Ipswich Borough Council Local Plan Site Allocations and Policies (incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) DPD Review - Final Draft

Support

Representation ID: 26542

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Department for Education (DfE)

DfE supports the Council’s prioritisation of education infrastructure, and the allocation and safeguarding of land for schools as set out in the following policies: Co-op Depot (Policy SP7/allocation IP010a) – school expansion.

Support

Representation ID: 26543

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Department for Education (DfE)

DfE supports the Council’s prioritisation of education infrastructure, and the allocation and safeguarding of land for schools as set out in the following policies: BT Depot Woodbridge Road (allocation IP129) - SEND School.

Object

Representation ID: 26547

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Department for Education (DfE)

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Generic requirements in the overall allocation IP048a cause potential conflict with the delivery of a Primary School expediently at the site. The requirement to develop residential uses at upper floors would not be necessarily wholly deliverable with a Primary School and therefore we propose that the supporting text to the allocation makes clear that residential accommodation should only be provided where feasible and appropriate. The allocation wording is too restrictive regarding retention of the locally listed façade. The requirement for a development brief is unnecessary. The school element should be a separate allocation. (See also SP2 & Opportunity Area C).

Object

Representation ID: 26549

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Department for Education (DfE)

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The ‘Development Principles’ for Mint Quarter (Opportunity Area C) set out that development should ‘respect and enhance setting of Listed and historic buildings’. This is not considered to wholly comply with the NPPF p.197 which requires an assessment of the asset’s significance (with regard to non-designated assets), and a balanced judgement to be made thereafter. NPPF p.184 dictates that assets ‘should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance’, which does not necessarily equate to ‘enhancement’ in every scenario. The terminology ‘historic building’ is also not robust or consistent with the NPPF.

Object

Representation ID: 26550

Received: 02/03/2020

Respondent: Department for Education (DfE)

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The allocation wording is too restrictive and could potentially frustrate and delay the delivery of the school. The specification of the retention of the locally listed façade is too specific for a site allocation policy, as it is not clear on what evidence this is based. The requirement for a development brief for the proposed primary school site is also considered to be unnecessary, the need for which is not sufficiently evidenced. We propose that the school component of allocation IP048a be stripped out from the policy and included as a separate allocation for a Primary School only.