of infrastructure, education and public art amongst others is fair and Investments contributions proportionate.
511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 5 General As the Core Strategy is progressed, further consideration should be given to what the Community Plan comment says about delivering new community services and facilities (comment made in context of para. 3.10 of issues paper). 511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 5 Infrastructure There is a need to identify the main dependencies between growth and key strategic infrastructure provision, as the DPD is developed. Are the infrastructure options provided contained in any delivery plans or programmes? Further consideration needs to be given to this in developing and testing options and moving towards preferred options, to show that the strategy is deliverable.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 512 Mr Eric Cooper Highways 5 Infrastructure The East of England model, whilst not necessarily taking full account of local generated trips, does give Agency an indication of future pressures on strategic corridors based on growth aspirations of the region. It suggests that there will be capacity issues at many of the junctions along the A14 and some sections of the A14 including the Orwell Bridge, some time in the next decade. Improving accessibility to and around Ipswich may require new infrastructure but this has not been modelled or quantified. First consideration should be given to reducing the need to travel by building sustainable developments and changing the travel behaviour of existing communities through demand management measures, area wide travel plans car sharing, etc. Only as a last resort should the core strategy be directed to new road infrastructure.
527 R Pope 5 Infrastructure B - the infrastructure needs to be improved, public transport must be improved, also Star Lane and Quay Street. Should be a tunnel to improve access to the dock from town on foot. 553 Stephen Marginson 5 Infrastructure The current infrastructure is not adequate as claimed. Recent developments in the Docks and Ranelagh Roads areas have not had necessary infrastructure improvements incorporated leading to excessive congestion and delays. Developments required could include, new roads, duelling of existing roads such as the ring road. New single bus station for all operators, new Orwell crossing, provision of the East Bank Link Road to the A14. Improvements to traffic flow are badly needed. Reduction in roundabouts and replacement with lights. Removal of lights at existing roundabouts. Computer controlled traffic light crossings on main routes to be replaces with subways or bridges. Key routes to become red routes to improve flows and capacity. Bus routes to be speeded up by more bus lanes in the inner town areas wher congestion is worst. Park and ride to be at locations nearer to the centre as well. Current parking areas to be converted to multi storey where this is not the case to increase capacity. Road layout and bus provision at Ipswich Station to be totally remodelled from its current chaotic mess. Other infrastructure improvements must be included in developments small and large. This to include sports and recreation fac
559 G Thomas 5 Infrastructure Comments submitted on a separate rep form .
567 R Gape 5 Infrastructure Public Transport, Education, Governance (Borough and County Councils), Parks, Leisure and Entertainment. 595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 5 2b, c, f, Transport Town would benefit from better rail links and improved links between the town centre, Ipswich Village and Salter g. infrastructure Ipswich Waterfront.
595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 5 (2d & Transport Congestion problems would not be solved through a new Orwell crossing (in particular a wet dock Salter e) infrastructure crossing), or through upgraded bus stations.
596 A Dobson 5 2a, b, Infrastructure c, f & g
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 596 A Dobson 5 2 (e) Infrastructure Against EBLR- Nature/wildlife protection. Would cut off residential areas from residential areas and make free access difficult. 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 5 2b, c, f, Transport Town would benefit from better rail links and improved links between the town centre, Ipswich Village and Campus g. infrastructure Ipswich Waterfront. Suffolk 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 5 (2d & Transport Congestion problems would not be solved through a new Orwell crossing (in particular a wet dock Campus e) infrastructure crossing), or through upgraded bus stations. Bus operators prefer not to use bus stations simply to park Suffolk their vehicles. 603 C Shah LIDL UK 5 2a, b, Infrastructure Options a, b, c and g improve confidence in public transport. GmbH c, g 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 5 2b, c, f, Transport Town would benefit from better rail links and improved links between the town centre, Ipswich Village and British Ports g. infrastructure Ipswich Waterfront.
605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 5 (2d & Transport Congestion problems would not be solved through a new Orwell crossing (in particular a wet dock British Ports e) infrastructure crossing), or through upgraded bus stations. Bus operators prefer not to use bus stations simply to park their vehicles. 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 5 2b, c, f, Transport Town would benefit from better rail links and improved links between the town centre, Ipswich Village and g. infrastructure Ipswich Waterfront.
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 5 (2d & Transport Congestion problems would not be solved through a new Orwell crossing (in particular a wet dock e) infrastructure crossing), or through upgraded bus stations. Bus operators prefer not to use bus stations simply to park their vehicles. 624 S Mills Network Rail 5 2 Infrastructure It is unlikely that Option 1 is realistic. While it may be the Councils intention to fund some of the works/items in Option 2 through planning obligations, emerging policy should recognise that it is not appropriate for physical proximity to the infrastructure concerned to be the sole criterion for identifying which developments should contribute. The cumulative impact of similar schemes also places demands on infrastructure. Thus the pooling of contributions and/or tariffs should be considered to address this issue provided that flexibility is retained in the negotiation process to take into account the cost of mitigating site-specific issues that may arise, and any other benefits that the scheme provides. Any planning obligation negotiations with NR should take into account the wider regeneration benefits of the scheme and reflect the fact that Network Rail is funded predominantly to maintain the existing railway. Planning obligations should conform to Para.B5 of Circular 05/05. Also much of the infrastructure under option 2 has funding sources elsewhere, e.g. LTP which should be the primary source of funding.
644 R Stewart 5 Infrastructure Need more bus services better coordinated so they do not run simultaneously. But opposed to a northern by-pass which would destroy the Fynn Valley. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 5 2 Infrastructure Supports options c, d and e. These examples do not exist at present. International
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 783 E Phillips 5 2b, d, Infrastructure Option 2: b, d, e, and f. To improve traffic flows and allow unrestricted access. e, f 810 J Lusardi 5 2 Infrastructure Supports options 2a and b. Opposes option e.
820 A Bumstead 5 2b, c, d Infrastructure Supports options b, c and d. Not enough use is made of the potential of our rail links. How about suburban stops? 824 R Nunn 5 e East Bank Link A and E. E: Scale of development of the Waterfront means that an EBLR is necessary to relieve traffic in Road Sart Lane/Wherstead Rd. area. Would require planning and landscaping to minimise environmental impact. Avoid retail on new road to reduce traffic levels. A: A single bus station at Tower Ramparts is required. 835 Mr David Barker Barton Crest 5 Infrastructure Clients will provide a range of appropriate infrastructure to ensure development is sustainable and Willmore Nicholson Northern addressed traffic, including bus, park and ride, local junction improvements and new pedestrian and cycle Fringe links. Required improvements to services to cope with northern fringe development can be provided.
848 P. Taylor 5 2e East Bank Link Against EBLR. Road 850 S. Sadler 5 2 (all) Infrastructure All options needed. Cycle lanes must be a priority
851 Mrs Byrne 5 Infrastructure Unless another major access route is built I do not see how any development that significantly increases road traffic could be built. This issue should be resolved. Whenever the A14 closes it causes major problems in Ipswich. We have an over stretched hospital and diminishing employment opportunities. The shopping centre is uninspiring. People need to live in decent surroundings with some open space and a proper garden where children can play. 854 R. Wallace 5 2c & d Infrastructure c- improve road structure around Waterfront area and links to town centre. D- Supports wet dock crossing to Wherstead Road side. 856 J. Jones 5 2b Infrastructure Option b.
857 A. Jones 5 2b Infrastructure Option b.
858 M. Gray 5 2a, b, Infrastructure Options a, b, d and e- to reduce HGV traffic in town and make public transport more user friendly. d, e 897 M. Allison IBC 5 2a, b, Infrastructure Support options a, b, c, d, f and g. Provide foundations for a sustainable transport system. EBLR would Environment c, d, f, cross a county wildlife site and a Local Nature Reserve, and damage BAP action plans and species. Protection g Panel 898 B Glover 5 2 Infrastructure Supports options a, b. Only one bus station needed though. Opposes option g.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 899 G Duncan 5 2a Infrastructure Developments should utilise the present bus structure more.
899 G Duncan 5 2d and Infrastructure Options d and e: major development in Dock need better access out of town. Use existing bus routes e more before expanding. 904 N Hine 5 2 Infrastructure Option 2.
996 Mr Armstrong 5 2e Infrastructure/ Opposes EBLR: Country Park, Pipers Vale and Braziers Wood should be protected for the benefit of East Bank Link Ipswich residents. Road 1005 D Dufty Transport 5 2 Infrastructure Supports all options listed. 2000 Group Ipswich and Suffolk 1006 J Hughes 5 2e Infrastructure/ Opposes option e. The natural environment is an important asset that we have a responsibility to protect. East Bank Link Road 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 5 2a, b, Infrastructure These would be of most benefit to residents without impacting in critical natural assets of the area. Countryside c, & f Option e (eblr) would cause irreversible damage to Orwell Country Park, including County Wildlife Sites Project and at least one Local Nature Reserve. Remove this option- it has repeatedly failed to show significant merits. 318 Mr Hunt 5 Infrastructure Will developers pay for the infrastructure needed for new homes and industry and commerce? If not, who will? Will planners insist that on all large scale developments all services are laid in one single channel so that roads do not need to be dug up. 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 5 2c Infrastructure IBC should produce an SPD on s106 obligations. Growth should be matched by growth in infrastructure County and linked to s106 obligations. Growth will need to extra demand for services- at least 1 extra primary Council school and one high school will be needed. Improve bus facilities, including the station and strategic locations. Address town centre congestion. Reduce adverse effects of traffic- environment and quality of life. Cycling and walking links within and into town. Enhance public rights of way.
1 I Wedd 6 0 0 Conservation Heritage and Wildlife sites should be protected and more encouraged 1 I Wedd 6 0 Design Growth and heritage can be achieved where the quality of dev is high. New dev should be in harmony with its surroundings. May mean limiting the height and style of new buildings. Skyline is important. Pastiche should be avoided. 33 N Brigham Sustrans 6 3 23 Conservation Q23 Option 3 109 J Welsh Green Living 6 23 Conservation Option 1 for wildlife, option 2 for buildings. Centre and protection
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 183 A Fuller 6 1 23 Conservation We have lost too much of our history already. & Protection 193 John Ireland 6 3 23 Conservation & Protection 288 Mrs J Seaton 6 1 23 Conservation Development of the interior of buildings is good if sensitively done e.g. St Stephen's Church. 447 B C Pinner 6 3 23 Conservation 454 J Fairclough 6 1 23 Conservation Option 1 - only very minor changes should be permitted to areas or buildings of interest, because Ipswich has lost many features of its historic environment which would have given it special character. Its historical character could have been a tourist attraction with economic value. Many historic buildings that do survive are scattered throughout the town. We must preserve not only the obvious features e.g. Christchurch Mansion, but also less obvious features, in order to preserve our historic identity. Buildings need to be kept in use so some minor change may be needed, but not wholesale removal of valuable parts of our heritage just because they may be perceived to be not of the highest quality. The Council should identify all areas and buildings of interest in order to support this approach. Ipswich Heritage Group are working on this.
489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 6 1 23 Conservation The wording of the options makes it difficult to comment, because a). the options just refer to "areas" Wildlife Trust without expanding further, and b). All the options allow for some degree of change to these areas , with the areas of interest "identified by the Council". The wording is therefore ambiguous and does not allow the respondent to choose to fully safeguard historic parks and locations with wildlife designations. We have chosen option 1, but we are not satisfied that this fully addresses the issue or accords with RSS.
490 A C Raworth 6 3 23 Conservation Option 3 - this will protect buildings of interest and prevent them from falling into disrepair. 491 Mrs V Andrews 6 1 23 Conservation 493 Rose Freeman The Theatres 6 3 23 Conservation Trust
507 T Beaven 6 4 23 Conservation Option 4. 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 6 3 23 Conservation Cant preserve untouched in 21st century otherwise no use in modern world - old and new can work in L harmony. 535 R Hopwood Bidwells 6 3 23 Conservation Options 1 & 2 make gross assumptions that a development would cause harm, which is an unsound position for a policy that would be more concerned with the detail rather than the principle of the development. The Core Strategy policies should not make a presumption against development. A development should be assessed on its merits and the impact it makes.
539 R Tustain Broadway duplicates 6 3 23 Conservation Allows the potential to enhance quality and environment. Malyan 928
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 543 Tom Clayton 6 2 23 Conservation Preserve the best bits, but don't hold back development without good reason 558 P R Richards 6 1 23 Conservation 567 R Gape 6 3 23 Conservation Good observation shows that historically Ipswich has mutated on a very pragmatic and often historically unaware basis. The Ipswich Town Centre roof-line tells its own mixed story of pragmatism and sometimes surprising care. 568 C Miller 6 1 23 Conservation Option 1 - is preferred to ensure that only very minor changes are permitted to areas (or buildings) of interest. Any area than has sufficient natural or historic importance to be of interest has sufficient merit to be protected against property development. I consider Option 2 to be too permissive. To require that a proposed development 'may be seen as beneficial' is too weak and subjective a criterion.
577 Michael Brain 6 23 Conservation All four of these options seem to me to be prescriptive and formulaic, and therefore do not allow for a & Protection pragmatic balance to be struck between the value of heritage against the value of the present and future life of Ipswich. We may be able to agree the value of our heritage, but we cannot anticipate the value of the new development needs which may arise, hence we should decide every case on individual priority. Perhaps by cataloguing, characterising, and prioritising all heritage sites, and then seeking to define a "heritage quarter" for preservation, and promoting more controversial developments in other quarters. Hence, apply Option 1 or 2 in a Heritage Quarter, Option 3 or 4 elsewhere.
578 L Jenkins Suffolk 6 1 23 Conservation Constabulary
579 R Henderson RSPB 6 1 23 Conservation The Core Strategy should incorporate policies to ensure the conservation of biodiversity and the environment and promoting a diverse environment rich in wildlife and habitats. The RSPB strongly supports an overarching policy to conserve and enhance biodiversity. The environmental and ecological aspects of the Borough are key contributors to local character and distinctiveness, illustrating the necessity for biodiversity conservation to play a major role in the Council’s Local Development Framework (LDF).Biodiversity is a key indicator of the state of the environment. An attractive environment rich in open space and biodiversity is central to a good quality of life for residents and provides opportunities for quiet recreation and attracting visitors. Environmental enhancement provides opportunity for delivery of Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) targets and socio-economic benefit. In compliance with PPS9, we recommend that the Council map important sites for wildlife, making clear distinctions between sites designated at a national, regional and local level. Policies accompanying the map should ensure the safeguarding of such sites designated for their conservation importance. PPS9 also recommends the identification of
584 T & S Groot- 6 6 23 Conservation All listed buildings, parks etc. should have blanket protection. Wassink
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 6 3 23 Conservation Option 3 would not stifle sympathetic development that is respectful of the protected areas/buildings. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 6 3 23 Conservation 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 6 3 23 Conservation Option 3 would not stifle sympathetic development that is respectful of the protected areas/buildings. Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 6 1 23 Conservation 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 6 3 23 Conservation Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 6 3 23 Conservation 769 Mrs S Brown Inland 6 1 23 Conservation Waterways Association 900 R Duncan 6 3 23 conservation Option 3 and protection
902 S Duncan 6 3 23 conservation Option 3 and protection
906 P Birdsall 6 1 23 conservation Option 1 and protection
912 Mrs R J Southworth 6 1 23 Conservation 928 Mr R Tustain Broadway 6 3 23 Conservation Allows the potential to enhance quality and environment. Malyan Planning 931 D C Harper 6 1 23 Conservation Least corrupt. 952 Mr S Bretherton 6 2 23 Conservation
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 971 Mr D Kidney English 6 3 23 Conservation Option 3: Provided that ‘as good as, or better than’ takes into account the biodiversity and geological Nature conservation interests of the site in question, this option is preferred (i.e. changes that would be detrimental to the biological and/or geological conservation interests of a statutory or non-statutory site should not be permitted). We advise caution with respect to Options 1 and 2, as ‘minor changes’, if they cause a net loss to the biodiversity or geological conservation interests of a site, are not sustainable. We strongly disagree with Option 4 as this implies that the council should not give regard to non-statutory sites (such as County Wildlife Sites) or to Local Biodiversity Action Plan habitats outside of statutory protected sites. This approach would be against the interests of both biodiversity and geological conservation and the quality of life for members of the community and would not accord with the Council’s obligations under PPS9. NB. The planning authority is required by law to consult English Nature before granting planning permission for development likely to damage a SSSI, regardless of which of the f
972 N Cenci IBC 6 2 23 Conservation Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 6 1 23 Conservation C Group 978 Mrs G Ellis 6 3 23 Conservation 983 K MacFadyen 6 2 23 Conservation Protect the best and allow others to change. We need to be practical. 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 6 1 23 Conservation Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 6 1 23 Conservation Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 6 1 23 Conservation Preservation Society 608 M Norden Suffolk 6 23 Conservation None of the options mentions conservation areas, historic parks or wildlife designations. This must be an Biodiversity oversight. Please refer to earlier comments (issues 1 and 2). Partnership 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 6 23 Heritage and Note ENV3 of RSS- biodiversity/ greenspace targets. Consider improving database on historic County conservation environment assets and characterising historic landscape. Consult SCC Archaeological Service on this. Council 54 Mr & Mrs James 6 24 Protect central The older buildings in central Ipswich and on the main streets should be protected to retain what W F Ipswich character is left- and prevent Ipswich from looking like every other county town.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 103 L Cunningham 6 24 Listed Should provide blanket protection for all of our listed buildings. buildings protection 105 W Last 6 24 Protect wildlife All wildlife sites should be protected. sites 106 P Stephenson 6 1 24 Protection and Protect areas of historic importance or architectural value. conservation
107 P Horne 6 24 Areas to Parks and green spaces for leisure, historic town centre buildings which give Ipswich its character. protect 109 J Welsh Green Living 6 24 Types of areas Protected green areas need to be protected, especially designated ones, e.g. CWS, LNR. Centre to protect
111 S Young 6 24 Protection and Protect all relevant designated areas. conservation
118 D Harper 6 24 Protection and Protect listed buildings, green areas and construct green corridors radially throughout the area. conservation
120 Edwards 6 24 Listed Protect listed buildings. buildings protection 131 M. Hill 6 24 Protect wildlife Protection of wildlife. sites 183 A Fuller 6 24 Conservation Everything built pre-1939. & Protection 190 Angela & Ellis 6 24 All special areas should be preserved - once historic buildings are lost they can not be replaced. Also, it Mark is important that areas for wildlife should not be lost. 193 John Ireland 6 24 Conservation Green' areas (e.g.. Gipping Riverside) & Protection 261 L. Williams 6 24 Preservation Unspoilt areas with minimal development. Parks. Nearby places for people to get away from an urban and setting. conservation 264 D. Seaton 6 24 Preservation Protect rural/agricultural land, buildings or historic/architectural interest and public parks. and conservation 284 M. Bowen 6 24 Heritage and Protect listed buildings/settings, conservation areas. Scope of conservation areas should be extended. conservation
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 288 Mrs J Seaton 6 24 Conservation Farm land. 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 6 24 Conservation All designated sites for nature conservation, statutory and non-statutory, e.g. SPA, SSSI, Ramsar, County Wildlife Trust Wildlife Sites and LNRs. Also those areas that contribute to the ecological network outside designated sites should be safeguarded and enhanced in accordance with PPS9.
490 A C Raworth 6 24 Conservation Areas, parks and buildings of historical interest and of ecological value. 491 Mrs V Andrews 6 24 Conservation open spaces. Also housing areas around new university so they are not swamped by the university buildings. 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 6 24 Conservation Green spaces/parkland L 543 Tom Clayton 6 24 Conservation Parks/greenspaces - areas of some individuality 558 P R Richards 6 24 Conservation The council should seek to protect the green spaces in and around Ipswich. Should increase the quality of new buildings so that they are designed to complement the existing character of urban areas.
577 Michael Brain 6 24 Conservation Yes, at one level, Ipswich is rich in heritage in the form of complete buildings and areas of the town which & Protection inform and enhance present life in some way or another, even for residents with no specialist knowledge. At another level, the alternative is the mundane homogeneity of modern towns: it is so very disheartening to go to a new town and find it looks and feels just like all the rest! The Willis building must be a classic example of modernity amongst the historic, and it will always be controversial yet valuable. Heritage is not just the old: it is the valuable, of whatever age, and for whatever reason, and everyone should be entitled to have their say in seeking to protect each individual instance.
579 R Henderson RSPB 6 24 Conservation Green spaces, open areas, wildlife corridors, roadside verges, the river corridors and imp wildlife areas.
595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 6 24 Heritage and Existing levels of protection are satisfactory. Salter conservation 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 6 24 Heritage and Existing levels of protection are satisfactory. Campus conservation Suffolk 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 6 24 Heritage and Existing levels of protection are satisfactory. Woodrow conservation Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 6 24 Heritage and Existing levels of protection are satisfactory. ABP has worked to integrate environmental considerations British Ports conservation into its work, with leading development that meet challenging Habitats Regulations of 1995. Ports have a role in assisting authorities in their biodiversity and conservation goals.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 6 24 Heritage and Existing levels of protection are satisfactory. JG Land has a continuing dialogue with environmental conservation organisations/agencies and works towards shared objectives that benefit the environment..
611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 6 24 Conservation Existing levels of protection are satisfactory. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 6 24 Conservation Self contained historic interest only. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 6 24 Conservation Existing levels of protection are satisfactory. Development s Ltd 731 Mr & Mrs McKie 6 24 Conservation The Council should fiercely protect historic parks and wildlife areas, and also historic buildings. Building on brownfield sites in conservation areas needs to be done with sensitivity.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 6 24 Conservation Parks and sports grounds and other recreational areas. Residents' Association 740 H Kembery 6 24 Conservation We need green spaces and wildlife areas and listed buildings add character to the area. Humans are not robots - they need outdoor and leisure activities. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 6 24 Conservation Protect town centre and parks International and protection
783 E Phillips 6 24 Conservation Protect the Hadleigh Road corridor north of Chantry Park- the views are marvellous. and protection
820 A Bumstead 6 24 Conservation Protect remaining ancient houses (e.g. in Fore Street, College Street, Silent Street, etc; industrial and protection heritage e.g. Brewery.
897 M. Allison IBC 6 24 conservation Protect designated wildlife sites (statutory and non-statutory). Existing parks and open spaces (including Environment and protection Orwell Country park) and historic parks. They are irreplaceable and an asset to the community. Protection Panel 899 G Duncan 6 24 conservation Preserve open green spaces. and protection
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 900 R Duncan 6 24 conservation Preserve open green spaces. and protection
906 P Birdsall 6 24 conservation Preserve green spaces and high quality wildlife habitat. and protection
912 Mrs R J Southworth 6 24 Conservation Buildings connected with the town's history. 931 D C Harper 6 24 Conservation Protect the few unspoilt historic buildings, all green areas especially to maintain radial green corridors.
952 Mr S Bretherton 6 24 Conservation Parks and sports playing fields. 957 A Fenton 6 24 Conservation Unsure of real meaning of statements or which buildings or areas would be covered. But I think we should be careful not to lose anything of historic or local significance to the town. The balance between loss or improvement needs to be carefully assessed. 971 Mr D Kidney English 6 24 Conservation The Council is advised to follow the guidelines laid out in PPS9 and the Government Circular: Nature Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – statutory obligations and their impact within the planning system . Section 1 (ii) of PPS9 states that: ‘Plan policies and planning decisions should aim to maintain, and enhance, restore or add to biodiversity and geological conservation interests. In taking decisions, local planning authorities should ensure that appropriate weight is attached to designated sites of international, national and local importance; protected species; and to biodiversity and geological interests within the wider environment.’
972 N Cenci IBC 6 24 Conservation Listed buildings and wildlife. Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 6 24 Conservation Conservation area boundaries need reviewing and extending. We should strengthen or abolish the local C Group listing of buildings of interest since currently it gives buildings absolutely no protection. We should look at conserving and improving areas and buildings of interest in less affluent areas of the town.
990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 6 24 Conservation All. Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 6 24 Conservation All historic town centre churches. Old Ipswich Ragged School Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 1002 R Ward Suffolk 6 24 Conservation Conservation areas and listed buildings and parks and their settings. Preservation Society 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 6 24 Conservation Naturally important sites- SSSIs, SPAs etc. Clear policies should protect biodiversity and contribute to the Countryside Wildlife and Countryside Act. Local Wildlife Sites that contribute to an ecological network or provide Project public links between other green spaces.
302 David Saunders 6 24 Protect Protect the countryside around the edge of town - should retain this natural asset and its wildlife for countryside posterity. 608 M Norden Suffolk 6 24 Conservation All designated sites for nature conservation, statutory and non statutory, including SPA, RAMSAR, Biodiversity SSSIs, NNRs, CWSs and LNRs. Partnership 968 Mr M Fleming Suffolk 6 24 Heritage and Option 1 for conservation areas, historic parks and wildlife designations. Green corridors into and out of County conservation town should be protected. In context of possible N.Fringe development- promote ecological corridors. Council Decisions should be based on up-to-date ecological information. Note the Suffolk Urban Habitat Diversity Action Plan. 75 A Gunn 6 25 Protecting Parks and playing field should be preserved. open spaces 103 L Cunningham 6 25 Heritage areas St Nicholas Street, parts of Silent Street, Fore Street, Grimwade Street and Tacket Street are very to protect attractive. There are listed buildings in these areas that should continue to be protected.
105 W Last 6 25 East Bank Link Protect areas of land in this area. Road 109 J Welsh Green Living 6 25 Areas to Pipers Vale- donated by King John- would have major impact if road built. Centre protect
139 S. Ion Councillor for 6 25 Protect parks Protect existing park areas. Rushmere
183 A Fuller 6 25 Conservation As above & Protection 193 John Ireland 6 25 Conservation Pipers Vale and nearby. Essential for wildlife and important resource for expanding population in & Protection Ravenswood area. 256 G. Knight 6 25 Conservation Council should protect wildlife sites and nature reserve within Orwell Country Park (I.e. Braziers Wood and and Pipers Vale). preservation
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 259 M. Duhm 6 25 Conservation Ipswich docks is an historic area. Protect medieval town centre buildings. and preservation 261 L. Williams 6 25 Preservation Pipers Vale and conservation 284 M. Bowen 6 25 Heritage and Town centre conservation area. conservation 288 Mrs J Seaton 6 25 Conservation The northern Fringe. It is top grade amenity land and first class agricultural land. 489 Dr S Bullion Suffolk 6 25 Conservation As above, all should be protected. Wildlife Trust
490 A C Raworth 6 25 Conservation No. 491 Mrs V Andrews 6 25 Conservation Green spaces in town e.g.. churchyards for wildlife and trees. People do not want to be hemmed in - they need to see the sky. 523 Councillor Gooch IBC 6 25 Conservation Orwell Country Park- people need open space to enjoy. Also old half timbered buildings on waterfront - L can only glimpse them from road - need better settings. 558 P R Richards 6 25 Conservation The green spaces in Ipswich and the countryside around the perimeter of Ipswich which forms a green belt which improves the quality of life of people living in Ipswich. 567 R Gape 6 25 Conservation See answer to Q21 above. The historic area between the Docks and the Town Centre to avoid destruction of heritage. 577 Michael Brain 6 25 Conservation The council should protect its parks and open spaces; protect and promote the regeneration of the town & Protection centre for shopping and entertainment; protect important heritage sites and that some kind of catalogue be produced listing all such sites. Of course, for a vast proportion of the local population, ITFC is the heart of the town and that is where the ground should be: but I struggle to reconcile such romantic metaphors with practical reality, not least the inconvenience and even danger caused to residents of the immediate neighbourhood from saturation parking and traffic congestion.
579 R Henderson RSPB 6 25 Conservation Waterways should be protected, esp the Orwell and Gipping rivers. Downstream from the Borough boundary the Orwell is designated a SPA therefore upstream activities that may have an impact must be controlled under Directive 79/409eec on the Conservation of Wild Birds (the 'Birds Directive')
599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 6 25 Heritage and No particular areas needing protection. UCS operations will seek economic and environmental Campus conservation sustainability. Suffolk
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 6 25 Heritage and No- the River Orwell is already protected, as are many areas close to most ABP ports. ABP manages its British Ports conservation operations to respect these areas, to be economically and environmentally sustainable.
606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 6 25 Heritage and No. conservation 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 6 25 Conservation No. Green Properties Ltd
613 Mr Chris Mole MP 6 25 Conservation Historic courtyards with aesthetic merit. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 6 25 Conservation No. Development s Ltd 739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 6 25 Conservation Halifax Road Bowling Club and Bourne Vale Club and green. There are no other facilities on Maidenhall Residents' Estate. Association 740 H Kembery 6 25 Conservation Green and wildlife areas. Wildlife is decreasing according to recent studies, and this can have unforeseen consequences in years to come. 769 Mrs S Brown Inland 6 25 Conservation We would like to see the River Gipping Navigation structures protected for their unique historic interest. Waterways Association 848 P. Taylor 6 25 Conservation Conserve Pipers Vale. and protection
856 J. Jones 6 25 conservation Protect historic buildings within town centre, waterfront and Christchurch Park. and protection
857 A. Jones 6 25 conservation Protect historic buildings within town centre, waterfront and Christchurch Park. and protection
900 R Duncan 6 25 conservation Preserve North Ipswich. and protection
902 S Duncan 6 25 conservation Preserve green belt around current developments. and protection
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 912 Mrs R J Southworth 6 25 Conservation The AWS Theatre, now a pub. The old barracks wall with its horse rings and troughs. Wolsey's house and the Ancient House. The old town street plan. 938 Mrs E Burrows 6 25 Conservation Protect Broomhill Baths and bring them back into use. 952 Mr S Bretherton 6 25 Conservation The parks which are unique to Ipswich. 957 A Fenton 6 25 Conservation All the parks, recreation grounds, nature reserves, allotments historic buildings and sites, lanes and religious buildings. 971 Mr D Kidney English 6 25 Conservation Ipswich Borough contains, either entirely or partially, three Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs): Nature The Orwell Estuary SSSI (a component of the Stour & Orwell Estuaries SPA and Ramsar site), Stoke Tunnel Cutting SSSI and Bixley Heath SSSI. Ipswich Borough also contains, either entirely or partially, six Local Nature Reserves (LNRs), 18 County Wildlife Sites and a number of sites of geological interest. Development planning for areas in the vicinity of these sites must take into account the indirect affects that development may have of the interest features of these sites.
976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 6 25 Conservation The area bounded by Norwich Road, Handford Road, and Chevallier Street. C Group 981 Mr D A Cooper 6 25 Conservation Why has Wolsey's Gateway been allowed to deteriorate so badly? 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 6 25 Conservation More Article 4 Directions for conservation areas. Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 6 25 Conservation Wolsey's Gateway should be historically renovated Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 6 25 Conservation Conservation areas and listed buildings and parks and their settings. Preservation Society 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 6 25 Conservation The areas that make up Orwell Country Park- 25% of the Borough's biodiversity capital- should be clearly Countryside and categorically protected form development. Project
608 M Norden Suffolk 6 25 Conservation As above, all should be protected. Biodiversity Partnership 65 D Morgan 6 26 Conservation This should be a major priority. Too often in the past historical buildings have been lost in the name of so- called progress.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 105 W Last 6 26 Previous By listening to objections on previous development the Council has got the balance of protection about Council right. protection 106 P Stephenson 6 26 Previous Yes, the Council has got the balance right. Council protection 109 J Welsh Green Living 6 26 Previous Good so far- but cannot yet tell with current administration. Centre Council protection 118 D Harper 6 26 Balance of Balance between heritage and development has been poor. Need more emphasis on preservation and protection/ less on e.g. new Waterfront developments. development 139 S. Ion Councillor for 6 26 Balance of Yes, the Council has got the balance right. Rushmere protection/ development 183 A Fuller 6 26 Conservation It could do better. What about the Wolsey Gate. It is a disgrace. & Protection 193 John Ireland 6 26 Conservation Generally, yes. & Protection 243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 6 26 Preservation Balance of development vs conservation- not achieved in recent proposals. the Earth, and Suffolk conservation Wildlife Trust
259 M. Duhm 6 26 Conservation Balance has mostly been right though opportunities for museum/visitor centres. and preservation 261 L. Williams 6 26 Preservation Previous balance- development and protection- about right. and conservation 284 M. Bowen 6 26 Heritage and previous balance between development and conservation- about right. conservation 288 Mrs J Seaton 6 26 Conservation Not if the northern fringe development happens. Await with interest. 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 6 26 Conservation Up to now, balance right- but with its new growth role, development should not be inhibited in the future. Planning Kesgrave Covenant Limited
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 447 B C Pinner 6 26 Conservation No. They are often petty over buildings of little historic interest simply because of their location.
490 A C Raworth 6 26 Conservation Yes. 491 Mrs V Andrews 6 26 Conservation Not sure. The docks have lost their character and have too much housing and not enough open space.
507 T Beaven 6 26 Conservation Unsure. 543 Tom Clayton 6 26 Conservation Historically no, but now much more encouraging 558 P R Richards 6 26 Conservation The council has been better than many at protecting the environment but it needs to be increasingly protective to ensure quality of life and long term economic success. 567 R Gape 6 26 Conservation Development has not always been in tune with conserving the good things about redeveloped areas.
577 Michael Brain 6 26 Conservation I believe that a strategy for the development of Ipswich would be a valuable aid to the overall planning & Protection and development process. I would therefore simply re-iterate my observations that Ipswich is rich in heritage and in open spaces but, regarding recent developments: the Cardinal Park development is not a versatile centre for family entertainment; the Waterfront Development, while impressive and even inspirational, seems perverse in the context of global warming and flood risk, appears to lack any transport infrastructure; as a town-centre resident, I find it ironic that I have to drive to out-of-town supermarkets for much of my domestic shopping. I therefore welcome this broad-ranging consultation, and hope that the Council will indeed begin to consider the long-term strategic issues which it raises, many of which are national if not global, but which nevertheless require some preparedness for action, very probably within the next fifteen years.
603 C Shah LIDL UK 6 26 Heritage and The Council has not always got the balance right. GmbH conservation 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 6 26 Heritage and No- it has been too cautious. New development can sensitively retain or adapt listed buildings. But British Ports conservation demolition and high quality redevelopment should be allowed where a building is beyond economic repair. Sensitive ecological sites can be improved, or relocated to more appropriate locations where appropriate. 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 6 26 Heritage and No- it has been too cautious. New development can sensitively retain or adapt listed buildings. But conservation demolition and high quality redevelopment should be allowed where a building is beyond economic repair. Sensitive ecological sites can be improved, or relocated to more appropriate locations where appropriate. 611 Mr R Houghton Bidwells St Margaret's 6 26 Conservation No. Council has been too cautious. New development could sensitively retain or adapt listed buildings but Green if a protected building is beyond economic repair, its special character should be carefully recorded prior Properties to demolition to make way for exemplar design which marks the 21st Century. Ltd
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 613 Mr Chris Mole MP 6 26 Conservation Yes. 730 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Star Lane 6 26 Conservation No. Council has been too cautious. New development could sensitively retain or adapt listed buildings but Development if a protected building is beyond economic repair, its special character should be carefully recorded prior s Ltd to demolition to make way for exemplar design which marks the 21st Century.
739 Mr G A Moore Maidenhall 6 26 Conservation No. A case in point is the new Asda on Stoke Park. Residents' Association 773 K Oliver 6 26 Conservation This is so subjective that there is no wrong or right answer to these questions. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 6 26 Previous Doubtful. Recent flat building raises the question of how the need was decided. International conservation
783 E Phillips 6 26 Previous Too much housing and flat development in the centre has removed areas better for jobs. conservation 856 J. Jones 6 26 previous Concern- removal of historic buildings along Waterfront. Guard against this in the future. conservation and protection
857 A. Jones 6 26 previous Concern- removal of historic buildings along Waterfront. Guard against this in the future. conservation and protection
897 M. Allison IBC 6 26 conservation Previous balance about right. Environment and protection Protection Panel 902 S Duncan 6 26 previous Recent expansion has been of poor quality housing, creating undesirable living environments.Failure to conservation provide prospects for educated youths. and protection
912 Mrs R J Southworth 6 26 Conservation No. 931 D C Harper 6 26 Conservation Rarely. 952 Mr S Bretherton 6 26 Conservation There has been too much constraint in the past. Ipswich needs a bolder, more forward thinking vision to fulfil its potential as a major regional centre. Norwich appears to have a better approach than Ipswich towards new roads and infrastructure, for example.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 957 A Fenton 6 26 Conservation Not sure. We lost a lot of precious historic buildings in the 20thC, but maybe they were beyond repair. If we had kept the merchant buildings around the docks, old theatre/citadel in Tacket Street, the Hippodrome, Arts Theatre in Tower St, old ramparts and airport, they could have helped to fuel our tourism and provide the variety of facilities that the residents need. Those that remain could be made more of, eg. Wolsey's gate. But I also accept the need for development to provide the town with employment. 972 N Cenci IBC 6 26 Conservation Overall, yes. Councillor 976 Councillor Jones IBC Labour 6 26 Conservation Generally, yes. C Group 990 Mr J Chapman The Ipswich 6 26 Conservation Yes. Society
1001 Mr Dave Cooper Christian 6 26 Conservation No, it has failed especially in the dock area Peoples Alliance - Ipswich Branch 1002 R Ward Suffolk 6 26 Conservation No. Protection involves also ensuring that new development is of the highest quality. Whilst the Council Preservation has protected and enhanced the historic built environment, it has not paid the same attention to detail in Society new developments especially in Ipswich Village and the Waterfront and those abutting the conservation area. 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 6 26 Conservation Some outcomes have been unsatisfactory- fear that with pressure for growth important sites could be Countryside lost. Project
302 David Saunders 6 26 Balance betw. Do not repeat Ravenswood elsewhere - poorly planned and architecturally undesirable. protection and growth
608 M Norden Suffolk 6 26 Conservation No comment. Biodiversity Partnership 243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 6 24 & Preservation Pipers Vale, Braziers Wood, ancient woodland and open space are invaluable. the Earth, 25 and Suffolk conservation Wildlife Trust
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 5 M Smith 6 Conservation/ Accepts the need to balance better conservation & future needs - but not expensive tower blocks. Should Waterfront rescue neglected buildings near Christchurch Mansion. Protect all listed buildings - to omany have been buildings neglected. 8 J A Cook 6 1 Conservation Cannot afford to lose any more historic buildings - past redev has led to a loss of character. 14 B Samuel 6 Conservation Listed buildings should be granted appropriate c/u to help protect them. 15 L Caudle 6 Conservation Concern about decay and dereliction of Elizabethan houses in the town 17 K Holley 6 Conservation Should protect all LBs, CAs, Historic parks and wildlife sites. Objects to any loss of green space for housing 19 A Lloyd-Evans 6 Conservation Protect historic parks, conservation areas and listed buildings.
26 M A Bolton 6 Conservation Must ensure Ipswich maintains its character- a market town with many historic buildings in a green agricultural setting. 27 S Boa 6 Conservation Listed Buildings and parks should be protected 34 H McNaughton 6 Conservation Preserve Historic Buildings and Cons Areas at all costs
38 S Steward 6 Old buildings Look after old buildings 41 J E Trowell 6 Protection of Protect the best historic areas and natural sites. areas 50 M Baker 6 24 Providing for Provision for open space, parks and recreational facilities is vital to making Ipswich a pleasant place to open space live. 61 N Blaken EEDA 6 Protecting The LDF should protect and enhance the region's landscapes and environmental assets. environmental assets 74 J Melton 6 Historic Need to ensure town centre development does not overrun historic buildings/churches. buildings/churc hes 80 S Pinder- 6 2 Protection of Qu23: Option 2 Banthorpe areas of interest 106 P Stephenson 6 1 Protection and Option 1- Areas of interest should be preserved for the benefit of future generations. conservation
107 P Horne 6 1 Q. 23: Option 1 109 J Welsh Green Living 6 Protection and There should be a key policy relation to wildlife and biodiversity. Towns with green areas and thriving Centre conservation wildlife population thrive.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 109 J Welsh Green Living 6 Protection and It is very wrong to confuse wildlife and building conservation. Centre conservation
109 J Welsh Green Living 6 Protection and Building conservation is important but we also need to improve SAP ratings of buildings- thus minor Centre Conservation changes may be necessary.
109 J Welsh Green Living 6 Omission Retain some brownfield sites for adding green areas. Some green areas are needed in urban areas to Centre provide wildlife and diversity in built up areas.
119 B Noll 6 24 Protection and Protect listed buildings and parks. conservation
139 S. Ion Councillor for 6 3 Protection and Protect areas around town centre with large Victorian houses from conversion to flats. Rushmere conservation
185 Daniel Sanford 6 Conservation Protection: (a) protect all. (options b and c are too vague). Protect all open and green spaces for wildlife & Protection habitat and movement corridors + public health, use and appreciation. 198 Paul Remblance 6 1 Conservation All conservation sites and nature designations are here for a reason. Why challenge these? (Option a). & Protection 243 P.&J. Lusardi Friends of 6 4 Preservation the Earth, and Suffolk conservation Wildlife Trust
259 M. Duhm 6 1 Conservation and preservation 264 D. Seaton 6 1 Preservation and conservation 284 M. Bowen 6 1 Heritage and conservation 360 C. Rope Bill Wilson The 6 4 Conservation Option 4. Planning Kesgrave Covenant Limited 391 J E Beaumont 6 Listed More buildings should be listed - anything that predates 1960. buildings
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 458 S Speight 6 Conservation All designated areas should be protected. Why should policy change just because of regional targets?
493 Rose Freeman The Theatres 6 Omission There should be reference to the protection and promotion of arts and cultural activities. The DPD should Trust include a policy about theatre, linked to the Council's cultural and tourism strategies.
511 Mr Nick Vass-Bowen GO East 6 Omission - The Core Strategy will include the Council's development control policies and are therefore surprised to development see no information included about them. Developing such policies through a consultative approach is as control policies important as in other policy areas. Area topics and themes should be identified. IBC should use any further opportunities in the regulation 25 stage to consult on generic development control policies.
549 Ishaku Maitumbi EERA 6 Conservation No comment and Protection
595 Mr R Houghton Bidwells Skinner 6 3 Heritage and Option 3 would not stifle sympathetic development that respects protected areas or buildings. Salter conservation 599 I Lockwood Bidwells University 6 3 Heritage and Campus conservation Suffolk 603 C Shah LIDL UK 6 3 Heritage and GmbH conservation 604 I Lockwood Bidwells Taylor 6 3 Heritage and Woodrow conservation Development s Ltd. 605 Mr M O'Hara Associated 6 3 Heritage and ABP is committed to using science to apply environmental knowledge in port design and development. British Ports conservation ABP works with environmental agencies and organisations to find ways of developing port facilities in an environmentally acceptable way. 606 P Clarke Bidwells JG Land 6 3 Heritage and JG Land believe that the knowledge exists to allow changes to areas of interest and establish conservation environmental improvement. It is committed to using science to develop pdl and preserve the best features or buildings of interest in new development. 617 S Rosenberg 6 Conservation Offer them all blanket protection. 782 Miss Dorrell Soroptimist 6 3 Conservation Option 3 most logical. International and protection
783 E Phillips 6 1 Conservation Option 1; Our historic areas and buildings must be preserved, not destroyed. Add green areas to and protection conservation areas.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 810 J Lusardi 6 Conservation Offer blanket protection from development to all conservation areas, historic parks and sites with wildlife and protection designations.
820 A Bumstead 6 3 Conservation Option 3 and protection
850 S. Sadler 6 2 Conservation Option 2 and protection
855 R. Worman 6 1 conservation blanket protection for listed buildings, etc. and protection
856 J. Jones 6 3 conservation Protect protected areas. Development should be allowed if it is sympathetic. and protection
857 A. Jones 6 3 conservation Protect protected areas. Development should be allowed if it is sympathetic. and protection
898 B Glover 6 conservation Retain as many old buildings as possible. and protection
899 G Duncan 6 3 conservation Option 3: need to move forwards. and protection
903 J Ames 6 conservation Development should match the local environment and protection
971 Mr D Kidney English 6 Conservation - Biological and geological conservation should be covered as a separate issue to the conservation and Nature omission protection of areas of historic importance as the 2 issues are underpinned by different legislation and require different approaches to policy making. Within a biodiversity and geological conservation section we would wish to see reference to the Council's obligations for the enhancement of biological and geological diversity under PPS9. The issues of natural habitat networks and the provision of green infrastructure and green space are also relevant to enhancement and need to be addressed.
1005 D Dufty Transport 6 1 Conservation Too many mistakes have been made based on options 2-4 in the past. 2000 Group Ipswich and Suffolk
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 1007 Mr James Baker Greenways 6 1 Conservation Option 1 in relation to nature designations. Emphasis on important areas and protecting their integrity. Countryside Project
17 K Holley n/a Givens Should not take RSS targets as cast in stone - are out of step with needs and aspirations of Ipswich people. More houses will lead to greater pollution, traffic congestion and a burden on local resources esp. water. 25 T Leggatt n/a Givens Does not agree that growth is necessary or that we should seek to provide it- "only the bankers and developers say we need more housing" 26 M A Bolton n/a Givens Do not want Ipswich to become a city - escalation of crime and overpopulation. Would be a need for hospitals, schools etc and the area would be less healthy to live in. 27 S Boa n/a Givens Concerned that new housing may not all be needed. New blocks of flats are terrific. 30 P Meredith n/a Givens Concern about acceptance of Regional Policies and insufficient available land. 31 D Hindmarch n/a Givens Can our comments have any effect when you have to adhere to Govt legislation. Concerned about pollution, traffic growth and lack of facilities. 32 S Brinkley n/a Givens The idea of building in the south east is wrong - derelict and empty homes in the north and availability of water mean the north should be the focus. 36 C W Smith n/a Givens Environment should be the no. 1 issue. The approach set out is too narrow. 77 I Maitumbi EERA new Phasing The Core Strategy does not address how development will be phased to ensure housing, employment issue and infrastructure are progressed together. 63 K Gleeson Lambert National Process & PPS12 states that core strategies should set out broad locations for delivering housing and other Smith Offender content strategic needs such as essential public services. Para 4.1 encourages early consultation of government Hampton Management agencies, B3 requires a strategic approach to infrastructure provision. Service 109 J Welsh Green Living Omission Core strategy must address sustainability policies relating to climate change and energy sources. We Centre must put more emphasis on renewable energy technologies/ micro generation and better building stock with better SAP standards. See RSS policy ENV8. 135 J. Woodall Extend Should extend borough boundary to address housing provision/ sites issue. borough boundaries 199 M J Howard Targets To the midlands or north of England. South East and East Anglia already overcrowded.
Please note that this database is still subject to editing Summary of Issues and Options Consultation Comments (26th September 2006 version)
Core Strategy and Policies Development Plan Document Respo Title/ Surname Organisation (On Behalf DPD Option Ques Topic Summary ndent Initials of) Issue tion 550 K Ashford Ipswich London Rd Seeks following: 1. withdrawal of London Rd allotment scheme: 2. Acknowledgement of need to retain as Allotment Allotments much greenfield land as poss: 3. Grant statutory status to all existing temporary fields that have been in Holders existence for more than 30 years: 4.An additional field to be provided to north of town to relieve pressure Assoc. Ltd on existing fields on that side of the town. The Assoc did not object to the ideas of providing affordable housing on field 7 London Rd because it was a minor dev that would have no great impact on the town. However, it is now clear that set out as a part of a much larger scheme in the consultation doc the loss of any allotments in the town would place IBC in the position where it would not be able to meet its statutory obligations.The IAHA has for the past few years been setting in place new field committees to run fields whenever the opp has presented itself. In every case it has resulted in a marked increase in lettings and there is every reason to believe that the London Rd field, which was formed earlier this year will follow this trend. Also town lettings are showing a year on year increase of 6%, a trend that is expected to contin
Please note that this database is still subject to editing