Strategic Environmental Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal - Proposed Submission Core Strategy and Policies DPD

Ended on the 5 March 2015

(2)Appendix B

Baseline Data

B. The Sustainability Baseline

B.1 Population

The following baseline indicators have been used to identify key population trends and characteristics:

  • Total population (2011 Census and Neighbourhood Statistics ).

  • Projected population growth to 2035 (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles)

  • Area of Ipswich Borough (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Population density (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Age structure of the population (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles and 2011 Census).

  • Mean household size (Strategic Housing Market Assessment Ipswich Borough Council, Data Review June 2012).

  • Percentage of single pensioner households (Neighbourhood Statistics).

  • Ethnic groups represented in the population (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

Ipswich has the highest population of all the districts within Suffolk. The population of the Borough has increased 1.4% per year since 2001, and between 2011 and 2013 from 128,300 people to 134,700, an increase of 6,400 (representing 5%). Ipswich has a relatively young population with 87,600 (65.7%) of working age which is 5% more than the average for the rest of Suffolk. Table B-1 below indicates the trend in population growth from 2001 to 2013. Table B-1 shows a relatively high level of growth across the Borough which is an indication why such a large number of new homes is considered necessary within Ipswich. The increase in population resulted from a mix of natural change (births – deaths) and net migration.

Table B-1 Population Change


Population Estimate






































*Populations are not estimates they are from the 2011 and 2001 Censuses and ONS Nomis

Source: Neighbourhood Statistics and the 2001 and 2011 Census and ONS Nomis

It is estimated that between 2010 and 2035, the population of the Borough will increase by 20.8% (Suffolk - 18.6%).

The Borough of Ipswich covers an area of 39km2. In 2010, the population density of Ipswich was 3,254 people per km2, significantly higher than the population density for Suffolk (189 people per km2) and that for England (401 people per km2). The Borough’s fairly high population density trend is anticipated to continue to 2035 based on projected population growth rates.

According to the 2011 Census, the population of the Borough continues to be heavily skewed to the 25-29 age cohort. Figure B-1 presents the age structure of the Borough based on 2011 mid-year statistics.

Figure B-1 Population Structure of Ipswich

Figure B-2 presents the East of England regional age structure based on the 2011 mid-year statistics.

Figure B-2 Regional Population Structure

The average household size in the East of England stood at 2.29 people per household in the 2011 Census and it is anticipated it will be about 2.17 by 2033 (Strategic Housing Market Assessment Ipswich Borough Council, Data Review June 2012). By 2033, the most common household type will be one person living alone; currently there are 6,750 of those over 65 who live in one person households. These single people will constitute nearly 50% of all households, with the actual number nearly doubling over the next twenty-five years. The number of lone parent households will have increased substantially too. Couple households with one or more other adult will see a decline of 20% as will “Other households” (includes lone parent households with all children non dependant) which are predicted to decrease by a third.

Ipswich has a relatively multicultural population. 2011 Census data indicated that 88.9% of the population of Ipswich were white, which is slightly lower than that for the East of England (90.8%) and slightly higher than that for England (87.1). Asian / Asian British are the main ethnic minority within Ipswich, representing 4.8.3% of the population (Population Estimates by ethnic group, Office for National Statistics).

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Population and household forecasts vary according to the assumptions made, but tend to be upwards. The projections used for this assessment are based on data and models included in Strategic Housing Market Assessment Ipswich Borough Council, Data Review June 2012.

B.2 Education and Qualifications

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise levels of education and attainment in the Borough:

  • Percentage of pupils achieving five or more GCSEs at Grades A* - C (including Mathematics and English) or equivalent (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Percentage of people aged 19 – 50/64 who have attained a Level Four NVQ or higher (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Percentage of the population aged 16-74 with no qualifications (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Most Deprived LSOAs for education, skills and training (ONS 201 Indices of Multiple Deprivation)

During the 2012 – 2013 school year in Ipswich 48.8% of pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 were achieving 5+ A*-C including English and Mathematics, which is less than the average for the East of England (59.7%) and England (60.6%).

Levels of educational attainment show a clear link to levels of affluence in later life, as access to employment improves with academic success. In 2010, there were 9,000 people in Ipswich with no qualifications; accounting for 11% of the population aged 16 to 64. Those with no qualifications in the East of England accounted for 10.8% of the population and within England 11.1%. Therefore this shows that Ipswich’s performance is average. In 2010, 31.9% of the population aged 19 - 64 (male) / 16 - 59 (female) had at least a Level 4 NVQCL1 qualification not significantly different from the East of England region.

Low skill levels, and the mismatch between supply and demand has long been a barrier to growth in Suffolk. According to the Suffolk Growth Strategy many young people have a limited understanding of work, the economic opportunities in Suffolk and how to be well prepared to secure employment. Employers’ state that one of the most critical factors to their business is being able to recruit people with the right personal skills for employment: literacy, numeracy, responsibility, communication and problem solving abilities.

Gipping, Priory Heath, Whitehouse, Castle Hill, Stoke Park, Rushmere Sprites and Gainsborough wards have LSOAs that fall within the 20% most deprived for education skills and training (ONS 2010 Indices of Multiple Deprivation).

It should be noted that Ipswich is home to University Campus Suffolk and Suffolk New College.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • There are no significant gaps or uncertainties identified for this topic.

Key Issues and Opportunities

  • Educational attainment across Ipswich is below the national average. Although the percentage of the population holding recognised qualifications is average across Ipswich, it is considered that low skill levels and the mismatch between supply and demand of qualified young people is one of the main barriers to economic growth.

  • There is a need to improve educational attainment in the Borough. By improving levels of educational attainment there could be wider social benefits and improvements to the local economy. However, there are limitations as to how far the DPDs could contribute to improving educational attainment.

B.3 Health

The following baseline data has been used to identify key trends:

  • Percentage of the resident population who consider themselves to be in good health (2011 Census).

  • Life expectancy at birth for males and females for the period 2009 – 2011 (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Distribution of and GPs and dentists (Ipswich Borough Council).

  • Distribution of sports facilities (Active Places).

  • Percentage of people participating in regular sport or exercise (defined as taking part on at least 3 days a week in moderate intensity sport and active recreation for at least 30 minutes continuously in any one session) (Sport England Active People Survey 5).

  • Conception rate of under-18 year olds (per 1,000) (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Most Deprived LSOA for health deprivation and disability (ONS 201 Indices of Multiple Deprivation)

  • Play and open space quality, quantity and accessibility (Ipswich Open Space, Sports and Recreation Facilities Study 2009)

The health of people in Ipswich is mixed compared with the England average. Deprivation is higher than average and about 5,600 children live in poverty. In addition, life expectancy is 8.6 years lower for men in the most deprived areas of Ipswich than in the least deprived areas. Over the last ten years, all cause mortality rates show no clear trend and the early death rate from heart disease and stroke has fallen and is similar to the England average. Priorities in Ipswich include narrowing health inequalities and reducing early deaths (e.g. from cancer), ensuring children get the best start in life and supporting older people to remain independent and active.

Suffolk has a seemingly high rate of adults over 18 suffering from depression (14.5%). The GP practices at Barack Lane (26.7%) and Norwich Road (19.9%) have the highest rates

Life expectancy from birth for females in Ipswich (83.2 years) is slightly less than that for the East of England (83.6 years). However, there is no significant difference in life expectancy at birth for males in Ipswich and the East of England. Table B-2 presents these findings.

Table B-2 Life Expectancy at Birth 2005 -2011



























East of England

































Source: Neighbourhood Statistics, Office for National Statistics

At the time of the 2011 Census, 45.6% of the Ipswich Borough considered themselves to be in very good health, compared to 47.2.% in the East of England and 47.2% in England and Wales. This subjective data indicates that the health of the Borough population is slightly below regional and national levels.

The teenage pregnancy rate in the Ipswich Borough in 2007 was 48.9 per 1000, compared to 33.1 per 1000 across the East of England and 41.7 per 1,000 in England as a whole. This represents an increase from 44.0 per 1000 in 2006.

Alexandra, Westgate, Whitton, Gainsborough, Gipping and Stoke Park wards all have LSOAs within 20% of the most deprived for health deprivation and disability.

Ipswich has a large proportion (10.2%) of ‘Retirement Home Singles’ aged 81+ which require leisure activities. The large amount of open space in the surrounding districts and the presence of parks within the Ipswich Borough provide an excellent recreational resource for the population that should be maintained / enhanced to secure health benefits. According to the Ipswich Open Space, Sports and Recreation Facilities Study 2009 overall provision of open space sites in Ipswich is considered to be very good especially in relation to parks. However, issues with accessibility and locational deficiency were believed to exist, particularly in the north east of the Borough. A number of sites are deemed to lack character, such as on Bramford Lane.

Sports facilities across the Borough are found in and around Ipswich town centre and at the main sports centres. Research from Sport England indicates that 14.5% of people in Ipswich Borough engage in regular sport or exercise, higher than the 13.6% who do so in Suffolk but lower than the 16.3% national figure (Sport England, Active People Survey 5 (2010/11)). A significant proportion of the Ipswich population is falling in the category of people doing none or little exercise per week. Data indicates that almost 60% of female adults in Ipswich do no sporting activity; this compares to 47% for men.

The quality and quantity of indoor sports facilities was generally thought to be good. However, there are some notable issues in terms of the ‘tired’ condition of Crown Pools and the lack of a two court basketball hall with spectator seating and potentially a 50 metre swimming pool for elite swimming development. The leisure centres are generally perceived to be well used although there are car parking issues (Ipswich Open Space, Sports and Recreation Facilities Study 2009).

Data Gaps and Uncertainties:

  • Percentage of residents who are happy with their neighbourhood as a place to live.

B.4 Crime

The following baseline data has been identified:

  • Crime rates per 1000 of the population for key offences including burglary (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Proportion of people experiencing hate crime (State of Ipswich Report May 2011)

30% of all the crime in Suffolk happens in Ipswich and 10% of all the crime in Suffolk happens in the Town Centre of Ipswich as a result of the night time economy. Out of the 1185 violence with injury offences recorded, 709 of these were experienced in the night-time economy hours, measured during the hours of 18:00-06:00. Shoplifting has also increased in Ipswich by 102 (6.8%) offences from 2009/10 to 2010/11. This appears to have been an ongoing trend up to and during the recession, although there is no robust evidence of a direct correlation. Thefts from motor vehicles have increased over the same period by 261 incidents (33.4%).

Ipswich also has the highest prevalence of organised crime in Suffolk, including people trafficking, drug dealing and prostitution. Anti-social behaviour also formed a large percentage of crime incidents in Ipswich as of June 2012 (State of Ipswich Data, Ipswich Borough Council).

The proportion of people experiencing hate crime, based on race and religion, has increased in recent years. Hate crime based on religion has increased 4 fold between 2008 and 2009 while the incidents reported under disability and sexual orientation have maintained at a steady level.

In 2008/09 the overall crime rate in Ipswich (71.2) was significantly higher than county (37.4), regional (40.4) and national levels (49.7). However, this reduced to 59.5 in 2009/2010 and 58.2 in 2010/11. Table B-3 presents the recorded crime and notifiable offences in Ipswich (per thousand persons) for 2010/11. Those recorded crimes per 1000 of Ipswich’s population have fallen from 106 in 2008-2009 to 77 in 2013-2014.

Table B-3 Recorded Crime and Notifiable Offences (per thousand persons)


Violence Against the Person

Wounding or Other Act Endangering Life

Other Wounding

Harassment Including Penalty Notices for Disorder

Common Assault


Theft from the Person

Criminal Damage Including Arson

Burglary in a Dwelling

Burglary Other than a Dwelling

Theft of a Motor Vehicle

Theft from a Motor Vehicle














East of England


























Source: Notifiable Offences Recorded by the Police, Home Office 2010/11

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Percentage of people who feel safe in the place where they live.

  • Percentage of people who feel their area is safe with low levels of crime and disorder.

B.5 Water

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise the water environment in the Borough:

  • River catchment areas (Environment Agency East Suffolk Catchment Flood Management Plan, 2009).

  • Historic flood events (Ipswich Borough Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 2007).

  • Distribution of areas at risk of fluvial flooding (Environment Agency Flood Map) and 2010/11 Annual Monitoring Report, Ipswich Borough Council).

  • Number of planning applications granted permission contrary to Environment Agency advice (Ipswich Local Plan Authority Monitoring Report 9, 2012-2013).

  • Water and groundwater quality (Environment Agency)

Water is an essential resource required for both domestic and industrial use. The Borough lies within the ‘East’ catchment area. The key watercourses in the Borough are the River Gipping and Belstead Brook which both flow into the River Orwell (Environment Agency River East Suffolk Catchment Flood Management Plan).

The Environment Agency has identified a risk of flooding on lands adjacent to the River Gipping, Belstead Brook and the small watercourse located within the northern part of the Northern Fringe area ‘Westerfield Watercourse’ (Environment Agency’s online Flood Map). Westerfield Watercourse flows westwards from Westerfield village towards the Gipping at Claydon and Areas of undeveloped land including the Council’s Millennium Cemetery in the North of Ipswich fall within its catchment.

In 2013/14 the Environment Agency was consulted 19 times and no objections to proposals were raised (Ipswich Borough Council, September 2014).

In 2012/13 the EA was advised of 21 applications in Ipswich where flood risk or water quality was an issue. Of these, 16 were approved, one was withdrawn, three were refused, and one has been approved contrary to the EA’s initial objection. Whilst an objection was raised by the EA, this was owing to the lack of a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) rather than an in principle objection to the proposed development. In this case the former fire station development on Sidegate Lane was approved for 59 dwellings subject to relevant EA planning conditions (Ipswich Local Plan Authority Monitoring Report 9, 2012-2013).

Ipswich Borough Council’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment indicates that major surge tides occurred in 1236, 1287, 1613, 1619, 1762, 1894, 1904, 1905, 1927/8, & 1938. However, these would not have caused great damage as town’s marshes were not built on. Flood defences built between 1971 and 1983 prevented serious surge tide flooding on 2/3 January 1976, 11/12 January 1978 and 1 February 1983. The most recent severe fluvial events were in 1947 and 1939. These were partly caused by flood debris that obstructed the old “Seven Arches Bridge” at London Road. The current replacement bridge is single span and no longer obstructs the flow.

Date Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Daily domestic water use (per capita consumption, litres).

B.6 Soil and Land Quality

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise the soil and land quality conditions across the Borough:

  • Distribution of best and most versatile agricultural land (www.magic.gov.uk).

  • Amount (hectares) of previously developed land available (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Density of new development (Annual Monitoring Report 2011-2012)

Most of the Borough is covered by urban development. However, Figure B-3 indicates that the undeveloped areas within the Borough lie predominantly on Grade 2 Agricultural Land. Grade 2 Agricultural Land is very good quality agricultural land with minor limitations which affect crop yield, cultivations or harvesting. A wide range of agricultural and horticultural crops can usually be grown but on some land in the grade there may be reduced flexibility due to difficulties with the production of the more demanding crops such as winter harvested vegetables and arable root crops. The level of yield is generally high but may be lower or more variable than Grade 1. Grade 2 Agricultural Land is also classed as best and most versatile land.

Figure B-3 Agricultural Land Classification

Source: www.magic.gov.uk

In 2011/12, there was 67.2 hectares vacant or derelict land. (141.8 hectares total including sites in use, allocated or with planning permission) (Ipswich National Land Use database 2014).

In 2009 there were 130 hectares of land that were unused or may be available for redevelopment in Ipswich. This reflects the high density urban environment of the Ipswich Borough. Table B-4 presents the results.

Table B-4 Previously-developed land

Vacant land (ha)

Vacant buildings (ha)

Derelict land and buildings

Land currently in use with known redevelopment potential (ha)

Land that is unused or may be available for redevelopment (ha)







East of England












Source: Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)

The density of new build dwellings is 45.2 per hectare or 55.2 per hectare if including the assisted living units on Handford Road (Ipswich Borough Council, September 2014).

Out of 219 dwelling units completed within new build developments between April 2011 and March 2012:

  • 0 were developed at less than 30 units per hectare (0% of units)

  • 110 were developed at between 30 and 50 units per hectare (50% of units)

  • 109 were developed at over 50 units per hectare (50% of units).

The average net density of land covered by the 219 units is 54.1 units per hectare.

There are some sites in Ipswich identified as potentially being contaminated, mainly associated with existing or former industrial areas. There are also a number of historic landfill sites across the Borough, primarily located within the urban area. Contamination on development sites is dealt with through the development management process. An example of a contaminated site which has been redeveloped successfully for its current use is the former Crane’s factory site.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • There are no significant gaps or areas of uncertainty for this topic.

B.7 Air Quality

The following baseline indicators have been used to identify environmental conditions and key trends:

  • Number and distribution of Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) (Air Quality Archive)

Air quality affects the state of the natural environment and has implications for human health. It is estimated that air pollution attributed to 5.6% (63) of all deaths in 2010 from the population of Ipswich aged 25 and over. AQMAs are designated when local authorities have identified locations where national air quality objectives are unlikely to be achieved. There are four AQMAs within the Ipswich Borough and all have been declared due to levels of NO2. Their locations are presented on Figure B-4.

Figure B-4 Air Quality Management Areas in Ipswich

The main source of air pollution in the Borough is road traffic (2010 Air Quality Detailed Assessment for Ipswich Borough Council). Ipswich continues to get exceedances of the annual average objective level for Nitrogen Dioxide in the AQMAs St Helen’s Street and St Matthew’s Street/Civic Drive.

Issues relating to carbon dioxide emissions are addressed in Section B.8.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Dwellings affected

  • Long term trends are uncertain.

B.8 Energy and Climate Change

The following baseline indicators have been used:

  • Total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per capita (DECC and Ipswich Local Plan Authority Monitoring Report 9, 2012-2013)

  • Annual average domestic gas and electricity consumption per meter (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • All energy consumption by sector (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles and DECC).

  • Applications for renewable energy developments (2010/11 Annual Monitoring Report Ipswich Borough Council).

Although climate change is a global phenomenon, action to avoid its most serious effects and to minimise the emission of greenhouse gases needs to occur at a local level. The Borough will not be immune to the impacts of climate change, either directly or as a result of policy responses at the national and international levels.

In 2011, the estimate of CO2 emissions for Ipswich was 4.2 tonnes per capita (Dept of Energy & Climate Change, 2011 data). When compared with CO2 emissions per capita for Suffolk in 2009, Ipswich performed better; this is shown in Figure B-5.

Figure B-5 Estimated CO2 Emissions Per Capita.

In 2010 the estimate of CO2 emissions for Ipswich per capita shows no change from the previous year. Ipswich Borough Council is committed to reducing its carbon emissions from the 2007/08 baseline by 30% by 2013 and by 50% by 2021. This equates to over 3,000 tonnes of CO2 the equivalent of the output of 300 homes (Ipswich Borough Council, Impact Carbon Management Plan 2009). During the period 2005-2011CO2 emissions in Ipswich reduced by 28.8% to 4.2 tonnes per capita. If the level of reduction seen up to 2013 continues it is expected that the areas targets for CO2 reductions will be met (Ipswich Local Plan Authority Monitoring Report 9, 2012-2013).

In 2009, the average consumption of ordinary domestic electricity for Ipswich was 3,440 kWh per meter point, which is lower than the regional average of 3,980 kWh. Since 2007 there has been a reduction in domestic electricity usage of 149 kWh per meter point in Ipswich, which compares with a regional decrease of 159 kWh. Similarly, in 2009 the average consumption of domestic gas in Ipswich was 13,640kWh per meter, which was lower than regional averages (15,471kWh). Gas consumption in Ipswich between 2007 and 2009 has also reduced by 1,864kWh per meter point.

Transport consumption of energy in Ipswich in 2009 was 399gWh. This accounted for 0.3% of all energy consumption in the East of England region. Domestic energy consumption accounted for the majority of energy consumption in Ipswich in 2009 (914 gWh). This data is presented in Table B-5.

Table B-5 Energy consumption by sector


Industry and commercial









697 (34%)

914 (44%)

399 (20%)

East of England


48,473 (35%)

44,688 (32%)

44,305 (33%)



442,903 (36%)

416,703 (34%)

348,118 (29%)

Source: DECC

There were no applications for renewable energy developments in 2013/14 (Ipswich Borough Council, 2014).

During Ipswich Borough Council’s 2010/11 monitoring period planning permission was granted for one domestic and one business related solar panel installation. These developments were capable of generating 1.5kWh and 3,301kWh respectively and have now both been installed. In addition, there were numerous solar panels installed under permitted development rights.

The Planning and Energy Act 2008 allows local authorities to include policies in their local development plans setting out reasonable requirements for:

  • A proportion of energy used in development in their area to be energy from renewable sources

  • A proportion of energy used in development in their area to be low carbon energy from sources in the locality of the development

The above policies should be carefully considered and balanced in the DPDs with the need to ensure that the environment of the Borough is not adversely affected.

In terms of the provision of shading and greening, Ipswich Borough currently has approximately 12% tree canopy cover.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Level of energy efficiency in homes

B.9 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise conditions across the Borough and within Ipswich:

  • Number and distribution of designated sites including SAC, SPA, Ramsar sites, SSSI, National Nature Reserves (NNR), Local Nature Reserves (LNR) and County Wildlife Sites (CWS) (MAGIC, SBRC, www.magic.gov.uk).

  • Areas of woodland, including ancient woodland (www.magic.gov.uk).

  • Key Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) species and habitats present (Suffolk BAP).

  • Geodiversity sites (www.geosuffolk.co.uk)

Ipswich contains a number of biodiversity sites of international, national, regional and local importance for nature conservation, as shown in Map 1 Sites of Ecological Importance.

There are three SSSIs located within the Borough; Stoke Tunnel Cutting (2.2ha), Bixley Heath (5.08ha) and the Orwell Estuary (1335.52ha). SSSIs represent the Country’s very best wildlife and geological sites. The Orwell Estuary is also designated as a SPA under EC Wild Birds Directive due to its importance for estuarine bird populations. In addition the estuary is also an internationally designated Ramsar site.

Ipswich also contains six LNRs and 19 CWSs. There was a net loss of biodiversity in 2010/11 of 0.15 hectares at the Wharfedale Road Meadow CWS (2010/11 Annual Monitoring Report Ipswich Borough Council).

There is one area of ancient and semi-natural woodland along with ancient replanted woodland to the south of the Borough.

The UK government published ‘Biodiversity: The UK Action Plan’ in 1994. This plan combined new and existing conservation initiatives with an emphasis on a partnership approach. It contains 59 objectives for conserving and enhancing species and habitats as well as promoting public awareness and contributing to international conservation efforts. Following on from the initial strategy publication, 391 Species Action Plans (SAPs) and 45 Habitat Action Plans (HAPs) were published for the UK's most threatened (i.e. "priority") species and habitats. In addition, there are approximately 150 Local Biodiversity Action Plans, normally at county level. These plans usually include actions to address the needs of the UK priority habitats and species in the local area, together with a range of other plans for habitats and species that are of local importance or interest (Biodiversity Action Reporting System).

The Suffolk BAP is made up of many individual species and habitat plans. Each plan gives information on the status and threats to the species or habitat. Suffolk BAP species and habitats include the following:

Source: Suffolk BAP

In 2012 UK Post -2010 Biodiversity Framework was issued to set a broad enabling structure for action across the UK between 2012 and 2020:

  • To set out a shared vision and priorities for UK-scale activities, in a framework jointly owned by the four countries, and to which their own strategies will contribute.

  • To identify priority work at a UK level which will be needed to help deliver the internationally agreed targets and the EU Biodiversity Strategy.

  • To facilitate the aggregation and collation of information on activity and outcomes across all countries of the UK, where the four countries agree this will bring benefits compared to individual country work.

  • To streamline governance arrangements for UK-scale activity.

GeoSuffolk has designated 31 local geodiversity sites in Suffolk, 8 of these are Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS) and 23 are the new County Geodiversity Sites (CGS). All of these have public access. The list of geodiversity sites in Ipswich is presented in Table B-6 below.

Table B-6 Geodiversity sites in Ipswich

Site Name



London Clay septaria used as building stone.

Chantry Park Mansion

Ransomes stone (artificial)

Christchurch Park

Springs and seepages

Christchurch Park Lower Arboretum

Sarsen stones in rockery

Coprolite Street

‘Fossil Animal Dropping Street’

Holywells Park RIGS

Springs and seepages

Ipswich Museum

Terracotta fossils on the façade. Large stones in the


Pipers Vale (Orwell Country Park)

Rotational slips, estuary, cliffs (valley gravel exposed).

Stoke Bridge Pocket Park

Sarsen stones

Stoke Tunnel SSSI

Interglacial site (no section visible)

St Nicholas Church

London Clay septaria and other local building stones

Source: http://co.uk/

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • There are no significant data gaps or uncertainties for this topic.

B.10 Cultural Heritage

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise the cultural heritage baseline:

  • Number and distribution of Listed Buildings, Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs), Conservation Areas and Registered Historic Parks and Gardens (www.magic.gov.uk).

  • Number of Listed Buildings / Scheduled Monuments / Conservation Areas and Registered Historic Parks and Gardens on English Heritage’s 2011 Risk Register (English Heritage Scheduled Monuments at Risk East of England, 2011).

  • Number of eligible open spaces managed to Green Flag standards (Civic Trust and Ipswich Borough Council).

In Ipswich there are 603 Listed Buildings, of which 11 are Grade I and 31 are Grade II* (Ipswich Borough Council, Listed Buildings in Ipswich). Listed Buildings are largely concentrated within the town centre. There has been little change in the number of listed buildings in the Borough since 1995.

There are also 14 Conservation Areas covering the historic areas of the Borough. As of 2012 all twelve of the Conservation Areas in the Borough had been the subject of character appraisals.

There are ten Scheduled Monuments within the Ipswich Borough. The Scheduled Monuments in the Borough range from a Dominican Friary (remains of) to middle and late Saxon assets. Scheduled Monuments in the Borough are largely located within the town centre.

English Heritage on behalf of the Government maintains the Register of Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England. These are designed landscapes that are considered to be of national importance. In Ipswich, the following parks and gardens are currently listed:

  • Old and New Cemetery Grade II;

  • Chantry Park Grade II; and

  • Christchurch Park Grade II.

According to English Heritage’s 2011 ‘At Risk’ Register there are three statutory heritage assets considered to be ‘at risk’. These assets include:

  • St Mary at Quay, Quay Street, Ipswich, Grade II* Listed Building and Conservation Area;

  • Barrack Corner, Conservation Area; and

  • Stoke, Conservation Area.

The Civic Trust and DCLG administer the Green Flag Award, given for the quality and management of parks and other public open spaces. Two of parks within the Borough have been accredited with the Green Flag status; Christchurch Park and Holywells Park (Ipswich Borough Council July 2011). These are also the only two eligible open spaces managed to Green Flag standards (Ipswich Borough Council, September 2014).

Improving the quality of the public realm is viewed as very important as it contributes to an experience of a place or location. A high quality public realm can attract inward investment and increase quality of life for the resident population.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Planning permissions adversely affecting known or potential designated assets (historic buildings, archaeological sites etc.).

Key Issues and Opportunities

  • Ipswich is home to a wealth of heritage assets including those of a national and local importance. Several sites within Ipswich are listed on the Sites and Monuments Record.

  • In addition, there are a number of Listed Buildings and it should be ensured that new development does not have detrimental effect on the architectural or historic value of these heritage assets.

  • Cultural heritage features across the Borough should be conserved and enhanced.

B.11 Landscape

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise the existing conditions:

  • Landscape characterisation (Suffolk Landscape Character Assessment, Suffolk County Council, http://org.uk/).

  • Distribution and area of National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) (www.magic.gov.uk).

  • Number of eligible open spaces managed to Green Flag standards (Civic Trust and Ipswich Borough Council).

The Suffolk Landscape Character Assessment identifies Ipswich town centre as urban, with some areas of ancient rolling farmlands to the north and northeast and estate sandlands to the east of the urban areas (Suffolk Landscape Character Assessment).

No National Parks are located within the Borough’s boundary (www.magic.gov.uk). However, the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB is located within close proximity of the southern Borough boundary.

Christchurch Park, 33 hectares in size, was given its third Green Flag award in July 2010 and its fourth Green Flag award in July 2011 in recognition of its excellent use of green space, well-maintained facilities and high standard of safety and security. Holywells Park was awarded its first Green Flag award in July 2011. Currently the amount of public open space in Ipswich owned and/or managed by the Borough Council is 477 hectares. The County Council, other public agencies and private landowners own further accessible open space in the Borough. An open space, sport and recreation facilities study published in September 2009 provides a breakdown of open space by type (2010/11 Annual Monitoring Report, Ipswich Borough Council).

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Percentage of new housing completions achieving design standards such as Building for Life and Lifetime Homes

B.12 Minerals and Waste

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise the existing conditions:

  • Amount of household waste collected per household (Defra).

  • Location and number of waste facilities serving the Borough (Suffolk County Council).

  • Data regarding the use of recycled and secondary materials in the construction industry (Suffolk County Council Waste and Minerals Annual Monitoring Report 2010/11).

  • Household waste recycling and composting achieved (Defra).

  • Number of planning applications relating to mineral development (Suffolk County Council, Minerals and Waste Annual Monitoring Report 2010/11).

The Suffolk Minerals and Waste Development Framework (MWDF) contains mineral and waste specific policies for use in determining planning applications for waste or quarry developments in Suffolk. It sets out the strategy for future minerals and waste development and addresses issues including mineral extraction; waste management and recycling; protecting mineral resources and restoring minerals and waste sites (www.suffolk.gov.uk).

In Ipswich, 499kg of residual waste was recorded per household in 2012/13. This is less than the waste per household in the East of England (525kg) and England overall (568kg). From 2010/11 to 2011/12, the amount of residual waste in Ipswich reduced on average by 13kg per household compared with a reduction of 30kg for the East of England region (Defra).

In 2012/13 40.8% of waste in Ipswich was recycled and composted (Ipswich Borough Council, September 2014). Reuse / recycling / composting rates were lower than those recorded for Suffolk, the East of England and England between 2008-2012. (results are presented in Table B-7) (Defra).

Table B-7 Household Waste Recycling and Composting Achieved

Rate Achieved 2008/09 (%)

Rate Achieved 2009/10 (%)

Rate Achieved 2010/11 (%)

Rate Achieved 2011/2012 (%)











East of England










Source: Defra, national and regional figures were collected from the Waste Statistics on Defra's website.

Waste disposal is an important strategic issue for Suffolk. Suffolk County Council’s adopted (March 2011) Waste Core Strategy identifies the following waste facilities within and within close proximity of Ipswich:

  • Ipswich Hospital (incinerator with energy recovery) NB clinical waste;

  • Ipswich Composting Facility;

  • Ipswich Household Waste and Recycling Facility;

  • Cliff Quay Anglian Sewage Treatment Works;

  • Bramford Quarry (Non-Hazardous Landfills);

  • Cook Transfer Station (Waste Transfer Facility);

  • Valley Farm Pit (Secondary Aggregates);

  • F. A. Edwards & Son Ltd (Metals/End of Life Vehicles);

  • F J Metals (Metals/End of Life Vehicles); and

  • Whip St Motors (Metals/End of Life Vehicles).

The Suffolk Annual Waste Survey 2009 indicated sales of recycled aggregate to be 257,497 tonnes, and this was less than the average yearly forecast of approximately 500,000 tonnes, identified in the Minerals Core Strategy. This also reflected the downturn in the economy. During 2010/11, one application at Waldringfield (outside of Ipswich) was received for minerals extraction. To reduce the need for natural resources, recycled and secondary materials should be used where feasible in construction projects and new development.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • There are no key data gaps or uncertainties.

B.13 Transportation

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise the existing conditions across the Borough:

  • Distribution of major transport systems – roads, airports, ports, rail etc. (Ordnance Survey mapping, Ipswich Borough Council, Suffolk County Council).

  • Journey to work by mode (2011 Census).

  • Number of housing developments of ten or more dwellings approved and located within 30 minutes travel time of a GP, primary and secondary school, employment area and major retail centre (Ipswich Borough Council 2010/11 Annual Monitoring Report).

  • Road network capacity (Ipswich Travel Model Assessment, 2010)

Ipswich serves as an important employment centre for outlying areas with approximately 97,000 (Census 2011) people travelling to work each day in Ipswich. Central Ipswich is the destination for almost 50% of these journeys. In 2011, 7.4% of people in employment worked mainly from home and more than 50% of people travelled to work by car or van. The percentage of people working from home is lower than that for England (10.64%). The percentage of people travelling to work by car (53.44%) is similar to that for England (53.71%).

The use of buses (public transport) is significantly higher than regional and similar to national levels (see Table B-8). Walking exceeds regional and national levels. The Ipswich Community Strategy includes a series of key priorities addressing transport and accessibility which include encouraging the provision and use of an integrated effective transport system which maximises the use of public transport, walking and cycling and reduces the overall impact of travel on the environment.

Table B-8 Journey to Work By Mode

Usual Journey to Work Mode

Ipswich (%)

East of England (%)

England (%)

Working mainly at or from home




Underground, light rail, metro or tram








Bus, minibus or coach




Motorcycle, scooter or moped




Driving a van or car




Passenger of a van or car




Taxi or Minicab








On foot








Source: Census 2011

18,300 pupils travel each day to the 52 schools in the wider Ipswich area. Three new education institutions catering for sixth form, further and higher education will contribute a further 10,420 students and 1,250 employees travelling in Ipswich (2011 State of Ipswich Report, Ipswich Borough Council).

Significant development within Ipswich could increase the transport pressures that currently exist within the town. Traffic modelling has shown that with the anticipated level of growth traffic could grow by over 15% by 2021. There will also be additional pressures on the A12/A14 at Copdock, Seven Hills Interchange and the Orwell Bridge. Significant housing development is also proposed within the Northern Fringe area and this, together with planned growth in Suffolk Coastal on the eastern fringe of the town will add significant pressure to radial routes leading to the town centre, the principal focus for employment. It will be important to ensure that transport is fully integrated with the development plans for these locations. Many peak hour journeys in Ipswich are fairly short and yet are carried out by car. Congestion levels are already seen as a significant problem (Suffolk County Council, Local Transport Plan 2011 – 2031; Ipswich Travel Model Assessment, 2010).

Bus service provision in Ipswich is generally good, and provides commercial services but there are some areas that are not well served. There are no orbital services so passengers wanting to skirt around the town have to travel into the centre and then out again. There is currently a lack of multi-operator ticketing which exacerbates this problem. The availability and pricing of car parking within the town is also an important factor in the travel choices that people make. More than half of long-stay parking capacity in the town is privately owned and much of it at little or no cost to users. The Ipswich – Transport fit for the 21st Century scheme is a £21 million package of traffic management, smarter choices, bus, walking and cycling improvements to address the main transport issues facing Ipswich over the next period (Suffolk County Council, Local Transport Plan 2011 – 2031).

All housing developments of ten or more dwellings completed in Ipswich during 2010/11 were within 30 minutes travel time by foot and public transport of a GP, primary and secondary school, employment area and major retail centre. However, two developments were not within 30 minutes travel time of a hospital by public transport (Ipswich Borough Council 2010/11 Annual Monitoring Report). In 2013/2014, there were seven applications within 30 minutes travel time of a GP, primary and secondary school, employment area and major retail centre (Ipswich Borough Council, September 2014).

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

There are no key data gaps or uncertainties for this topic.

Key Issues and Opportunities

  • The Borough is well-connected by transport infrastructure and public transport links, making most areas relatively accessible.

  • Opportunities should be sought to reduce dependence on the private car and increase public transport use.

  • It will be important to ensure that new development can be easily accessed by public transport.

  • The cycling and walking network should be expanded and enhanced.

B.14 Economy

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise economic conditions across the Borough:

  • Location of key industries and major employers (Ipswich Borough Council).

  • Economic activity rate (ONS – Nomis).

  • Employment by sector (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Employment by occupation (ONS – NOMIS).

  • Percentage of resident population claiming Jobseekers’ Allowance in 2012 (ONS – Nomis).

  • Average weekly pay (2011 State of Ipswich Report, Ipswich Borough Council).

  • Employment land availability (Employment Land Availability 2012 Report).

  • Planning permissions for employment sites (Employment Land Availability 2012 Report).

  • Vacant retail units (Ipswich Local Plan Supplementary Planning Guidance District and Local Shopping Centres 2012)

Ipswich is a historic county town of Suffolk and a major centre of population, economic activity and growth in the Eastern Region. Ipswich has one of the strongest finance and insurance sectors in the country. Willis, AXA and RBS all have a presence within Ipswich. The economic structure of Ipswich predominantly comprises tertiary sector activities which encompass more than 80% of the total employment. There is a strong reliance on public sector employment, including two councils, a hospital trust and University Campus Suffolk (UCS). Key local economic sectors identified are:

  • Port and logistics;

  • Financial services;

  • Education and applied research;

  • Culture;

  • Health and Social Work;

  • Construction;

  • Distribution and Hotels; and

  • Public Sector.

Table B-9 below compares employment by sector in Ipswich, Suffolk and the East of England.

Table B-9 Employment by Sector %









Accommodation and Food Service activities




Human Health and Social Work
















Transport and Storage




Finance & Insurance




Information and Communication




Public admin and Education




Professional, Scientific and Technical Activities




Other services




Source: ONS April 2011 – March 2012 data

Despite the economic downturn the Borough’s economy continues to perform well when compared to other districts across the East of England. This is in part due to the high concentration of public sector employment within the Borough, with approximately 27.6% of people employed in the public sector in 2012 compared to only 18.4% and 19.3% in the East of England and England, respectively (ONS Employment Local Profiles).

Ipswich has a large working age (16-64_ population 65.7% (87,566) compared with the rest of Suffolk, 61%. Around 5,500 (5.7%) of residents have never worked or are long-term employed. The economic activity rate measures the proportion of the adult population in paid employment, unemployed actively seeking employment or who are full-time students. The figure of economically active people in employment for Ipswich was 72.9% between April 2013 - March 2014, slightly lower than for the East of England (75.5%) and higher than that for Great Britain (71.7%). In August 2014 2.7% of the resident population were claiming Jobseekers Allowance, compared to 1.7% in the East and 2.3% across England (NOMIS).

A lower than average proportion of Ipswich’s population are classified as managers or senior officials (Ipswich – 5.5%, East 11.0%, Great Britain 10.2%), while caring, leisure and other service occupations along with sales and customer service occupations and process plant and machine operatives are higher than regional and national averages. This data is presented in Table B-10.

Table B-10 Employment by Occupation (April 2013 – March 2014)


Ipswich (%)

East of England (%)

Great Britain (%)

Managers, directors and senior officials




Professional occupations




Associate professional and technical




Administrative and secretarial




Skilled trades occupations




Caring, leisure and Other Service occupations




Sales and customer service occupations




Process plant and machine operatives




Elementary occupations




Source: NOMIS

On average, the gross weekly pay for employees in Ipswich is £445.5 (2012), which is lower than the East of England average (£531.0) and lower than the national average (£508.0). Part of the reason for this is because the gross weekly pay for female workers at £380.5 is significantly (27.1%) behind that for males in Ipswich (£522.3) and the national average for females (£449.6) (NOMIS 2012).

The total amount of employment land available has decreased by 4.03 hectares (ha) to 71.74 ha across the whole of Ipswich at April 2012 due to the implementation or expiry of planning permissions. The total consists of 0.63ha with unimplemented planning permission, 18.73ha on allocated land and 52.38ha of vacant land within identified employment areas. Completions on allocated and existing employment sites for the current monitoring year has been recorded as zero hectares (Employment Land Availability 2012 Report).

Planning consents for employment sites (over 100 sqm) for the year 2011?12 amount to 15.07ha, of which 14.44ha are extensions or new buildings within existing employment areas, and 12.57ha are outline planning permissions (largely accounted for by the outline planning permission for employment uses at the former Crane’s factory site).

According to the SPG District and Local Shopping Centres 2012 there are 46 vacant retails units in the Borough.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Commercial / retail rental data.

  • Business start-ups and closures.

  • No. of business enquiries to Ipswich Borough Council / Suffolk County Council by types and size of site.

B.15 Deprivation and Living Environment

The following baseline data has been identified:

  • Number of wards with LSOAs in the bottom 10% most deprived within the Index of Multiple Deprivation (2011 State of Ipswich Report, Ipswich Borough Council).

  • Number of domestic noise and light complaints

Deprivation is a multi-faceted and complex problem which influences and is influenced by a wide range of factors. In general, between 2007-2010, all Local Authorities in Suffolk became relatively more deprived (NB data does not include the effects of the credit crunch and recession). According to the Index of Multiple Deprivation (2010) 26.6% (35,000) of the town’s population lives within the most deprived fifth of areas in England. Ipswich remains the most deprived Local Authority in Suffolk being ranked 87/326 in England (Waveney 112/326; The number of people living within the most deprived 20% of areas has risen by 2.5% (3,200) suggesting that Ipswich has become comparatively more deprived since 2007. Mid Suffolk 274/326), and all of the areas ranked in the bottom 20% of Suffolk are found in either Ipswich or Lowestoft. All of the Suffolk lower super output areas (LSOAs) ranked in the worst 10% of England in 2010 (14) are in Ipswich (9) 64% and Lowestoft (5) 36%. The Bridge Ward had the only LSOA to have moved out of the worst 10% ranking, but LSOAs in Whitton and Stoke Park dropped in rank sufficiently to fall into this group.

During the period April 2012 – March 2013 Ipswich Borough Council served Noise Abatement Notices on 43 premises. During the same period of time there were no abatement notices for light nuisance served.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Provision of childcare.

B.16 Housing

The following baseline indicators have been used to characterise the status of housing across the Borough:

  • Average house price (Suffolk Observatory).

  • Ratio of relative housing affordability (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Number of vacant dwellings (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Dwelling Stock by Tenure (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles and 2011 State of Ipswich Report, Ipswich Borough Council).

  • Number of affordable housing completions (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

  • Number of Homeless presentations (2011 State of Ipswich Report, Ipswich Borough Council).

  • Number of dwellings (2011 State of Ipswich Report, Ipswich Borough Council and Ipswich Local Plan Authority Monitoring Report 9, 2012-2013)

Since 2001, the number of dwellings in Ipswich has increased by 11.9%. The total housing stock rose from 57,914 at 1st Apr 2009 to 58,303 at 31st Mar 2010. In 2009 the composition of housing was 14.2% (8210 dwellings) Local Authority stock, 7.8% (4510 dwellings) Registered Social Landlord stock, and 77.8% (44982 dwellings) private housing stock (2011 State of Ipswich Report, Ipswich Borough Council). However housing completions between 2012-13 were the lowest since 1998-99, with just 96 new homes completed – 604 short of the areas National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requirement (Ipswich Local Plan Authority Monitoring Report 9, 2012-2013)

The total housing stock in Ipswich rose from 58,303 at the beginning of the 2010 monitoring period to 58,640. Council Tax records show total housing stock as 58,882 rising from 58,441 – Council Tax records include student accommodation.

Housing costs are relatively low but have gradually increased in recent years. The Median house price (July 2013) in Ipswich was £150,000, which shows an increase of 7.1% from the median price of the same time the previous year (£140,000). The average house price is lower than Suffolk (£167,000 in July 2013) and lower than that in the East of England (£178,000 in August 2013 (ONS).

The affordability of purchased homes in 2011 was a ratio of 5:7 which was less than the affordability for Suffolk 6:9, the East of England 7:6 and England 6:5 (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles).

In Ipswich, the number of affordable homes provided in 2013/14 was 44. In 2010/11 the number was 150 and over the period since 2006/07 the maximum number of affordable homes was 500 in any year (Office for National Statistics Local Profiles). During the period April 2011 – March 2012 283 dwellings net were completed, 54% of them were affordable homes (AMR 8 2011/2012). The longer-term affordable housing delivery average as a percentage of total housing completions for 2001-12 is 22%.

The number of homeless people has been increasing since 2010. During 2012/13, 617 people were identified as homeless in Suffolk according to the statutory criteria compared to 368 in 2010/2011 and 500 in 2011/2012 (Suffolk Observatory).

At November 2014 there were 972 vacant dwellings (Ipswich Borough Council, November, 2014). This shows a decrease from 2011 when there were 1,909 vacant dwellings and from 2012 when there were 1,750. Of the 972 vacant homes 306 were long term vacant properties (i.e. over 6 months). It is not stated as to what types of dwellings are vacant i.e. there could be a low demand for large expensive homes yet a high demand for affordable homes.

At 1st April 2013, Local Authority dwelling stock was 8,110; Private Registered Provider dwelling stock was 4,770; Other Public Sector dwelling stock was160 and Private sector dwelling stock was 46,650 this totalled 59,690 (Ipswich Borough Council, September 2014).

Table B-11 presents details of the tenure of housing stock across the Borough in 2011, highlighting that owner occupation in the Borough is lower national and regional averages.

Table B-11 Dwelling Stock by Tenure (2011)

Local Authority Dwelling Stock (%)

Registered Social Landlord Dwelling Stock (%)

Shared Ownership (%)

Owner Occupied and Private Rented Dwelling Stock (%)






East of England










Source: Census 2011, ONS

Ipswich Borough Council’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2008) reported the following conclusions:

  • The current gross housing need is calculated to be 3,723;

  • The annual future need is calculated to be 2,665 (per annum);

  • The total affordable housing stock available is calculated to be 1,563; and

  • The future annual supply of affordable housing units is calculated to be 1,520.

The Strategic Housing Market Assessment found a substantial need for smaller 1-2 bedroomed homes in Ipswich to meet the needs of smaller households and an ageing population, as well as a continued need for smaller 2-3 bedroomed family homes. They also reported that some local Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic households require larger affordable homes, so there is also a continuing need for a small number of larger 4+ bedroomed homes. Much of recent housing development in Ipswich, however, has been in the form of 1 and 2 bedroomed apartments and in the present economic climate there is an oversupply of flats.

The Ipswich Housing Needs Study 2005 looked at housing needs across the Borough. It has been partly updated through the Strategic Housing Market Assessment in 2008. Combined findings of the two studies indicate that:

  • Around 66% of households are owner occupiers, 22% live in the social rented sector and 12% in the private rented sector;

  • One quarter of households consist of older persons only, and such households account for 37% of all Council accommodation;

  • Around 12% of the net affordable housing requirement comes from key worker households;

  • Nearly 2% of households live in overcrowded homes, whilst 34% under occupy their dwelling;

  • When householders were asked in 2005, around two thirds of their previous house moves had been within the Borough;

  • Ipswich has lower than average property prices;

  • The need is most acute for small properties, notably two bedroom homes, and is geographically widespread; and

  • 80% of any affordable target should be social rented housing (Ipswich Borough Council, Adopted Core Strategy (2011)).

In 2012 the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) was further updated to reflect the economic and political change that has occurred since the SHMA was published in 2008. The findings of the study indicate that:

  • On average, incomes in the Ipswich Housing Market Area (HMA) remain below both regional and national levels. Earnings in Ipswich are well below those in the rest of the HMA. This update estimates that 41% of newly forming households are not able to afford to rent or buy a home within the Ipswich HMA.

  • Worsening affordability of housing reduces the rate that young adults form households. One effect has been for more young people to live with their parents. Nationally, around one in three men and one in six women aged 20 to 34 now live with their parents, an increase from one in four men and one in seven women in 1997.

  • A lack of choice of housing affects mobility within the labour-market and, therefore, the economy. There are also local spatial implications for the Ipswich HMA if this trend continues such as:

  • an even greater need for affordable housing in the least affordable areas;

  • greater household formation in more affordable areas such as Ipswich, increasing the birth-rate which increases demand for schools for example; and

  • further commuting from more affordable to less affordable areas.

  • One consequence of an aging population is a reduced average household size as fewer households contain children and more single households are present.

  • Currently, there is a backlog of over 4,000 households in need of a suitable and affordable home in the Ipswich HMA. The supply of new affordable homes and the reuse of existing stock are not sufficient. In order to address this shortfall, 70% of all new homes in the Ipswich HMA currently being planned would need to be affordable.

  • With more older people being assisted to remain at home, the trend for larger homes to be under-occupied is likely to increase. This could have a knock-on effect of constraining the supply of homes. At the same time, older people will expect more choice on the type, quality and location of accommodation.

Data Gaps and Uncertainties

  • Percentage of new dwellings meeting BREEAM/Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 standards.

B.17 Transboundary Issues

For many authorities, the geographical scale of particular baseline issues means that they relate closely to neighbouring authorities. For example, housing provision and prices, employment migration and commuting, service provision and education can all result in flows of people across Local Authority boundaries. In order to help to characterise the baseline further, some of these key ‘transboundary’ issues have been identified below.

  • Waste disposal is a significant issue for Ipswich with the adopted Suffolk Core Strategy identifying a deficit of waste facilities for the future.

  • Ipswich may encounter a shortage of affordable dwellings in the future, which may lead to people relocating to cheaper parts of the East of England.

  • Cumulative impacts regarding major roads should be considered.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.
back to top back to top