ipswich.gov.uk
Opportunity Area B - Merchant Quarter
Object
Proposed Submission Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document
Representation ID: 5259
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Historic England
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
This is a more complex and diverse area than Area A, and perhaps less coherent making it difficult to establish specific development principles relating to specific sites. Current references to the historic environment are welcomed, but there needs to be greater detail with regards to scheduled monuments and archaeology given the rich potential of this area. Scheduled monuments are not shown in either diagram, with 'development options' mapped over the top of every scheduled monument within this area. This is misleading and does not provide sufficient clarity for development proposals.
This is a more complex and diverse area than Area A, and perhaps less coherent (especially stretching up to the bus station) making it difficult to establish specific development principles relating to specific sites (hence the need for individual site sheets). The area forms an important transition between the town centre and waterfront and needs careful planning to enhance sites and improve links. Design issues such as building heights need consideration and further masterplanning might be useful. Current references to the historic environment are welcomed, but there needs to be greater detail with regards to scheduled monuments and archaeology given the rich potential of this area. Scheduled monuments are not shown in either diagram, with 'development options' mapped over the top of every scheduled monument within this area. This is misleading and does not provide sufficient clarity for development proposals.
As currently drafted in relation to archaeology, we consider that the plan is unsound as it is not effective or consistent with national policy. The NPPF requires adequate detail to be provided in Local Plans (e.g. paragraphs 154 and 157), while Local Plans should set out a positive strategy for the historic environment (paragraph 126).
Object
Proposed Submission Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document
Representation ID: 5395
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Applekirk Properties Ltd
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
The Opportunity Area guidance in Part C is inconsistent with the assumptions and content of site specific allocations in Policies SP2, SP3, SP5, and Tables 1-3. Opportunity Area B Merchant Quarter identifies a Development Opportunity for mixed use (max 50% [residential]). In SP2/Table 1 and SP3/Table 2 there are instances where the assumed residential component exceeds 50% (IP043, IP052, 1P136). Development Principles suggest that there should generally be a limit of 3 storey development, rising to 5 storeys in some instances, but for allocations IP136 and IP132, the assumed capacity is derived from a development scenario which is 10 storeys.
See attached.
Support
Proposed Submission Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document
Representation ID: 5466
Received: 05/03/2015
Respondent: Ipswich Central
Merchant Quarter (P62) - we are broadly supportive of a mixed residential, retail and restaurant/café development. Car parking should be included, if possible.
Merchant Quarter (P62) - we are broadly supportive of a mixed residential, retail and restaurant/café development. Car parking should be included, if possible.