To See Or Download a PDF of Consultation Comments and Our
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VISION & OBJECTIVES COMMENTS: Response ID Organisation Answer Officer Response Action Both are totally aspirational and hopelessly unrealistic in current Economic clime Point Noted, however Norfolk authorities will work together to achieve No change to NSF ANON-3C85-CA87-P Resident the vision and objectives and monitor performance against these. I have no comment on Sect 2, but I ask that Agreement 1 at Sect 1.3 be amended to include: employment, economic, infrastructure and environmental needs. This shouldn't be limited to housing. The wording used was to allow local plans that are not comprehensive Update to Agreement 1 to include The residents and (ie around specific targeted areas) to set different end dates where this 'which seek to identify levels of ANON-3C85-CAFP-W businesses of Hoveton is appropriate. Local plans would include all the elements highlighted but Objectively Assessed Need for & Stalham Division the wording is changed to make this clearer. housing' It is essential that Norfolk retains its rural identity. Unsuitable housing developments and the dualling of roads must be seriously reduced or Norfolk will no longer be an area of outstanding natural beauty. The NSF recognises the rural nature of the county and looks at ways to No change to NSF Hockering Parish enhance this through the Green Infrastructure study completed as part ANON-3C85-CA8T-K Council of this work including the identification of Green Corridors. If there is a clear desire to engage communities in development at a local level, significant changes will need to be made to processes which currently offer residents pre-decided choice (often none are suitable) and are presented in a way Point noted and authorities will give consideration to this when Point to be highlighted to ANON-3C85-CAFT-1 Resident which is a barrier for many residents to read. The opportunities to engage (as this one is) are often only for the educated given the complexities of language and technical terms, meaning those who are often most negatively affected by completing local plans authorities development are least able to raise their own concerns. Much of Norfolk is too dependent on tourism/visitors. Let's accelerate the diversification and attracting high tech/high wage businesses. ie. Downham market is set to gain from the "Cambridge effect" leapfrogging over Ely and Littleport. The points raised are noted, section 5 of the NSF supports diversification No change to NSF Let's see more of it. and attracting high tech/high wage businesses and various initiatives are Hunstanton Coastal ANON-3C85-CA8V-N being led by local authorities to encourage this eg Norwich to Community Team However I fear they will be deterred by the poor rail link from Norwich and the indecision over services from Kings Lynn. Cambridge Tech corridor, A47 corridor etc. That is before you consider the poor road network, North to South from mid and west Norfolk and even worse east to west from Norfolk to the midlands and heading northern England. lack of infrastructure - improved roads, hospitals, GP's, faster broadband to facilitate business growth in the more rural areas, much better mobile coverage and of a higher standard - 3G/4G- is vital to achieve any objectives The points raised are noted and supported within various sections of the No change to NSF ANON-3C85-CAXS-J Resident NSF N2RS - No to Relay I would agree that it is a largely rural county with a relatively low population density with a very considerable stock of historic assets which are now under threat. Support Noted No change to NSF ANON-3C85-CAXF-5 Stations East Ruston Parish The county is being changed forever by an overload of housing Noted No change to NSF ANON-3C85-CAXN-D Council Attleborough Land Limited supports the Proposed Spatial Vision and Proposed Spatial Objectives. Attleborough Land Limited understands Attleborough's strategic position in the context of the Breckland District Council Local Plan and Support Noted No change to NSF Bidwells (on behalf of Norfolk Strategic Framework. The SUE will be delivered in accordance with the Spatial Vision and Objectives. Attleborough Land Limited agrees that market towns like Attleborough can offer a very attractive quality of life to residents. ANON-3C85-CAXP-F Attleborough Land Attleborough Land Limited is committed to ensuring that the SUE will enhance the quality of life for both existing and new residents. The attached Design & Access Statement sets out the Vision for the SUE, and explains the design Limited) evolution of the indicative masterplan submitted with the planning application. ADDITIONAL INFO SUBMITTED - Attleborough D&A Statement The vision does not recognise that full time residents in North Norfolk have limited access to quality jobs, affordable housing, shops, swimming pools, roads and other public services which this summary suggests is already available in The vision in the NSF is intentionally aspirational and forward looking so No change to NSF Norfolk. doesn't address the current infrastructure and economic disadvantages faced in the county. These matters are adequately recognised elsewhere ANON-3C85-CAJG-R Resident in the document. The NSF recognises the rural nature of the county and looks at ways to address the issues. Para 2.1 It is not clear whether over half the population live in the built up areas of Norwich, Great Yarmouth and King's Lynn or whether the residents of the 21 market towns contribute to this half. Half the population covers Norwich, Great Yarmouth and King's Lynn No change to NSF In the first paragraph of page 7 it says "there is a highly skilled and versatile population" but also says "skill levels in the workforce are relatively low." These must be different sections of the population. and the 21 market towns. Point 2 and 3 noted. Hunstanton & District Para 2.2 - the Spatial Vision - is obviously optimistic in particular with regard to housing needs and transport. ANON-3C85-CA63-G Civic Society Para 2.3 - Shared Objectives - all 27 are laudable and should be supported but may well be difficult to achieve - particularly aligning job growth with housing provision and the locations of workplaces and homes. Car ownership is essential in the sparsely populated rural areas where public transport is non existent, owners will rely on Park & Ride services to access the built up areas. Developers are too ready to claim that costs involved in using brown field sites excuse them from the obligations of including affordable housing, so the proportion achieved is lower than anticipated. Your Vision should include a railway reopening strategy to address the car crisis in Norfolk. There is big potential for reopening of some key routes (e.g. Norfolk Orbital Railway) to unlock tourism and employment opportunities and to One of the aims of producing the Norfolk Strategic Framework is to No change to NSF relieve congestion. agree shared objectives and priorities to improve outcomes and help shape future plans. The introductory text to the document notes that “This document is intended to be strategic in nature. It provides only an overview of background information and shared research.” Section 7 goes on to state “Further work on infrastructure priorities will continue before the finalisation of the NSF but it should be noted that these short term priorities which are listed in this document will only represent a fraction of the overall infrastructure investment needed to deliver the growth ambitions of the NSF” Given this, I am afraid that, whilst the local authorities involved in producing the document might support the aims of the Melton Constable Trust and those of the community rail partnerships, the stage ANON-3C85-CA6U-J Resident of the project (for orbital rail), the likelihood of it being achievable in the short to medium term, and its role in serving the transport needs of the county (when weighed against the projects within the framework such as Norwich to Cambridge rail) all mean that it is considered premature to consider it of sufficient strategic standing to merit detailing its inclusion in the framework. We are aware that the Trust has been speaking to the various local authorities including Norfolk County Council and are sure that continuation of this dialogue will help to move forward with the project. It is felt there is insufficient reference to the infrastructure required to support the economy and employment. There is much reference to enhancing productivity, skills and education, co-locating future employment and housing and The first points made are noted but they are deemed to be a matter for Add ‘and infrastructure’ to Section ensuring digital connectivity and transport infrastructure around 'main settlements' and connections with the other areas. But as there are existing issues where infrastructure is required to support current employment areas (ie Vinces local plans to address and not a strategic issue. 2.3 Road, Diss), it is considered this ought to be given a stronger priority within the strategic framework as there may well be other areas where this is an issue. The suggested section 2.3 change is agreed with and has been updated River valleys should already be protected by various local plan A proposed amendment to the wording of Agreement 2 is: designations Its settlements and key infrastructure will be physically resilient to 'future growth and' the impacts of climate change. ...and of the first bullet point at 2.3 would be: ANON-3C85-CA6V-K Diss Town Council facilitating the development 'and infrastructure' needed to support the region’s business sectors and clusters... Under: To improve and conserve Norfolk’s environment by: ensuring the protection and enhancement of Norfolk’s environmental assets, including the built and historic environment, protected landscapes, Broads and coast; ...it is felt that the river valleys are so important that they should be included at the first bullet point.