Ipswich Borough Council has been ordered to pay costs to a company over the refusal of a five storey student accommodation block in the town. 

A planning inspector has ordered the borough to pay Jaevee Limited some costs for their reason for refuse the 160-bedroom block in Tye Road, Ipswich.

Plans were refused by the council on April 6, 2023, but following an appeal, it has been found they "behaved unreasonably" in their refusal, thereby causing Jaevee Limited to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process.

The council's first reason for refusal of the plans, relates to Policy SP27, which identifies a number of sites, which have existing planning permissions for various types of development, protecting it for residential or residential-led mixed-use development.

The site inspector, John Felgate, who visited the site on February 13, found that student accommodation would be "clearly residential in nature."

He stated that even with additional facilities such as a communal lounge, gym and laundry, the scheme would be "led by its residential element."

In response Ipswich Borough Council said sites included in SP27 meets other housing needs, rather than student accommodation.

Mr Felgate found, however, that "neither the policy, nor its supporting text, appears to make any distinction between housing for students and other types of residential development."

The appeal decision states: "The policy does not exclude housing which is to be occupied by students.

"Suffice to say that the Council's evidence on these matters (relating to Policy SP27) was insubstantial and unconvincing, and provided no reasonable justification for the matters alleged,

"It is hereby ordered that Ipswich Borough Council shall pay to Jaevee Limited, the costs of the appeal proceedings."

The appeal to overturn the council's refusal itself was dismissed, due to the inspector finding the reasons for refusal outweighed the benefits.

Mr Felgate said: "The development would bring some benefits. It would add to the local housing stock, and it would support the growth of the University. I have given these some weight. The scheme would also be likely to generate local expenditure and investment, with benefits to the local economy, but in the absence of any information on these matters, I can give only modest weight to this. Overall, these considerations in favour are outweighed by the conflicts with the development plan, and the resulting harm, that I have identified."