Comment

Representation ID: 24780

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Mr Andrew Hunter

Yes. If we nibble away employment sites it becomes increasingly difficult to meet jobs targets through the local plan.

Comment

Representation ID: 24791

Received: 23/09/2017

Respondent: Mr Philip Pethybridge

How about a growth area where there is housing and enterprise space e.g. small/medium sized shared office and workshop space? Try to minimise people's commute. Look at taking space and putting it in clusters, not massive industrial estates but enterprise small business space e.g. on Ravenswood where small businesses could base themselves rather than commute into town by car. Stick facilities such as Basepoint next to residential to encourage people to re-locate business closer to home. My own business is based in Bury St Edmunds. There is no appropriate space in Ipswich to relocate it to.

Comment

Representation ID: 24835

Received: 23/10/2017

Respondent: Mr Michael Mann

Decrease the number of high-rise buildings around the town and number pointless office blocks stand empty for many years.

Comment

Representation ID: 24876

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: FIS Property Limited and Landex Limited

Where sites are specifically allocated for new employment use, rather than simply being within defined Employment Areas, then so long as they constitute high quality employment land then they should be protected from other uses. However, secondary employment sites, even within defined Employment Areas, should not be protected from other uses, including residential. Policy should allow for redevelopment of these areas to provide regeneration and for urban land to be used as efficiently as possible, including mixed developments which may be residential-led.

Comment

Representation ID: 24981

Received: 25/10/2017

Respondent: Northern Fringe Protection Group

No. Some flexibility would appear sensible.

Comment

Representation ID: 25077

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: On behalf of EDF Energy

We don't consider that it's feasible to continue to allocate the site at Cliff Quay for 100% employment. The allocation for mixed-use development would optimise opportunities with part allocation for residential being an enabler for the site to come forward for development. We understand that the Council has concerns regarding the impact of the water treatment works on potential new housing development. However, we consider that the site can be configured to offset against any potential impacts, taking into account the size and topography of the site and specific measures that can be incorporated into the building design.

Comment

Representation ID: 25157

Received: 27/10/2017

Respondent: Suffolk Chamber of Commerce

We strongly recommend that sites currently allocated for employment are sustained and that a presumption should be made against their re-allocation for housing. Business growth and not housing growth will be the primary driver for a more prosperous Ipswich.

Comment

Representation ID: 25226

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: New Anglia LEP for Norfolk and Suffolk

Three Space to Innovate Enterprise Zone sites are located within the town; Futura Park (E17 on the plan), Waterfront Island (a mixed use site) and Princes Street (E7). These sites have strong potential for employment development, as evidenced by the sector summary tables within the recent Ipswich Economic Area Sector Needs Assessment (Lichfields, September 2017, Table 16.4 ). They are also incentivised for development with Enterprise Zone status. New Anglia would therefore urge the Borough Council to continue to protect these sites for employment purposes.

Comment

Representation ID: 25306

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Conservative Group

This should be addressed on a case by case basis but we should consider mixed use developments such as those in Norwich.

Comment

Representation ID: 25371

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Pigeon Investment Management Ltd

The sites allocated for employment use should be protected from residential or other uses. 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. The recently adopted Local Plan policy CS13 protects land in existing
allocated employment areas for employment uses. This should be continued.

Comment

Representation ID: 25380

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Mr Matt Clarke

Boss Hall - It is acknowledged that Ipswich Borough has a challenging job sourcing additional land for housing within its boundaries; however it also has a responsibility to ensure jobs can be delivered within the Borough. Whilst it may be necessary for some employment sites to be de-allocated, given that they have no reasonable prospect of coming forward for such development, it is also vital for certain employment sites, such as the site at Boss Hall Industrial Estate, to remain available within the Borough. This ensures the provision of a range of sites of different sizes in different locations and of the right quality to attract businesses.

Comment

Representation ID: 25391

Received: 30/11/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

It is vital that the Local Plan continues to identify locations to meet strategic and general employment needs. The area is well placed to benefit from the expansion of the transport and logistics sector. The east of Ipswich is well placed to support this expansion through the delivery of mixed use urban extensions. Furthermore, Ipswich and the New Anglia LEP area is recognised to have a strong and growing digital technology sector. It is essential that Local Plans create the right environment in which these industries can further develop.

Comment

Representation ID: 25414

Received: 30/12/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Limited

Yes. The council is very anti-car but this is how we all rely on getting to work when there isn't enough local employment opportunities. Buses do not provide a good service to the door of an out-of-borough employer. This creates relatively unnecessary congestion.
Residential development is being forced upon by central targets and there just isn't the allocation of employment zones to cater for the density of planned housing.