ipswich.gov.uk

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Search Representations

Results for Ipswich Central search

New search New search

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 40:

Representation ID: 25088

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

Ipswich Vision 'quarters' definitions should be adopted for planning purposes. The Vision Board should be tasked with assisting with master planning of the Quarters in order that they develop a unique character.

Alternative uses should be encouraged within the Eastgate and Westgate Quarters and core retail investment should be concentrated within the Central Quarter, together with a more independent offering within the Saints Quarter. Several buildings/areas within the Central Quarter could be redeveloped to suit modern retail demand for example Upper Brook Street and to bring new occupiers to previously underused sites.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 39:

Representation ID: 25089

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

The number of residents living in the town centre has increased, but nowhere near enough. The Plan must help to stimulate new residential development, particularly that differentiated from the high number of apartments currently in existence. Town housing developments throughout the Eastgate and Westgate Quarters should be encouraged.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 64:

Representation ID: 25090

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

New retail development within the Eastgate and Westgate Quarters should be abandoned once and for all. Any temptation for further out of town retail development should be resisted and replaced with a 'town centre only' policy. Failure to do this will continue to create confusion for potential developers, employers and other inward investment by retailers.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 25:

Representation ID: 25091

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

IBC has shown an entrepreneurial approach to granting permissions for more mixed uses alongside retail. This must continue, as town centres can no longer be sustained on retail alone, and require a much broader range of leisure, service and experiential-based occupiers.

Additional reasons to visit and stay, including additional hotel space and attractions, must be planned for. A new visitor experience must be encouraged on the Waterfront, where further increases in the height of buildings opens up views northwards to the Park and beyond, and southwards. Any opportunity for the creation of a cultural hub, incorporating existing operators.

As part of the redevelopment of the Cornhill, detailed plans should be made for the future use of the new Square to create a vibrant community space that operates as an important, managed open space attraction.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 61:

Representation ID: 25092

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

Whilst issues of congestion are noted, Ipswich must be seen to be 'open for business' for the car-borne visitor. We believe that the number of poor quality, temporary car parking sites should be restricted and that opportunities for quality, often multi-storey, provision stimulated. Ideally, the town would have four major car parks, one within each of the Eastgate, Westgate, Central and Saints/Waterfront Quarters.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 56:

Representation ID: 25093

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

The Star Lane gyratory system presently restricts and endangers pedestrian and cycle routes to and from the Waterfront. It should be rethought with the primary aim of improving the vista through to Waterfront and of creating a sense of arrival rather than a barrier.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 54:

Representation ID: 25094

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

Priority and focus should be given to key pedestrian and cycle routes throughout the area. These are Princes Street from the town centre to the station; Queens Street, St Nicholas Street and St Peters Street to the Waterfront; Tacket Street and Fore Street through Blackfriars to the Waterfront; and links from the Station to the Waterfront within the Riverside Quarter. This 'triangle' of movement, including links to Christchurch Park, are illustrated within the Vision document.

Full text:

See attached.

Comment

Issues and Options for the Ipswich Local Plan Review

Question 73:

Representation ID: 25095

Received: 30/10/2017

Respondent: Ipswich Central

Representation Summary:

Additional reasons to visit and stay, including additional hotel space and attractions, must be planned for.

Full text:

See attached.

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.