- Screen Colours:
- Normal
- Black & Yellow
Answer: nothing!
Let me explain: Ipswich is a low wage town, and has been since Robert Ransome attracted agricultural workers into town by offering agricultural wages but paid at the same rate 52 weeks per year. On the farm the wage fluctuated with the season, sometimes nothing during the winter (when there was no work). This low wage economy has prevailed, outlasting the engineering, clothing and cigarette industries to perpetuate into the new financial-based (insurance) institutions.
Despite the national housing shortage there is not an excessive demand for higher priced housing. Many of the proposed new developments are changing the balance of the range of property on offer, reducing the number of four and five bedroom, detached houses and increasing the number of two and three bedroom properties, especially those with three floors. We have seen this happening at Henley Gate (Ipswich Garden Suburb) and what, I consider, should be one of the best sites in Ipswich. Persimmon's Discovery Avenue (near the new tidal barrier and overlooking the river) where the developer is building the smallest possible starter homes, most of which will go into the Buy-to-Let market.
The Mill, East Anglia's tallest residential tower block: there are a variety of reasons why this hasn't been developed. The main reason is that it isn't economically viable to finish it, that is the cost of the building work required to complete the flats exceeds the return on that investment (remembering that developers will require 25% - 30% 'profit' to cover the risks involved). The completion of the nearby 'Winerack' was only possible because the Homes and Communities Agency contributed £15 million towards completion costs (technically a loan) and £5 million came from New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP). I understand that sales haven't been as brisk as had been hoped. You will appreciate that The Mill (tower block) is currently an empty shell, no lifts, no bathrooms, kitchens or plumbing services as well as the obvious problems with the external cladding. Access for 'fit-out' will also be difficult: nowhere does the external wall of the 23 storey block reach the ground, so nowhere can scaffold start from the ground to rise up the external walls. A further issue is that the lift shaft is too small for building purposes; once a lift car is installed, it will be of insufficient size to convey sheets of plasterboard. It will be a brave developer who takes on these risks in the current market.
The vacant site between the Churches of St Peter and St Mary-at-the-Quay has a wealth of buried history; it can be argued that this is the original heart of Anglo-Saxon Ipswich, and we know it is where Cardinal Wolsey started his college. It was the site of a Friends Meeting House and more recently St Peter's Ironworks. Archaeologists are suggesting that there may be 1,000 bodies buried on the site. No wonder then that they are also suggesting that the archaeological dig will cost over £1 million. A hefty outlay even before the first brick is laid (and as I've already said 'high rise flats in Ipswich don't sell’).
Much the same applies to 47 Key Street, the vacant site bounded by Key Street, Slade Street, Fore Street and Salthouse Street and previously the offices of R&W Paul (Pauls and Whites). The Jewish Cemetery sits in the middle of the site. The whole site is currently owned by Investec, – it has received planning permission for various redevelopment schemes but there have been no takers.
Burton Son & Sanders offices, 1-5 College Street, (the building shrouded in scaffolding on the right as you drive towards the Novotel roundabouts). It is in the same ownership as the vacant site behind the building (see above for the archaeological problems). This is a listed building and has been – and still is – subject to an Urgent Works Notice requiring the owner to make it weatherproof and secure. He has carried out some work and we understand that repairs to the temporary roof are in hand. The issue for the local authority, who issued both Urgent Works and Building Repairs Notices is what to do next. Failure to comply with the latter means that the local authority can compulsorily purchase at a price set by the District Valuer. Unfortunately, the local authority has no budget for this type of expenditure and so cannot proceed; I’d guess that the building owner knows this.
In the case of the small merchant's house opposite, number 4 College Street, Ipswich Borough Council purchased the whole site, including the house and car park and are spending a fair amount of money renovating the building. They hope to sell the site to a developer and influence them into a scheme that will be the gateway into the Waterfront. With the small merchant’s house renovated, the whole should be somewhat more attractive to modern developers.
Between Stoke Bridge and Princes Street bridge, former Lower Yard (a railway goods yard) fronting Grafton Way was to be a massive Tesco supermarket and planning permission had been granted. This was probably the first major supermarket to be cancelled when retailers realised we were all swapping to home-shopping. Spenhill, Tesco’s property arm, offered the site for sale and a number of different planning permissions have been sought; the latest is a series of town houses (with gardens) – more of those three bedroom, three storey houses mentioned earlier. However, the developer still isn't confident that when built they will sell, so the site is still a car park. Incidentally the retail units opposite the Royal Mail sorting office are owned by Trinity College Cambridge, one of East Anglia's biggest landowners, and they have a policy of not selling. So, this bit of the site isn't included in the planning permission.
New Cut West: see article page 16.
Why not develop these brownfield areas as green parks? Unfortunately, this is about ownership. The majority of these sites are in private ownership, and all of the owners are expecting a return on their investment. Even if there is no immediate prospect of development the owner can borrow against the asset and use the money to develop elsewhere. Take, for example, the Tacket Street/Cox Lane car parks; these are owned by National Car Parks and are on their books as potential retail development land. On paper this is (was) four times the value of residential land and, although NCP have no intention of developing either car park, they have been using their portfolio of property assets as security against borrowing for developments in other towns.
John Norman