MM62.

Showing comments and forms 1 to 5 of 5

Object

Joint Local Plan Main Modifications

Representation ID: 22493

Received: 27/04/2023

Respondent: Sproughton Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Representation Summary:

p152 LP27. 7 We do not understand why grey water recycling has been taken out of the policies

Full text:

p152 LP27. 7 We do not understand why grey water recycling has been taken out of the policies

Attachments:

Support

Joint Local Plan Main Modifications

Representation ID: 22648

Received: 03/05/2023

Respondent: Anglian Water Services Ltd

Representation Summary:

Anglian Water supports the modifications to the policy, which provide greater clarity in relation to flood risk and the management of on-site surface water drainage. The reference to SuDS is particularly significant, since the Government announced its intention to implement Schedule Three of The Flood and Water Management Act 2010 to make SuDS mandatory in all new developments in England in 2024.

Full text:

Anglian Water supports the modifications to the policy, which provide greater clarity in relation to flood risk and the management of on-site surface water drainage. The reference to SuDS is particularly significant, since the Government announced its intention to implement Schedule Three of The Flood and Water Management Act 2010 to make SuDS mandatory in all new developments in England in 2024.

Object

Joint Local Plan Main Modifications

Representation ID: 22666

Received: 03/05/2023

Respondent: Environment Agency

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Representation Summary:

references to types of flooding should be amended to formal terminology, throughout Plan to ensure consistency and also correct interpretation.

Full text:

We would generally support a strongly worded Flood Risk and Vulnerability policy that helps to inform decision making by ensuring new developments are protected against the impact of any flood risk both now and in future, taking into consideration the effects of climate change, for the duration of a developments lifetime, and where possible ensure vulnerable forms of development are steered away from the highest risk Flood Zones.

We consider that Point 3 of "LP27" as it is now listed could be improved, by amending the titles of the types of flooding to the proper classifications: (ie Coastal Flooding would be better described as "Tidal Flooding". Fluvial is correct. these are the two types of flooding sources that the EA are responsible for advising upon. Surface water flooding, is better known as "Pluvial". You may have a coastal region that is affected by both Fluvial and Tidal flood risk for example, so best to use correct terminology.

These changes should be made throughout the Plan document, where required to ensure consistency of reference.

Object

Joint Local Plan Main Modifications

Representation ID: 22676

Received: 03/05/2023

Respondent: Pigeon Investment Management Ltd

Agent: Turley

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Representation Summary:

Pigeon supports a Policy which seeks to ensure that new development is appropriately located with respect to Flood Risk and minimise the risk of development being adversely affected by drainage issues. However, Pigeon object to Policy LP27 as currently worded on the basis that the Policy is not ‘justified’. The Policy needs to be re-drafted in such a way that the requirements are proportionate to the scale of development and can be met by future applicants on land within their legal control and to the adopted standards of statutory undertakers.

Change suggested by respondent:

See full representation

Full text:

The modifications to Parts 5 and 8 of the policy have not addressed Pigeon’s representations to the Regulation 19 consultation, or as expressed at the EiP. As such Pigeon continue to object to the policy on the basis that it is not justified. For ease of reference, their concerns to these aspects of the policy are repeated below.

Part ‘5’ of the Policy requires new development proposals to detail how on-site surface water drainage will be managed so that it does not increase flooding elsewhere. This is in accordance with the NPPF. It goes on to specify that this includes the cumulative impact of minor developments. As this part of the policy requires all new development to detail on-site surface water drainage, it applies to minor developments too. Therefore, there should not be a requirement on developers of other schemes to pick up the requirements of other minor schemes. As such, to make this policy sound, this requirement should be removed from the wording of the Policy.

Part ‘8’ requires details of the maintenance and adoption of the features as part of a planning application. This is not reasonable and should not be required at the application stage. The environment around adoption of assets is constantly evolving and addressed by other Acts and legislation which are best placed to determine this type of information. As such, to make this policy sound, this requirement should be removed from the wording of the Policy.

Support

Joint Local Plan Main Modifications

Representation ID: 22885

Received: 03/05/2023

Respondent: Suffolk County Council

Representation Summary:

SCC welcomes the changes made to this policy following comments made in our response to the previous Regulation 19 consultation. SCC now considers this policy to be sound.

Full text:

MM62: Policy LP29 (now LP27)
SCC welcomes the changes made to this policy following comments made in our response to the previous Regulation 19 consultation. SCC now considers this policy to be sound.

Attachments: