Five-suite aparthotel at Unit 1 The Winerack, Key Street, Ipswich

What was proposed

The application proposed changing the first floor from a café to a five-room aparthotel, with a new east window and altered entrance doors.

“1.Proposal 1.1The application seeks planning permission for the change of use of first floor from café (Use Class E (b)) to aparthotel (Use Class C1), and provision of new window to east elevation. One set of double doors would be replaced with 2 single doors on the front elevation separated by a brick infill. The original application also included the installation of awnings on the front elevation.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site is part of The Winerack, a mixed-use development with commercial premises below residential units, in the town centre and flood zones 2 and 3a.

“The café use was part of the original permission for The Winerack. It is currently unoccupied. A License has recently been granted by IBC to operate the ground floor as a bar. 1.2There would be separate access from a revised door access on the front elevation via a staircase to the first floor.”

“The Design and Access Statement states that there would be on site management arrangements and the proposals would present an efficient re-use of existing floorspace within a sustainable town centre location.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to conditions controlling management, waste, parking, noise, materials, use and length of stay.

“Details of an Operational Management Plan to include central booking control (no unmanaged occupation), guest verification prior to booking acceptance, record of occupancy levels and length of stay to be viewable upon request by the Local Planning Authority, house rules issued to all guests, complaint response protocol, confirmation of no open or uncontrolled access to the building and confirmation of access instructions issued only after booking approval, confirmation of…”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the commercial tourism use acceptable in the town centre and found that conditions could address amenity, flood risk, transport and noise.

“Policy SP15, ‘The Waterfront’, requires that new development should contain a mix of uses stating that ‘Residential, community, office, arts, culture, open space, boat-related and tourism uses will be permitted.’ The site is in Opportunity Area B, the Merchant Quarter where the following mix of uses is acceptable - residential (could include live work units); and non-residential use: offices/businesses; cafes/restaurants; and small scale retail. 5.6.”

“The continued commercial use of the first floor premises as an aparthotel, albeit a different commercial use, does not require the property to be marketed as the commercial use of the property would not be lost. It is considered that the continued commercial use of the site within an area which allows a mix of uses including C1 tourism uses would, in principle, be an acceptable use for the site.”

Officer report

What residents said

Residents objected over parking, access, noise, security, waste, fire safety, short-term occupants, building facilities and the adequacy of application information.

“Gray, 86The Winerack Ipswich received 29th January 2026 Issues raised- • Limited and inaccurate information has been provided with application • No details of marketing for loss of café have been provided • BNG is required- if not required more information is needed to explain this • LPA needs to request accurate documents • Fire Statement has not been provided • Flood Risk Assessment provided contains errors- does not indicate correct address • External works have been downplayed-…”

“Parking may result in blocking emergency vehicles • Guests should be prevented from parking by planning condition • Concerns with use of stacker- not all vehicles fit into the stacker, users need instruction, costs associated with repair following breakdown should not be covered by residents • Development not required, many other hotels nearby • Inappropriate to put holiday accommodation in residential block • Residents have an agreement to not let their properties as Airbnb…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent supported the proposal, saying it would replace a more intensive hospitality use, bring the vacant unit into use and support the Waterfront.

What members debated

Members debated the classification of aparthotel use, enforceability of residence controls, the maximum stay, waste, noise, emergency contacts and construction management.

“Councillor Jones noted that a 24-hour emergency contact number would be provided as part of the management regime and asked whether this provided to Winerack residents and be part of the complaints protocol. Councillor Jones asked if the Waste Management Plan would include waste collection by the Council, and whether the requirement of a Construction Management Plan should be added given concerns raised within the late representation.”

“The Senior Planning Officer reported that Waste Management had been consulted about refuse bins and collections, but had made no comment; as a commercial operator, the applicant could arrange their own waste collection service.”

Minutes

The committee’s votes

A proposal to reduce the maximum stay to 30 days was lost, while adding a Construction Management Plan condition and residents’ liaison informative was agreed.

“Councillor Holmes proposed that the maximum length of stay in condition 10 be reduced to 30 days, but this amendment was lost.”

“Councillor Jones proposed that a condition be added to request that a Construction Management Plan be submitted, and Councillor Rae proposed that, given the number of objections raised by residents, an informative be added to suggest that the applicant hold discussions with the Winerack residents on the proposed operation of the aparthotels, and these additions were agreed.”

Minutes