Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed5 January 20263350673

Land North-East of Humber Doucy Lane, Humber Doucy Lane, Ipswich, IP4 3QA

Planning appeal 3350673 at Land North-East of Humber Doucy Lane, Humber Doucy Lane, Ipswich, IP4 3QA (East Suffolk) was dismissed on 5 January 2026 by Inspector Board D, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the approach to the appeal scheme would provide a comprehensive and coordinated approach to development of the site (IBC RFR1, ESC RFR1).

Hybrid Application - Full Planning Permission for the means of vehicle, cycle and pedestrian access to and from the site. Outline planning application (all matters reserved) for a mixed use development for up to 660 dwellings (Use Class C3), up to 400 sq m (net) of non- residential floorspace falling within Use Class E and/or Use Class F2(b), an Early Years facility, and associated vehicular access and highway works, formal and informal open spaces, play areas, provision of infrastructure (including internal highways, parking, servicing, cycle and pedestrian routes, utilities and sustainable drainage systems), and all associated landscaping and engineering works

Authority
East Suffolk
Appeal type
other · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Inquiry
Development
residential · Unknown
Inspector
Board D
Postcode
IP4 3QA

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the approach to the appeal scheme would provide a comprehensive and coordinated approach to development of the site (IBC RFR1, ESC RFR1)
  • Whether the scheme would represent an appropriate quantum of development on the site (IBC RFR11, ESC RFR10)
  • The effect of the scheme on the character and appearance of the area (IBC RFR4, ESC RFR3)
  • Whether the scheme would make appropriate provision for green infrastructure (IBC RFR12, ESC RFR10)
  • The effect of the scheme on the Stour and Orwell Estuaries, and Deben Estuary, designated European conservation sites (IBC RFR 7, ESC RFR6)
  • The effect of the scheme on highway safety (IBC RFR3, IBC RFR2, ESC RFR2)
  • Whether the scheme would be at risk from flooding, having particular regard to flooding and drainage strategy (IBC RFR5, ESC RFR 4)
  • Whether the scheme would make appropriate provision for infrastructure (IBC RFR13, ESC RFR11)
  • Whether the loss of sports pitches arising from the scheme would be justified (IBC RFR 10) [Appeal B only]

What decided it

The proposed on-site green space would not function effectively as SANG mitigation, so an adverse effect on the integrity of the nearby European protected sites could not be ruled out, and this strong reason for refusal disapplied the tilted balance and was not outweighed by other considerations.

Public benefits (housing delivery, affordable housing, economic benefits and open space) outweighed the less than substantial heritage harm, but this did not overcome the conflict with the development plan on green infrastructure/SANG provision (and sports pitch replacement in Appeal B), and with the tilted balance disapplied by footnote 7 the appeals were dismissed as the schemes conflicted with the development plan as a whole.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
ISPA4DM1DM4DM5DM6DM8DM12DM13DM18DM21CS8CS12CS16CS17SCLP12.24SCLP12.23SCLP11.1SCLP11.3SCLP11.4SCLP10.4SCLP10.1SCLP9.6SCLP8.2SCLP7.1SCLP3.5RSA2RSA9RSA11
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 11

How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.

See how each was applied

The decision letter

Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

40 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in East Suffolk

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2026

  1. Dismissed24 August 20266009815
    115 Oulton Road, Lowestoft, NR32 4QW
  2. Allowed5 August 20266004646
    Easton Bavents Ltd, Larks Rising, Reydon, IP18 6SS
  3. Allowed16 July 20266007778
    Land South Of Felixstowe Road, Stratton Hall, Felixstowe, IP11 0SQ
  4. Dismissed18 May 20266003227
    61 Hollow Grove Way, Carlton Colville, Lowestoft, Suffolk, NR338NS
  5. Dismissed13 May 20266005314
    43 St John's Road, Lowestoft, NR33 0PH

The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.