Update: The district planning committee voted unanimously to give permission, and said some very complimentary things about the Jetty Lane plans and intentions. We couldn’t be better pleased! This is another real vote of confidence in the project
The vital planning meeting for Woodbridge ‘s proposed Jetty Lane Community Youth and Arts Centre is being held tomorrow, Thursday 21 February, at Suffolk Coastal’s new headquarters in Riduna Park. It’s a public meeting – do come and support us and the community of Woodbridge. We’re expecting the discussion to take place early – around 9am – so please get there before 9.
When the Community Youth Centre was pulled down in 2017, many groups were forced to move out of Woodbridge simply because there was nowhere to house them. The Jetty Lane site (Jetty Lane being the original name of The Avenue) – has been used uninterruptedly for Youth and Community clubs and meetings since 1949 : that’s SEVENTY years! It is now the last site suitable for such a centre in Woodbridge.
The County Council have such faith in the need for this project to have offered a 125y lease on the land. We are really hoping that the district council will have similar faith!
It is clear that Jetty Lane has a great deal of community support. However, despite a number of community consultations (still ongoing) a few residents still have personal concerns about this project. This is understandable. As chair of Jetty Lane I would like to assure them that the cic – soon to be a charity – will work with them at all times to endeavour to allay their concerns . After all, this site has been occupied for the same purposes for seventy years. It’s not exactly new.
Slightly more startling however, are the two letters of objection sent to the Planning department from a central London-based planning consultancy on behalf of unnamed and unknown ‘local interests’. We do not know whether these ‘local interests’ are people, or companies, or even people who are associated with companies. What, do you think, is their agenda? Is it to benefit the community of Woodbridge?
Its been quiet on the Woodbridge Cheese Wedge (aka Suffolk Coastal’s old head office ) front for a long time. Too quiet…
The burning question? That same old story. It seems that the applicant would rather not build the affordable housing (32 units out of 100 dwellings) he is obligated to under policy DM2 of the local plan. Apparently it’s simply not ‘affordable’ – for him.
Suffolk Coastal’s Planning Committee’s response reminds one of jesting Pilate. They washed their hands and delegated agreement of the essential affordable housing provision to their Planning Officers. Who have negotiated a sum of money (a ‘commuted sum’) be paid “to provide affordable housing at the same level as approved, in the event that no affordable housing provider acquires some or all of the affordable housing in a reasonable timescale.”
Lets park the cynical phrase “to provideaffordable housing at the same level as approved’ for one moment, and follow the money.
This decision clearly – presumably unintentionally – gives the applicant an opportunity to elect to pay the commuted sum option instead of building 32 affordable units simply by refusing any offer for affordable units from any provider. (I have heard that at least one realistic offer has been made. )
It would very much benefit the developer to pay the commutated sum. It would provide no benefit whatsoever to the people of Woodbridge.
Why? The amount the applicant would have to pay NOT to build the 32 affordable homes is a maximum of £100,000 per unit *. Multiply that by 32 and you see he would in effect be paying about £3 million to be allowed to build 32 extra houses of the same size to sell at market prices ( in Woodbridge, that’s a great deal more than £100,000 each). The greater the number of affordable housing units and the higher the sales price of market housing, the greater the incentive to commute.
So, when the Council agreed an increase of residences from 70 to 100, it increased the incentive for the applicant not to provide affordable housing. And by the combination of the Council agreeing an increase in residences and commuting the affordable housing provision, the applicant will receive a multi-million pound windfall. Talk about the law of unintended consequences! Unless Suffolk Coastal ‘s Planning Committee takes immediate action, it looks like the public asset that is the old Council Offices is earmarked for private profit.
At the same time, that commutated sum of £3million – supposedly to provide “Affordable Housing at the same level as approved” – will do little to benefit the forgotten people of Woodbridge. It will certainly not provide 32 units of affordable housing within Woodbridge which is what we might consider the phrase ‘at the same level as approved’ to mean.
Although £3million is considered by Suffolk Coastal’s planners as fair reparation for NOT building 32 homes on a site that has already been purchased, it will NOT cover the purchase of land, design, planning and building of anything like 32 homes anywhere else! Experts suggest 14 maximum, which is less than half of those guaranteed to the committee and promised to the community. And, of course, wherever these affordable homes are, they will be unlikely to be in Woodbridge, where finding any housing below ‘market’ prices is daily less possible. There is no land within Woodbridge to buy.
How can it be right that an applicant purchasing a public asset gains by not providing the agreed affordable housing the locality so desperately needs? Indeed, has a positive incentive not to provide it?
To say that the development was unpopular was to put it mildly. It was overwhelmingly opposed by the residents of Woodbridge and Melton, the Woodbridge County Councillor (me), Woodbridge Town Council, Melton Parish Council, and local and national organisations, whose views were overridden by the planning officers and planning committee. Its only saving grace was the possibility of affordable housing in situ.
The District Council Planning Committee needs to step up to the plate, rescind its delegation to the Head of Planning, and revert to its October demand for a detailed scheme for the provision of affordable housing on-site and to wholly abandon using the offer of a commutation alternative.
*The amount payable by the applicant in the event of commutation is set according to the number of bedrooms per residence in the affordable housing and whether the area in which the housing is to be provided is categorised high, medium or low cost. Woodbridge is categorised high cost and the figure per residence is in the region of £90,000 -£100,000. Thus a commutation of the 32 affordable residences in Woodbridge would require a commutation payment of about £3 million. How many homes can you buy in Woodbridge for £3 million? How many can you build?
Home to school transport Central government have made changes to the age of statutory education. It is now compulsory to stay in education or training until you are 17 – and shortly it will be 18. These are impacting on poorer students who have to travel to college, as Suffolk’s free home to school transport policy (as indeedthe national home to school transport policy) only covers students up to 16 years old. Over 16s can avail themselves of a discretionary – paid – option but it costs £540 a year. Currently the SCC Administration are taking the line that the Endeavour card (offering 1/3 off available journeys by some operators) will cover the problem, and that there are Bursaries to help the needy. I do not think this is an adequate response and I will be taking this up as a matter of urgency.
Historic milestone lost – and found The Thoroughfare Milestone outside John Ives was reported to me as missing by an anxious local historian and nobody seemed to know where it had gone. We were for a short time worried that it might be a case of vandalism or theft. Luckily some nifty detective work by Woodbridge Town Council’s very own Kay Yule and myself has traced it to the depot in Melton and we expect it to be returned shortly.
Planning Application next to Dukes Park I have had a lot of emails of concern from residents about the planning application to build housing on the field next to Dukes Park.As this is also the site through which the EA One underground high tension cabling is due to be routedI contacted the EA ONE link officer at Suffolk County Council for definitive information on the separation necessary between housing development and underground high tension cables. You can find his brief resume of the status quo and implications on my blog : http://carolinepage.blog.suffolk.libdems.org/2014/07/26/dukes-park-and-east-anglia-one/
Travellers Sites Suffolk County Council has abandoned a public consultation on where to create three official Gypsy and Traveller stopping sites. The consultation identified seven potential sites – with the aim of selecting three in the areas where unauthorised encampments usually occur. However, following a number of landowners coming forward with other potential sites and early feedback from councillors and residents, Suffolk’s council and policing leaders decided to halt and reconsider. The sites were:
Layby off A143 opposite Shepherds Lane, Wortham
Land between Candlet Road and Treetops, Felixstowe
Layby on Felixstowe Road, Levington, south of junction with Bridge Road
Former Little Chef site, Kentford, between Bury Road and A14
Former Chippings Dump, Upthorpe Road, Stanton
Former Little Chef site, off A14 by the Orwell Bridge
A140 junction with Castleton Way, Yaxley.
Restoration of Woodbridge – Ipswich Sunday Service Just to reiterate that from the 20th July a Sunday/Bank Holiday bus service has resumed allowing car-free travel between Woodbridge and Ipswich. Suffolk County Council is sponsoring 3 return services a day between Woodbridge and Ipswich. As you know I have ben fighting for this since the last was so disgracefully discontinued at two weeks notice to us, the passengers, back in 2011.
The Sunday 65b will allow car free journeys to visit hospital and help young people get out on their own. It will be a boon for all people who can’t- or can’t afford to – drive. And its obviously a big boost for tourism. It is only guaranteed until the end of 2014 – after that, it depends on numbers – so it’s a case of use it or lose it!