Comment

Representation ID: 24657

Received: 16/10/2017

Respondent: Alice Martin

Yes - large bits of land around 'Ipswich Dock' on the eastern side could be used for housing. is there a need for all of the timber merchants within the town?

Comment

Representation ID: 24702

Received: 24/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Preservation Society

Small town centre employment sites which may represent a risk to residential amenity could be released for housing while accessible larger employment sites along the A14/A12 corridors should be protected. SPS believes that Baseline housing and economic growth which could allow surplus employment land to be released for housing.

Comment

Representation ID: 24723

Received: 26/10/2017

Respondent: Mr Christopher Wrathall

Generally speaking, I would say that space-efficient employment facilities (e.g. offices, labs etc) are good for the town centre, providing there is a good public transport system for commuters. On the other hand, there is a strong case for encouraging industrial premises that occupy larger surface areas with less employees to move further out towards the borders of the Ipswich area.

Comment

Representation ID: 24773

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Mr Andrew Hunter

No switching should take place. Protection of employment sites is vital for the economy. The best local plan is one that is smart enough to plan for mixed land use. A local plan that has a focus on housing development will lead to unbalanced planning.

Comment

Representation ID: 24872

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: FIS Property Limited and Landex Limited

It is considered that Ipswich should switch employment land to housing use notwithstanding that the borough has a high jobs target. In this respect the Council should prioritise protecting high quality employment land which meets the needs and requirements of modern industry/commerce. Other employment land should be considered for housing or mixed used development particularly where more efficient use can be made of that land and urban regeneration results.

Comment

Representation ID: 24971

Received: 25/10/2017

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

Whilst accepting the need for providing sufficient employment land sites that offer flexibility to potential employers, the current Local Plan has over a 150% margin over the assessed employment need. Apart from the missed opportunity of sites remaining undeveloped through excess capacity, there is the issue of unregenerated brown field sites remaining a blot on the landscape making Ipswich a less attractive and vibrant town. There should be an opportunity to make some reallocations from land currently protected for employment use to housing. Similarly there is an over provision of the allocation of retail space.

Comment

Representation ID: 25042

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ashfield Land Limited

There will be instances where the reuse of existing employment land for residential development is appropriate. Sufficient flexibility should be provided for sites that are no longer appropriate or required for employment purposes to come forward for alternative uses. This would not on its own be sufficient to meet the levels of growth required across the plan period.

Comment

Representation ID: 25100

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: AquiGen

AquiGen notes the identification of employment land as a potential alternative sources of residential land. This is acknowledged as a sensible policy option given the OAN. At this stage we note that there has been no actual published assessment of the suitability of employment sites for continued B class/economic development. The consultation document refers to the assessment of sites under the ELSA 07/2017 yet this has not been published. This is a significant shortcoming of the consultation process as it leaves landowners unable to comment on the findings of the ELSA in terms of specific sites and land allocation decisions.

Comment

Representation ID: 25290

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Conservative Group

Employment land is vital to the economy of Ipswich but drawing lines on a map is never an exact science. Consideration should be given, where appropriate, for change of usage for any piece of land within the Borough on a case by case basis.

Comment

Representation ID: 25365

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Pigeon Investment Management Ltd

With a high jobs target a wide variety of employment land is needed to provide flexibility in the employment land market. The requirements of businesses vary significantly and to meet the jobs target an over provision of employment land is required. This approach was found sound in the recent local plan examination in the Borough.