Logo

Hundred home plan for former council offices withdrawn by developer

PUBLISHED: 10:27 12 August 2018 | UPDATED: 12:37 05 September 2018

Suffolk Coastal's former headquarters at Melton Hill, Woodbridge  Picture: ARCHANT

Suffolk Coastal's former headquarters at Melton Hill, Woodbridge Picture: ARCHANT

Archant

Uncertainty surrounds the future of a controversial housing project today after developers withdrew their application for 100 new homes to replace vacant council offices in Woodbridge.

An impression of what the front of the Melton Hill housing development could look like Picture: HOOPERS ARCHITECTS/AUPGAn impression of what the front of the Melton Hill housing development could look like Picture: HOOPERS ARCHITECTS/AUPG

Plans to redevelop the Melton Hill site, occupied by Suffolk Coastal District Council until December 2016, were approved by the council’s planning committee last October, despite more than 330 objections.

However, the final decision was deferred until April, as councillors sought to resolve a number of issues chiefly, the delivery of affordable housing.

The committee agreed to 32 affordable units in two blocks one less than originally proposed by Active Urban Property Group, due to “market concerns” of registered providers taking on separate units in open market housing blocks.

The council’s head of planning, Philip Ridley, was given authority to issue the final go-ahead.

Philip Ridley, head of planning and coastal management at Suffolk Coastal District CouncilPhilip Ridley, head of planning and coastal management at Suffolk Coastal District Council

In a letter dated last Thursday, he wrote that the applicants were able to attract only one expression of interest from a registered provider to take on just 16 units for affordable rent.

Mr Ridley wrote that the committee’s original resolution would allow for the shortfall to be made up by a commuted sum of £1.5million.

But, last week, the applicants informed Mr Ridley that the provider no longer wanted the 16 units, and that no other provider was interested instead suggesting the possibility of vacant building credit (VBC) introduced to give developers a financial credit for the amount of vacant building floorspace brought back into use or demolished, offset against affordable housing contributions.

The day after Mr Ridley’s letter concluded VBC would not be applicable on the site, the council revealed a letter from the applicant, requesting the application be withdrawn with immediate effect.

The homes were due to be contained within 14 blocks, up to five storeys high, with a community and café space, pedestrian thoroughfare to the river, and underground parking.

Some opponents labelled the design “cheese wedges”, and were concerned about height and density, but planners felt it was bold, with an “acceptable and positive approach”.

It has yet to be confirmed whether or not the applicant will submit a fresh proposal.

Latest Articles

Meet the Editor

David Vincent

David Vincent Email

EADT writer David Vincent has more than 40 years experience in Suffolk. He has explored the highways and byeways of East Anglia, meeting homeowners, developers and estate agents from Bury St Edmunds to Aldeburgh and Colchester to Diss.

Most Read