ipswich.gov.uk
Policy DM40 Land with planning permission or awaiting a Section 106
Object
Draft Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document
Representation ID: 38
Received: 13/02/2014
Respondent: Savills
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Draft Policy as presently proposed fails the tests set by Paragraph 182 of the NPPF. It is neither justified, effective nor consistent with national policy. The policy proposes that in default, if the permissions listed are not taken up, the council will protect the sites listed for residential or residential-led uses. It cannot be certain that residential use will be the most appropriate future alternative use for such sites. Circumstances can change. Other reasonable alternatives may be preferable on their own merits, and may be more deliverable.
The proposed policy ,as currently drafted, fails the tests set by Paragraph 182 of the NPPF .
The policy proposes that in default , if the permissions listed are not taken up , the council will protect the sites listed for residential or residential-led uses.
It cannot be certain that residential use will be the most appropriate future alternative use for such sites . Circumstances can change.
As drafted the policy is not justified in that other reasonable alternatives may be preferable on their own merits . Also, it may not be effective in that the default use may not always prove deliverable . Nor is it consistent with national policy it that it may act to frustrate the presumption in favour of sustainable development at the heart of the NPPF set out at paragraph 14 therein.
Object
Draft Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document
Representation ID: 220
Received: 10/03/2014
Respondent: Mr Leslie Short
Agent: Mr Leslie Short
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Beeson Properties Ltd. consider that alternative uses for the site are possible whilst not objecting to the allocation proposed. However, as part of a retail led regeneration of this part of the waterfront, this site with its prominent gateway position to this part of the town could accommodate a special, architecturally imposing development with a high component of retail floor space. It is acknowledged that it can only achieve this in conjunction with the allocation of other sites for similar purposes in line with the representations made by Applekirk Properties Ltd. or independently.
Beeson Properties Ltd. consider that alternative uses for the site are possible whilst not objecting to the allocation proposed. However, as part of a retail led regeneration of this part of the waterfront, this site with its prominent gateway position to this part of the town could accommodate a special, architecturally imposing development with a high component of retail floor space. It is acknowledged that it can only achieve this in conjunction with the allocation of other sites for similar purposes in line with the representations made by Applekirk Properties Ltd. or independently.
Object
Draft Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document
Representation ID: 739
Received: 10/03/2014
Respondent: Crest Strategic Projects
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Not specified
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Crest welcomes the acknowledgement that housing needs are to be met in full.
Crest considers that deliverable sites should be allowed to come forward now.
This could reduce IBC's reliance on the sites listed under this policy for
achieving the targets. There may be very good reasons why some of these sites
will continue to be stalled, and so their contribution - a collective 2,032 units -
should not be assumed. Crest does welcome however IBC's proposed approach to continue to safeguard these sites for residential development, as one component of
housing land supply in the Borough.
See attached.