These are some of the Society's responses to planning applications and IBC's
decisions where known.
Eagle Mill, Helena Road: development comprising 566 residential units over 9
blocks with a typical height of 8 storeys and a tower of 14 storeys on
south-west corner. Proposal includes visitor centre, doctors'surgery and
community performance space and new vehicular access.
"This huge development
has been discussed by the Executive Committee of the Society; we welcome it
and most aspects of the high quality of architecture. We think the deep U
shape of the main block and the enclosed open area with the flight of steps
is very exciting. The public building and performance area facing the Wet
Dock is innovative and we look forward to seeing it in use.
"The only part of the plans to which we take exception is the rectangular
tower block (50 metres high) at the south-west end on Helena Road. We felt
the external appearance to be very retrospective. It seemed to hark back to
buildings of the sixties in Ipswich which are going to be demolished.
Further, architecturally it seemed quite different to the remainder of the
proposals. Clearly a radical rethink is needed for this part. Otherwise we
congratulate the developers and the architects on the scheme."
Land bounded by Cardinal Street and Wolsey Street, Franciscan Way: erection
of 50 two-bedroomed apartments in 5 storey block
"This is a very sensitive
area with two Grade I and Grade II buildings in close proxirmity. The
Planning Committee should therefore expect an outstanding building. This is
by no means so and thus we would ask the Committee to reject it."
[IBC has granted permission. The Development Control Committee thought it
was a good building and could even have been higher.]
Kennings, Duke Street: proposal for a 5- and 6-storey mixed
"This proposal has some attractive
features but it is over-development on this site. The Duke Street faqade has
no coherent rhythm and the details of the roofing surely need to be
improved. The trouble with allowing a very large building on one side of a
street is that developers have every reason to expect to be allowed to build
as large on the opposite side, thus creating a canyon effect. This attempt
should be refused."
2-8 Fore Street: internal and external alterations including demolition of
No 2 Fore Street warehouse to rear and erection of 2.5 storey building and
works to 10-14 Orwell Place (ex-Martin & Newby's)
"The Society, whilst sad
to see the demise of Martin & Newby, is pleased that the new development
includes 5 shops as well as the now usual apartments. We also note the
minimal parking provision with approval. The Council officers are working
hard to ensure the retention of several interesting Georgian features
(fireplaces, staircase and wine cellar) as well as an archaeological survey.
Assuming the details are satisfactory, permission could be granted."
Ipswich Sports Club, Henley Road: installation of 8 flood lighting columns
to illuminate all-weather hockey pitch.
"This application needs to be
refused as it will cause two sorts of pollution in a quiet residential area.
When the majority of these houses were built and purchased the Sports Club
was small and quiet; now it has grown to have the presence of the Ipswich
Hockey Clubs, both nationally important and well supported. They will create
light, noise from the crowds and from their cars leaving in the late
evening. To have this in one's back garden is insupportable in planning
[IBC refused permission on grounds of ugliness of columns, noise pollution,
light pollution and inappropriate use in residential area.]
ALBION MILL: (formerly Pauls),College St.
This was a presentation prior to a
formal planning application when ready. The Society's letter was addressed
to the developers. "Thank you for inviting us to attend your presentation.
In general terms we were happy with your general proposals for the site but
we feel that a lot more thought needs to go into key areas.
- The corridor
of view is not big. On the quayside elevation it forms what appears to be a
10 metre square opening. This is clearly unsatisfactory; the idea is
excellent but needs review.
- We are unhappy with the arrangement of the
- The presence of 23 storeys on the next site should not encourage
you to build any higher than the current hideous concrete silo.
- We need
to look at the security arrangements. The Society is totally opposed to
enclosed and gated communities. They must be avoided by design.
Society recommends the inclusion of an Arts Cinema as the major need. We
would be delighted to make the case for this separately."
The outcome of previous planning applications:
Water tower, reservoir, Park
Road: installation of antennae, etc.
IBC refused permission and the
applicants have appealed against this decision. The Society has written to
the Planning Inspectorate in Bristol repeating our original objections. All
apparatus was to have been installed behind a fibre-glass screen but this
has not been adhered to and the tower has become an unsightly mass of
straggly poles, wires and panels.
67 Westgate Street: retention of shutters.
Society objections but IBC
Crown Pools: new car park on existing lawn.
The Society recommended refusal.
IBC granted permission but the new IBC coalition Council has decided to
postpone building it.