Object

Representation ID: 5377

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Applekirk Properties Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Applekirk Properties Ltd objects to policy CS2 as it cannot be considered to have been positively prepared and it is not justified as the strategy will not provide the future capacity for comparison and convenience retail floorspace identified in the evidence base. The NPPF requires local planning authorities to allocate a range of suitable sites to meet the scale and type of retail development needed. We consider that policy CS2 fails to do this. Sites are available in the Waterfront/Merchants Quarter which would accommodate an element of the retail capacity identified for Ipswich and support its regeneration.

Object

Representation ID: 5378

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Applekirk Properties Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

CS14 is not positively prepared or justified as the allocations included do not seek to meet the requirement for comparison retail identified in the evidence base. Insufficient sites are identified to meet the requirements for retail floorspace over the plan period, particularly for comparison goods. The evidence base identifies a requirement for additional retail floorspace. A single site is proposed for new retail development in the town centre (Westgate), which is carried forward as an existing commitment. The NPPF requires local planning authorities to allocate a range of suitable sites to meet the scale and type of retail development needed.

Object

Representation ID: 5379

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Applekirk Properties Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to Policy CS20 as it cannot be considered to have been positively prepared and is not justified as the strategy will not provide the future capacity for comparison and convenience retail floorspace identified in the evidence base. The NPPF requires local planning authorities to allocate a range of suitable sites to meet the scale and type of retail development needed. We consider that Policy CS20 fails to do this. The focus on the Central Shopping Area alone for major new retail development (here defined as over 200sqm) will not meet the requirements for retail floorspace over the plan period.

Object

Representation ID: 5380

Received: 05/03/2015

Respondent: Applekirk Properties Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Object to Policy CS23 as it cannot be considered to have been positively prepared and is not justified as the strategy will not provide the future capacity for comparison and convenience retail floorspace identified in the evidence base. The NPPF requires local planning authorities to allocate a range of suitable sites to meet the scale and type of retail development needed. We consider that Policy CS23 fails to do this. The focus on the Central Shopping Area alone for major new retail development (here defined as over 200sqm) will not meet the requirements for retail floorspace over the plan period.