Statement of Consultation Growth Triangle Area Action Plan Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Contents
1 Introduction 3 2 Preparation of the Area Action Plan (Reg.18) 4 3 Consultation Activity 5 Parish Assessments (Feb-May 2008) 5 Principles for Development (Nov 2008-Jan 2009) 8 Options for Growth (March-July 2009) 12 Growth Triangle Workshops (Sept-Oct 2011) 41 Options Consultation (March-June 2013) 47 GNDP Design Review Panel (Sept 2013) 112 Appendix 1: Parish assessment survey form 115 Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development' 117 Questionnaire 117 'Initial Site Concept' form 119 Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth' 124 List of consultees 124 Publicity material 126 Consultation with schools 133 Infrastructure workshop 136 Appendix 4: Publicity Material - Growth Triangle Workshops 138 Workshops flyer 138 Workshops agenda 140 Broadland News article - Autumn 2011 141 Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation 142 List of consultees 142 Consultation response form 146 Broadland News article - Spring 2013 151 Summary leaflet 153 Focus Groups Agendas 157 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Contents
Appendix 6: Letter of feedback - Design Review Panel 160 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Introduction 1
1.1 A major area of growth to the north-east of Norwich is identified by the Joint Core Strategy (JCS).The Old Catton-Sprowston-Rackheath-Thorpe St. Andrew Growth Triangle (or Growth Triangle, for short) will accommodate at least 7,000 new homes by 2026, rising to 10,000 thereafter. This growth will include significant employment allocations and greater provision of services and facilities in the area. It is also dependant upon delivery of key infrastructure. The Growth Triangle includes land within the parishes of Old Catton, Sprowston, Rackheath and Thorpe St. Andrew, as well as within adjoining areas such as Beeston St. Andrew, Postwick, Great & Little Plumstead, Salhouse and Spixworth.
1.2 Broadland District Council has developed an Area Action Plan (AAP) as a Development Plan Document (DPD) to guide the major growth within the Growth Triangle as a whole and to ensure that it leads to the development of sustainable communities.
1.3 Community and stakeholder consultation has been crucial to the development of an AAP that is fit for the needs of communities (existing and new) within the area. The Council's strategy for consultation in the production of the Local Plan is set out in the Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), which was adopted in April 2006 and updated with an addendum in 2008.
1.4 This Statement of Consultation details the programme of community and stakeholder consultation that has been carried out in the development of the Growth Triangle AAP. In particular, it addresses the requirements of the Town & Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012, which require such a statement to form part of the 'proposed submission documents' to be sent to the Secretary of State. Regulation 17(d) requires a statement setting out:
1. Which bodies and persons were invited to make representations under regulation 18, 2. How those bodies and persons were invited to make such representations, 3. A summary of the main issues raised by those representations, and 4. Broadland District Council's consideration of and response to those issues.
1.5 The Town & Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 set out the statutory requirements relating to consultation in the production of Local Plan documents. Regulation 18 relates to 'Preparation of a Local Plan' and allows for a local planning authority to be quite flexible in how it gathers evidence and views from consultation bodies and the public at an early stage.
1.6 This statement explains, in chronological order, the range of consultation exercises undertaken during the regulation 18 stage.
3 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 2 Preparation of the Area Action Plan (Reg.18)
2.1 Regulation 18 of The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 requires local planning authorities to notify specific and general consultation bodies (where it is considered they may have an interest) of the subject of the Local Plan document that the authority proposes to prepare and invite them to make representations to the authority on what that document should contain. The local planning authority must also consider whether it is appropriate to invite representations from persons who are resident or carrying on business in their area and, if so, they must make arrangements for this to take place. The local authority must take into account any representations made to them in response to these invitations.
2.2 This requirement for early consultation therefore allows for a relatively flexible approach in how a local planning authority can consult with the public and with consultation bodies in the preparation of a Local Plan document.
2.3 As Broadland District Council has stated in its 'Update to the Statement of Community Involvement' (October 2008), it is likely that this preparation stage (Reg. 18) will normally encompass the following, broad phases of work:
1. Evidence gathering 2. Consideration of issues and options 3. Consideration of a draft DPD
2.4 The consultation activity relating to the Area Action Plan broadly follows this pattern, with early stage evidence gathering in order to identify the issues, an 'issues and options' style consultation in order to gain views on the most appropriate options for development, and (although not a draft DPD, as such) a consultation on a further refinement of options, before drawing together the final document for publication.
2.5 The following information within this document outlines the specific consultation exercises that have been undertaken. For each consultation exercise undertaken the following information is presented:
1. The aim of the exercise 2. The timescale of the exercise 3. The consultees invited to take part in the exercise 4. A description of the exercise methodology 5. A summary of the exercise results 6. Broadland District Council's consideration of and response to the main issues raised
2.6 The appendices that feature at the end of this document present a variety of information produced in support of the different consultation exercises undertaken. Each of these is referenced within the following sections, where appropriate.
4 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Parish Assessments (Feb-May 2008)
Aim
3.1 Parish assessments were undertaken as an initial exercise to engage Parish and Town Councils across the district in considering any key constraints, issues or opportunities relating to the future development of their parish. This exercise formed an initial part of the evidence gathering related to the Area Action Plan (AAP), as well as the Council's Site Allocations Development Plan Document.
Timescale
3.2 This exercise commenced with a briefing event, undertaken by Broadland District Council's Spatial Planning Team, which was held on four separate occasions in different locations across the district. One of these events took place within the Growth Triangle, at Pinebanks Business & Recreation Centre, Thorpe St Andrew, on 21st February 2008.
3.3 The events were targeted at Parish and Town Councils and were intended to introduce the 'parish assessment' concept and explain to representatives of Parish and Town Councils the type of information that the District Council was seeking as part of the assessment.
3.4 This was then followed by the assessment forms being sent out to all Parish and Town Councils for completion between 6th March and 2nd May 2008.
Consultees
3.5 The invitation to workshops and subsequent 'parish assessment' forms were sent to all Parish and Town Councils and Parish Meetings in Broadland District, including those based within the 'Growth Triangle'.
Description
3.6 The 'Parish Assessment 2008' survey forms were sent out to every Parish and Town Council in Broadland on 6th March 2008, for completion. Parish and Town Councils were given until 2nd May to complete these forms and return them to the District Council.
3.7 The survey forms asked questions relating to the local environment, housing, employment, transport and community facilities, relating to the parish. A copy of the survey form is attached as Appendix 1.
3.8 A reminder letter was sent to those Parish and Town Councils that had yet to respond, on 23rd April, asking them to complete their survey forms.
5 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Results summary
3.9 Completed survey forms were received from 40 different Parish/Town Councils (out of 65 civil parishes). 5 of the 9 parishes falling within the Growth Triangle responded to the survey.
3.10 The completed survey forms highlighted a range of spatial development needs, across Broadland's parishes, which would need to be considered in more detail to see whether they could be addressed through the production of Development Plan Documents.
3.11 Although the needs and issues raised by each parish are different in a detailed and geographical sense, an analysis of the results highlights certain, general trends. The information below relates only to the responses received from those parishes based within the Growth Triangle.
The most commonly identified area of particular environmental importance was local woodland. Other local, environmental assets which were highlighted included marshland, parks and allotments.
Two of the five responding Parish/Town Councils from within the Growth Triangle stated that the current settlement limit, as defined in the adopted Local Plan, should stay as it is. One respondent stated they wished for the limit to be reduced. Two parishes left this question unanswered.
Two of the Parish/Town Councils suggested areas of land for future market housing within their parish and one suggested there were no suitable sites. Two of the Parish/Town Councils left this question unanswered.
One of the responding Parish/Town Councils identified a need/ exception sites for affordable housing. One stated there is no need/ no suitable sites and three left the question unanswered.
Two Parish/Town Councils stated there are suitable sites for employment within their parish. Three left the question unanswered.
On the subject of local transport issues, Parish/Town Councils within the Growth Triangle highlighted the need for improvements to local roads and junctions, and speeding was mentioned by one respondent as a particular issue. One Parish/Town Council stated that the impact of additional traffic brought about through future development will need to be addressed - particularly relating to traffic flow to and from the Norwich Airport Industrial Estate.
As regards the need for new or enhanced community facilities, those mentioned included an extension to a cemetery, new recreational land for the
6 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
parish, new green space and an improved play area. One parish stated that it was seeking no new or enhanced facilities.
In terms of the potential need for future facilities in the parish, those mentioned as possibilities include additional recreation space, a new village hall, an extension to a cemetery, allotments and an improved doctors surgery.
3.12 Clearly this exercise was limited by the low number of responses from Parish/Town Councils within the Growth Triangle. However the issues identified do provide a useful, broad indication of some of the aspirations and concerns of communities within the area, upon which further consultations sought to build.
Response to the main issues raised
3.13 As mentioned in para. 3.9, only five of the responses from this exercise are relevant to the Growth Triangle which limits the scope by which these comments could be used to inform the proposed Area Action Plan. However, the issues raised have been of use in informing and justifying the inclusion of certain topic-based questions in the subsequent 'Options for Growth' consultation.
3.14 In particular, the 'Options for Growth' questionnaire covered a variety of issues which were alluded to within these earlier responses.
3.15 For example, the issue of areas of environmental importance, highlighted in 3.11 above, formed the basis of a question within the Environment section of the questionnaire which asked respondents to specify any particular areas of environmental importance within the Growth Triangle that should be protected or that would make a good location for publicly accessible open space.
3.16 In a similar fashion, the responses relating to land suitable for residential development were echoed in questions in the Options for Growth questionnaire relating to potential village locations within the Growth Triangle (based on land that had been promoted for development).
3.17 The Options for Growth questionnaire also included sections and questions relating to how economic growth should be planned for, which types of amenity/service should be provided, protected and/or enhanced, and the issue of transport and connectivity - all reflecting issues raised by the parish councils responding to the Parish Assessment exercise.
7 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Principles for Development (Nov 2008-Jan 2009)
Aim
3.18 Following the 'Parish Assessment' stage, Broadland District Council undertook an extensive exercise to identify major potential sites for future development within the Growth Triangle which, ultimately, could be allocated within the Area Action Plan. This exercise ran in tandem with a wider 'call for sites' across the whole district, the aim of which was to identify potential sites for the Council's Site Allocations Development Plan Document.
3.19 This exercise also included an opportunity for people to comment on 'principles for development', exploring individuals' 'likes and dislikes' about the area, thoughts on dispersal of dwellings versus concentration and ideas for creating sustainable communities.
Timescale
3.20 This exercise commenced on 14th November 2008 and finished on 12th January 2009, providing a period of 8 weeks during which responses could be made.
Consultees
3.21 This exercise was open to the public, but it was also targeted at the nine Parish and Town Councils based within the Growth Triangle, due to the nature of the issues being considered.
3.22 Other, particular stakeholders were notified about this exercise, including remaining Parish and Town Councils, agents and developers, landowners and community groups in the area.These included those stakeholders that had already submitted site proposals in the recent past.
Description
3.23 Parish and Town Councils based within the Growth Triangle were sent the following information:
A map showing the north east fringe of Norwich in which the boundaries for the AAP (at this time) were to be drawn (N.B. The area which later became known as the Growth Triangle). A 'Principles for Development' questionnaire (see Appendix 2). Copies of an 'Initial Site Concept' form (see Appendix 2). A 'Glossary of Terms', including the proposed settlement hierarchy taken from the draft Joint Core Strategy for Greater Norwich.
8 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.24 The 'Initial Site Concept' form was a standard form produced by the Council for individuals to use when proposing any sites for potential future development. The exercise was flexible in that respondents could either complete an 'Initial Site Concept' form (if they wished to promote a site) or the 'Principles for Development' questionnaire, or both if they so desired.
3.25 As this was also a public exercise, a variety of publicity measures were taken to ensure members of the public were made aware of the exercise. These included:
Updates being made and all of the documents above being made available via Broadland District Council's website. An article being published in the Winter 2008 edition of Broadland News - the Council's magazine which is delivered free to every household and business in the district. Articles were also published in Business Focus magazine, which is sent to all businesses in the district, and in the Parish Pages newsletter, which is sent to all Parish and Town Councils.
3.26 As mentioned above, agents and developers, landowners and community groups that were registered on the Council's consultation database were also sent a notification email or letter regarding the exercise, explaining how they could get involved if they so wished.
Results summary
3.27 The results of this exercise, pertaining to the Growth Triangle Area Action Plan, were quite disappointing, with only four responses to the 'Principles for Development' questionnaire being received. Clearly this is not a high enough response to draw any valid conclusions from the questions that were asked. As a result of this response, the Council sought to undertake a further public consultation during spring 2009, where many of these questions were asked again, albeit in slightly different forms.
3.28 For information purposes, the following issues arose out of the comments that were received during this consultation:
When asked what they liked about the area to the north east of Norwich, respondents commented on easy access to the city, the Broads and the coast, the high quality landscape, and the rural environment with distinct village identities.
When asked what they liked least about the area, the most common issue that respondents raised was traffic issues - noise, HGVs, poor road maintenance etc. Aircraft noise and other forms of pollution were also mentioned.
9 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
When asked what new things should be provided, respondents highlighted the need for improved public transport, an improved road network and more green space.
When asked whether any new development should be spread throughout the area, creating several 'village-scale' developments or concentrated in one area, creating a 'town-scale' development, opinion varied.There was no clear consensus of views.
Respondents were asked how they felt objectives for achieving a sustainable community (based on Inspire East's 'Excellence Framework') could be achieved within this area. The following issues were the ones which were mentioned the most often:
The development of the Northern Distributor Road will ensure that there is good transport and communication within the area. The development of sustainable homes will help to ensure that communities are well-designed and that development is environmentally sensitive. A network of cycle paths and footpaths throughout the area will help to ensure communities are well connected, environmentally sensitive and well designed. It is important to ensure that opportunities for small scale business (e.g. Premises) are built in to any new developments in the area. The provision of high quality community facilities will help to ensure that existing and new communities are active, inclusive and safe and that they are fair for everyone.
Two strategic sites were also submitted as part of this exercise (which had already been submitted to the Greater Norwich Development Partnership as part of their work on the 'issues and options' for the Joint Core Strategy). These were the Rackheath Eco-community' proposal and a 'Vision Statement for North East Norwich' submitted by the 'North East Consortium' of landowners.
Response to the main issues raised
3.29 As discussed in para. 3.22, the extremely minimal response to this exercise from stakeholders with interests in the Growth Triangle limited the opportunities for these results to inform the development of the AAP in an accountable and meaningful fashion. The level of response was not high enough to draw any valid conclusions from the questions that were asked.
10 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.30 However, in a similar fashion to the responses received during the earlier 'Parish Assessments' exercise, the issues raised in this consultation have been helpful in terms of informing the content of the 'Options for Growth' consultation.
3.31 In addition, the two strategic sites that were submitted initiated debate and discussion regarding the shape and form of future major growth within the Growth Triangle. Their submission also encouraged further landowner interests to form consortia with a view to submitting co-ordinated site proposals to the Council for consideration. Elements of both of these original site proposals remain within the draft Area Action Plan.
11 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Options for Growth (March-July 2009)
3.32 During spring and summer 2009, Broadland District Council undertook an 'Options for Growth' consultation programme relating to the production of the Area Action Plan (AAP). This marked the first substantial public and stakeholder consultation relating to the document, which largely dealt with identifying consultees' aspirations, concerns, constraint and opportunities regarding the issue of major development in the Growth Triangle.
3.33 The consultation programme was split into three distinct exercises:
1. The 'Options for Growth' questionnaire 2. Consultation with schools in the area 3. An 'Infrastructure Masterplanning' workshop
3.34 Each of these exercises is dealt with separately in the following sections of this chapter.
3.35 In addition, although not a consultation exercise undertaken as part of the AAP, the final section of this chapter provides details of relevant issues raised during a public consultation that ran in parallel to the 'Options for Growth' programme, that sought views on potential development sites promoted for growth across the district. This 'Potential Development Sites' consultation was undertaken as part of the production of the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD).
12 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Options for Growth - Questionnaire
Aim
3.36 The aim of this public consultation exercise was to establish some of the key principles regarding future growth within the Growth Triangle.
3.37 Whilst choices were limited about where development should be located within the area (due to the level of growth needed against land that is available), this exercise recognised that there were still distinct and important questions that need to be considered which the public should have the opportunity to answer.
3.38 For instance, a significant part of the development area will need to be set aside as green space or undeveloped land to create green links and ecological corridors. Also, there were decisions to be made regarding the types of services, facilities, housing and employment land that should be incorporated into the new developments and what form it should take.
Timescale
3.39 This exercise ran for 12 weeks, between 9th March and 1st June 2009.
Consultees
3.40 This was a public consultation event, but particular stakeholder organisations were also targeted. Types of organisation invited to take part included Parish/Town Councils based within the Norwich Policy Area (which includes the Growth Triangle), utilities bodies, local/regional government bodies, business and commerce representatives, community organisations, environment/heritage bodies and other public sector organisations.
3.41 A full list of those consulted is attached as Appendix 3 in this report.
Description
3.42 Targeted stakeholders were sent copies of the following information:
A cover letter explaining the procedure and explaining how further information relating to the exercise could be accessed from the Council's online Consultation Portal. A copy of the 'Options for Growth' questionnaire.
3.43 A wide range of communications measures was adopted in order to ensure that the public could find out about the consultation and make their views known.These were as follows:
The questionnaire, as well as being available in hard copy format, was uploaded to the Council's Consultation Portal
13 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
(http://broadland-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal), where maps and supporting information could be viewed online and where people could fill in an online version of the response form, in order to participate in the exercise. This was explained to targeted stakeholders within their covering letter. A series of 10 staffed public exhibitions were held in accessible venues around the district, featuring displays on the work being carried out (see Appendix 3), information relating to the consultation and providing the opportunity for members of the public to ask questions of members of the Council's Spatial Planning Team. All publicity regarding the consultation, discussed here, highlighted the exhibition dates and venues. For the purpose of these exhibitions, a 'quick' questionnaire was developed, featuring a smaller selection of questions from the main questionnaire. Members of the public could either fill these in at the exhibitions and leave them with Council staff, or take them away to complete and submit to the Council within the consultation deadline. An article regarding the consultation was published in the Council's spring 2009 edition of Broadland News (see Appendix 3), which is delivered to every home and business based in Broadland District. Updates were made to the Council's Local Development Framework web pages, hosted on the Council website (www.broadland.gov.uk). Copies of the 'Options for Growth' questionnaire were distributed to Broadland's Council Information Centres at Aylsham, Wroxham and the Millennium (Norwich) libraries.The material was also available on the Council's Mobile Information Centre and at the Council offices. The consultation was also publicised at the Council office reception via the looping digital display that is based in the customer waiting area. An article was written and sent to contacts for parish newsletters/magazines around the district, for potential inclusion in forthcoming issues. Parish and Town Councils were, in addition to the consultation material, also sent copies of a poster (see Appendix 3) to put up in public locations around their community. This provided background to the consultation, information on how people could respond and details of upcoming public exhibitions.
3.44 In addition to the above, the Council also sent a notification of the consultation to all remaining contacts registered on the Council's Consultation Portal, via email or (failing this) letter. Articles were also printed in 'Parish Pages' (a Council periodical sent to all Parish and Town Clerks) and 'Members Bulletin' (sent to all Broadland District Council members).
3.45 This period also coincided with consultation relating to two other Broadland planning documents: the Joint Core Strategy (produced by the Greater Norwich Development Partnership) and the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (being produced independently by Broadland District Council). As those Parish/Town Councils within the Norwich Policy Area received material relating to these three consultations on distinct, but related documents (Site Allocations, Area Action Plan and Joint Core Strategy DPDs), Broadland District Council felt it appropriate
14 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
to hold a briefing session for these particular bodies.This was held at the Council offices on 19th March 2009 and was attended by representatives of six Parish/Town Councils.
3.46 Officers from the Council also attended a meeting of the Broadland Disability Forum on 18th March 2009 to provide background to the Local Development Framework and to explain to the group how they can help to influence future development by taking part in these various consultation exercises. The Forum was made up of a group of individuals from around the district who met on a quarterly basis to discuss issues affecting disabled people and who sought to improve access to services for the disabled.
Results summary
3.47 This consultation exercise generated 60 individual responses, in total. These responses consisted of 22 full questionnaires (11 in hard copy and 11 submitted online), 10 quick questionnaires and 28 responses in alternative formats (including letters and reports). However, six of the responses received were questionnaire documents that were left blank and so have not been counted in this analysis.
3.48 The ten staffed exhibitions that were held received much interest amongst the public. These exhibitions not only dealt with this particular consultation, but also those relating to the Site Allocations DPD and the Joint Core Strategy DPD. The following table includes a break down of numbers attending the various exhibitions:
Date Venue No. Of attendees
16/03/2009 Thorpe End Village Hall 64
17/03/2009 Acle Recreation Centre 17
19/03/2009 Sprowston Parish Council Offices 25
23/03/2009 Hellesdon Community Centre 18
24/03/2009 Reepham Town Hall 43
25/03/2009 Aylsham Town Hall 27
26/03/2009 Rackheath Holy Trinity Church 34
31/03/2009 Drayton Village Hall 62
01/04/2009 Wroxham Church Hall 61
02/04/2009 Old Catton Church Hall 50
Total No. Of Attendees: 401
3.49 The majority of people attending the exhibitions were in the 55+ age category and lived within 3 miles of the particular exhibition venue.
15 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.50 In terms of questionnaire responses, a wide range of issues were raised by respondents and these have been set out in detail in the document entitled 'Response to OSRT Options for Growth Consultation Event - Summary and Analysis of Results'. For convenience, some key points that were raised have been reiterated below.
3.51 Firstly it should be noted that there was a roughly even split between those respondents to the questionnaire who supported the proposed boundary for the Growth Triangle and those that did not. Some of those that objected did object to details regarding the land identified, although a significant number objected to the principle of growth.
3.52 Key principles identified by respondents as being of particular importance include the need for good access to day-to-day services and facilities and creating a high quality environment. Less important to respondents was meeting housing need and affordability.
3.53 There was an overarching theme of concern running through the responses received regarding a potential loss of identity and the rural character of the area, including the individuality of Thorpe End Garden Village and other attributes of the historic environment and local green space.
3.54 It was relatively clear that respondents had a preference for new developments that had a more rural feel as opposed to feeling like an extension of urban Norwich. However, it was also clear that providing new facilities that could be shared by existing residents and creating linkages between new communities and existing facilities was of importance.
3.55 There was general support for high energy efficiency standards in new developments and for renewable energy infrastructure, both small and large scale. Although there was notably more concern about the issue of wind energy.
3.56 Respondents felt that the following features are of particular importance to villages:
housing for different groups a primary school childrens’ play areas good public transport a community hall informal open space a food shop
3.57 However, of distinctly less importance was a public house, and public art was considered to be of little (if any) importance to a village.
16 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.58 Respondents also stated they were willing to travel further for library, secondary school, employment opportunities and supermarket facilities than for any of the other facilities mentioned. The importance of having the facilities listed above within walking distance was reiterated.
3.59 Ensuring that people can move in, around and beyond the Growth Triangle was also a key theme with respondents feeling that all of the potential growth areas had the potential to share services and that connectivity was a key element of achieving successful development.
3.60 Key transport agencies were clear that the impact of growth in the area needed to be considered in combination if development were to be successful. Environmental agencies were clear that full consideration needed to be given to key environmental assets, including those outside the Growth Triangle which might be indirectly affected.
3.61 The issues raised through this consultation provided a valuable insight into the views of respondents on the principles and issues for growth within the Growth Triangle. The views expressed during this exercise were fully taken into account and helped to progress the development of the Area Action Plan.
Response to the main issues raised
3.62 The following table outlines how the main issues arising from the Options for Growth Questionnaire were addressed in the development of the 2013 Options consultation document.
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
Vision & Objectives
Particular importance – access to facilities & Strategic polices outline transport principles to ensure that creation of high quality environment. future masterplans of individual Urban Quarters or Villages demonstrate, through sustainable transport strategies, how Least importance – addressing housing need transport patterns will be implemented at a site level to create and affordability & extending existing natural walkable and semi self-contained neighbourhoods in the form landscapes. of Public Transport Orientated Developments (section 6).The vision for the Growth Triangle (GT) outlines that new development will be built to high sustainability standards, including incorporating decentralised low carbon and renewable energy sources (Section 4.0).
Additional comments:
Provision of services. Good transport Transport and Movement Strategic Policy, Green Infrastructure provision. Protection of important green spaces Strategic Policy & Sustainable Development Strategic Policy and historic built environment. Promoting address additional comments (Section 6.0) environmental sustainability by reducing C02 emissions.
17 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Strategic Requirements (Section 6.0) outline the use of sustainable technologies to improve environmental performance and Area Based Policies address the provision of services (Section 6.0, 7.0)
Boundary
Site assessment – boundary of GT potential Joint Core Strategy (JCS) examination confirmed geographical to change. extent of Area Action Plan (AAP).
Additional comments:
Perception that rural villages’ identities will Areas of landscape value are considered in the Area Based later change to an urban feel like Norwich. Policies (7.0) to establish which areas are suitable for development. Concern over loss of agricultural land. Change is unavoidable to meet the development needs of the Growth should expand further than rail link that current and future population. forms eastern part of the Growth Triangle (GT) boundary. Disagreement over the boundary The Housing Strategic Policy (Section 6) outlines the need to and concept of AAP. manage the transition of new development between the urban core of Norwich and the rural edge of the Urban Quarters or Villages.
JCS examination confirmed geographical extent of AAP.
Village locations
Split JCS examination confirmed geographical extent of AAP.
Areas of landscape value are considered in the Area Based Policies (7.0) to establish which areas are suitable for development.
To meet the development needs of the current and future population Greenfield sites need to be made available.
Facilities and services required to support new development are outlined in the Infrastructure Distribution section of the Area Based Policies (Section 7.0).
The Local Infrastructure Plan and Programme (LIPP) supports the need to phase development and identifies infrastructure necessary to support the development proposed within the Growth Triangle (Section 6.0)
Additional Comments: Objections of concept of development in its entirety. Concerns of loss of agricultural land. Concerns of lack of infrastructure and utilities.
Social & Culture
Preservation of amenities:
18 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Thorpe End Garden Village remains as a Area Based Policies (section 7.0) recognise the landscape settlement with unique identity, separated by setting of Thorpe End and protection of the conservation area, green spaces from other settlements. Public including the preservation of green space outlined. open spaces, woodlands, countryside and hedgerows. Green infrastructure and wildlife Green infrastructure strategic policy (section 6.0) outlines corridors. Historic character. Local shops and landscape features to retain and the development of green services. High grade agricultural land. infrastructure network in the Growth Triangle.
Listed buildings are recognised in the heritage component of the spatial portrait (Section 2.0) of the built environment in the AAP. Listed buildings and conservation areas will be protected from any impact of proposed development due to the recognised status.
Enhancement of amenities:
Transport routes. Historic parkland. Green Green Infrastructure Policy (Section 6.0) addresses historic infrastructure. Recreation and sports facilities. parkland and recreational facilities.
Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) outlined for transport in the AAP are developed from the implementation plan for the Norwich Area Transport Strategy ensuring proposals are integrated with the wider transport network and needs.
Strategic polices outline transport principles to ensure that future masterplans of individual Urban Quarters or Villages demonstrate through sustainable transport strategies how transport patterns will be implemented at a site level to create walkable neighbourhoods and development in the form of Public Transport Orientated Developments (Section 6.0).
Physical solutions to aid integration
Providing services that can be shared and Facilities and services to support new development outlined appeal to range of demographic groups. Green in the Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) Infrastructure to enable movement of wildlife. Recreation facilities. Residential elderly care. Green Infrastructure Policy (Section 6.0) addresses wildlife Libraries. Safe well–lit walkways. and recreation.
Specialist, flexible, adaptable housing to accommodate requirements outlined in the Housing Policy (section 6.0).
Transport and movement policy promotes Public Transit Orientated Developments (PTODs) and walkable neighbourhoods (section 6.0).
Housing and built environment
New development – create places with a new Strategic requirements and area based policies require new identity but which are well connected to development to be well connected with a focal point. existing places. New villages should have rural feel with a central focal point.
19 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Principle of good design
Scored high – provision of facilities and public Provision of facilities and public spaces recognised in the spaces. Meeting social and lifestyle needs strategic green infrastructure policy for recreational need most important. Principles relating to energy (Section 6.0) and area based policies recognise the facilities efficiency and landscaping scored highly. required (Section 7.0).
Comments: High energy efficiency standards Design Strategic Policy outlines that development needs to in homes of additional design. Focal point incorporate sustainable technologies to improve environmental within neighbourhood for community activities. performance (Section 6.0). Intuitive to potential flood risk, through design and technology. Incorporation of the built Strategic requirements of strategic policies (Section 6) outline environment. the need for development proposals to incorporate Sustainable urban Drainage Systems to mitigate against the risk of surface water flooding in existing and new development.
Planning for employment growth
Allocating varying sizes of land or Housing Design and Employment Development Strategic providing multi-purpose business units, Polices (Section 6.0) recognise the need to provide the and allocating land in appropriate places. infrastructure and flexibility for home working and to ensure High quality infrastructure and multi-purposes business units are available and accessible. telecommunications could be provided for both employment area and residential to attract businesses and facilitate home working.
Equity
Providing a deliverable local economy. Issues raised about the landscape character are addressed Protecting countryside. Improve in the strategic policies section of the AAP. provision of services to rural communities. Addressing the needs of Areas of landscape values are considered in the Area Based Gypsy and Traveller communities. Policies (Section 7.0) to establish which areas are suitable (Gypsy & Traveller site Location for development. preference Area 8 followed by Area 1). Economic Development Strategic Policies explore promoting and developing the local economy.
Housing Strategic Policies recognise that needs for Gypsy and Traveller communities need to be met.
Environmental
Potential support for on-site energy schemes, Design Strategic Policy outlines that development needs to providing for individual buildings, up to a larger incorporate sustainable technologies to generate energy area, potentially on a district-wide scale e.g. (Section 6.0). large scale heating and energy generation schemes and micro-generation technologies. Least support for large scale energy generation on either industrial or rural sites.
Environmental Protection
20 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
All areas currently designated. Thorpe End The Green Infrastructure Strategic Policy (Section 6.0) proposed conservation area. Wildlife sites. acknowledges allotments and wildlife sites. Allotments. Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) recognise the landscape setting of Thorpe End and the need to protect the conservation area.
Protection of Historic Environments
Sites suggested include: - Grade 2 churches Listed buildings are recognised in the heritage component of and listed buildings. Historic parks and the spatial portrait (section 2.0) of the built environment in the gardens. Archaeological sites. Beeston AAP and in the area based polices. Listed buildings and Mansion House. Rackheath control town and conservation areas will be protected from the impact of hangar buildings. proposed development.
Area Based Policies incorporate the Greater Norwich Historic Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment findings to ensure new development respects the heritage of the area (Section 7.0).
Services
Public transport and informal open space were Transport and movement policy promotes Public Transit considered to be the most essential facilities Orientated Developments (PTODs) and walkable for new villages. Public art least important. neighbourhoods (Section 6.0).
Open space standards discussed in the green infrastructure strategic policy for recreational use (Section 6.0).
Other essential / desirable facilities
Library, mobile library van, Adult Education, Facilities and services to support new development outlined Pre-school care / activities, elderly care, youth in the Infrastructure Distribution section of the Area Based club Policies (Section 7.0)
Specialist, flexible, adaptable housing to accommodate requirements outlined in the Housing Policy (Section 6.0).
District Centre
Location 7 Rackheath. Location 4 Blue Boar Possible locations of a District Centre within the Growth Lane. Location 8 Rackheath & Salhouse Triangle are discussed in the Infrastructure Distribution section parishes. of the Area Based Policies (Section 7.0).
Transport & Connectivity
Potential to share services. Slight bias towards Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) outlined for transport and shared services between fringe and rural areas movement in the AAP are developed from the implementation as opposed to between separate fringe plan for the Norwich Area Transport Strategy ensuring locations. Respondents perception no proposals are integrated with the wider transport network and needs.
21 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
significant barriers to the area being developed Transport and movement policy promotes Public Transit as an interrelated and mutually supportive Orientated Developments (PTODs) and walkable whole. neighbourhoods (Section 6.0).
Services to share
Schools provision, transport services, Facilities and services required to support new development employment, sports pitches, care facilities and are outlined in the Infrastructure Distribution section of the supermarkets. Area Based Policies (Section 7.0)
Specialist, flexible, adaptable housing is outlined in the Housing Policy for care facilities (Section 6.0).
Community Facilities
Small food shops & children’s play area should Transport and movement policy promotes Public Transit be most accessible facility within walking Orientated Developments (PTODs) and walkable distance. Lower priorities for accessibility neighbourhoods (section 6.0). include employment opportunities, supermarkets and libraries. Facilities and services to support new development outlined in the Infrastructure Distribution section of the Area Based Policies (Section 7.0)
Frequency of bus
One bus every 10/15mins considered Transport and movement policy promotes Public Transit frequent. Orientated Developments (PTODs), including a bus stop within Short journey equals 10mins (less than 400m of each dwelling in each new urban quarter / village 30 mins). (Section 6.0).
Pedestrian & cycle links
Network connecting all routes to each other. Transport and movement policy promotes Public Transit Underlying design should maximise walking Orientated Developments (PTODs) (Section 6.0). Creating & cycling. Appropriate interchanges where semi self-contained neighbourhoods enables transport modes different transport routes converge. to converge and access to the public transport network will be supported.
Governance
Slight majority considered there to be Objectives of AAP and the Growth Triangle Vision recognise capacity within existing communities to the need to create opportunities and support communities in mange new facilities. Also concern managing community assets. however about the capacity of community to take on these AAP Strategic Policies identify that it will be important to responsibilities. identify appropriate management structures for community assets and their future maintenance (Section 6.0). Types of facilities that could be managed:
Village halls and community centre Sports pitches and playing fields Open spaces and natural habitats
22 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Allotments Places of worship
Existing community organisations and groups:
Town and Parish councils Residents association Housing associations
Support to manage facilities:
Administration and legal support Training Appointment of a community development officer
23 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Options for Growth - Consultation with Schools
Aim
3.63 To date, the work done to involve communities and stakeholders in developing the Area Action Plan had focused on the general public, Parish and Town Councils in the area, and other key stakeholders. A decision was therefore taken by the Council, in summer 2009, to undertake some focused work with young people living in or nearby the area, in order to gather their views on future growth and what any new communities in the area should look like. This formed part of the 'Options for Growth' consultation stage.
3.64 A letter was therefore sent to five schools in and around the area asking if they would like some of their pupils to take part in a short exercise designed to identify their priorities for future development in the Growth Triangle.
Timescale
3.65 This exercise was undertaken on three separate occasions with three schools in June and July 2009. Dates and venues were as follows:
Sewell Park College, Norwich 25th June 2009
Broadland High School, Hoveton 1st July 2009
Sprowston High School, Sprowston 10th July 2009
Consultees
3.66 The schools invited to take part included Broadland High School (Hoveton), The Open Academy (Heartsease), Sewell Park College (Norwich), Sprowston Community High School and Thorpe St Andrew School. Positive responses were received from Broadland High School, Sewell Park College and Sprowston High School.
3.67 Officers from the District Council (no more than three on each occasion) visited each of the three schools on the dates listed above in order to run an exercise with groups of pupils. The exercise lasted no longer than 2 hours and there were no more than 25 pupils on each occasion.
Description
3.68 The exercise took the following form:
1. Introduction
24 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Who we are, what the Council does, what we do within the Council, what we are looking to do in the Growth Triangle, why we want the views of young people and an outline of what the exercise entails.
2. Quiz: sustainable communities Pupils were arranged into groups (no more than four groups at each school) and each group was given a quiz to work through. The quiz featured multiple-choice questions on topics such as population, the environment, crime and safety etc. and was largely based on statistical information as it relates to Norfolk and the U.K. Teams marked each others’ work and the winning team was awarded a prize. The purpose of the quiz was to familiarise the pupils with the kinds of issues that affect the sustainability of communities. This knowledge would prove to be of value for the ensuing parts of the exercise.
3. ‘Hopes’ and ‘Concerns’ In their groups, pupils were asked to identify their four ‘hopes’ for the new communities that will be built in the Growth Triangle and their four biggest ‘concerns’, i.e. what would they most wish to see happen in the new communities and what would they be most concerned about happening in the new communities (see Appendix 3). To help them identify their hopes and concerns, each group was given a pack of ‘statement cards’, featuring statements on possible aspects of life in a new community. Each pack contained 32 cards, categorised into one of five themes by colour (Business, Community, Environment, Housing and Transport). Groups could go through the cards and pick out their four biggest ‘hopes’ and four biggest ‘concerns’. Packs contained blank cards for them to write their own hopes or concerns if they so desired. Groups were asked to write their four ‘hopes’ and ‘concerns’ on a team worksheet that they had each been given.
4. Designing a Community Remaining in their groups, pupils were asked to choose one of three potential community areas within the Growth Triangle to focus on.These were coloured yellow, blue and red and followed the options for growth set out as the basis for the wider public consultation. Groups were then asked to design their own community in their chosen area, keeping in mind their ‘hopes’ and ‘concerns’ (see Appendix 3). Pupils were encouraged to be as creative as possible and to use as many different techniques as possible to show what their community looks like and what life is like there. Groups were provided with a large scale map of their particular community area, on which they could set out different areas of land use. Team worksheets also featured a large blank area where groups were encouraged to draw pictures of various features within their community, give
25 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
their community a name, list features and write ‘a day in the life…’ pieces from the point of view of different members of the community. Groups were asked to present their designs to the rest of the class and then vote on each others’ work. The winning group was then awarded a prize.
5. Summary and close All pupils were thanked for their hard work and valuable contribution. It was made clear that their work and priorities would inform the emerging AAP for the Growth Triangle.
Results summary
3.69 If the hopes of the different working groups are considered on a broad thematic level then it is clear that there is a distinct bias towards community and environmental themes. However, this analysis arguably obscures some of the detail. When the occurrence of specific issues is considered it appears that there is a much more evident balance. The most prominent issues raised as hopes comprise feeling safe, access to facilities, access to employment opportunities and environmental sustainability, in the form of both recycling and waste and energy generation.
3.70 There was a much wider spread in the individual concerns that were raised by the school groups. However, it could be argued that there are distinct parallels in the broad thematic areas that were identified. In particular issues such as having to leave the area to find a career or the area becoming a dormitory clearly echo the issues of employment opportunities and services and facilities being available. It might therefore be surmised that these issues are of key priority to the groups who participated in the events.
3.71 However, it is also important to identify that there was one key concern that occurred notably more often than others: ‘There won’t be much green space in the area (e.g. sports fields, heathland, woods etc)’. This can be interpreted as a key concern that development should not also mean the excessive urbanisation of the countryside.
3.72 Also interesting to note as frequently occurring concerns are the congestion of roads and the main shops in the area being supermarkets. The interpretation of these issues occurring frequently is considered to be relatively self evident.
3.73 Overall it could be surmised that the school groups wished for a liveable place where they could meet their day-to-day needs, including employment, recreation and access to local services and facilities. Much regard was also had to the community’s impact upon the wider environment.
26 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.74 When considering the assessment of the results of this exercise it should be remembered that the participating groups represent a relatively small sample of the school age population. Nevertheless, the results are important in the ongoing development of the strategy for the growth of Broadland.
3.75 A full report of the results from this exercise is available, entitled 'Schools Consultation Exercise - Report & Conclusions'.
Response to main issues raised
3.76 The following table outlines how the main issues arising from the consultation with schools exercise have been considered by the District Council in the development of the Area Action Plan.
Main issue(s) raised Issue Addressed in AAP Section
Broad Hopes – community and environmental themes Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) theme
Specific Hopes – feeling safe, access to facilities, access to Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) Issues employment opportunities and environment sustainability (recycling and waste and energy generation) Area Based Policies (Section 7.0)
Concerns – having to leave the area to find a career or the Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) area becoming a dormant, issues of employment opportunities and services and facilities available. Area Based Policies (Section 7.0)
Key Lack of green space. Excessive urbanisation of the Strategic Policies, Green Infrastructure concern countryside. and Transport and Movement (Section 6.0) Congestion of roads and main shops in the area being supermarkets. Area Based Policies (Section 7.0)
27 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Options for Growth - Infrastructure Masterplanning Workshop
Aim
3.77 The principle aims of this workshop were:
To understand how best to plan services and facilities for the community (e.g. Doctors surgeries, schools, police stations etc.) within the Growth Triangle and whether there are any benefits that may arise from locating services together. To understand how best to plan for utilities within the Growth Triangle - what are the constraints and how do we plan around these? To understand the transport and access issues that may arise when deciding how to locate services within the area. To understand how green spaces and the natural and built environment impact on the potential location of development within the Growth Triangle. To start to apply this understanding to the various options for locating new development within the Growth Triangle.
Timescale
3.78 This workshop took place on 24th July 2009 at the Queen of Hearts, Magdalen Street, Norwich.
Consultees
3.79 Invites to the workshop were sent to 30 individuals representing 18 different organisations (including various officers from Broadland District Council). A list of participants can be found in Appendix 3. Organisations were specifically targeted due to the relevance of their work to the aims of the event - i.e. they were either utilities bodies (e.g. Anglian Water, EDF Energy), environmental bodies (e.g. Environment Agency, Norfolk Wildlife Trust), other service providers (e.g. NHS Norfolk, Norfolk County Council) or companies representing developer interests in the area.
3.80 Individuals actually attending the event numbered 31, representing 16 different organisations.
Description
3.81 Following a presentation on the background to the Growth Triangle proposals and the generic infrastructure needs of the area, the attendees of the workshop were split into three discussion groups.
3.82 Each group then sought to address two particular issues:
28 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
1. What are the principles for locating/distributing a particular service, facility or utility within the Growth Triangle? This should include the consideration of timing issues (i.e. at what stage should particular services be provided?) and potential co-location of services.
2. Consider the implications of delivering these services/facilities etc. within a number of different development scenarios in the Growth Triangle.
3.83 The agenda for the workshop can be found within Appendix 3.
Results summary
3.84 The following details the conclusions from the event. A detailed analysis of results is available within the document entitled 'Growth Triangle Workshop on Infrastructure Masterplanning - Summary Note'.
3.85 It was clear from the results of the workshop that this was an ongoing debate and that, although a number of key points were identified, there still needed to be further discussions before working up the masterplan for the area.
3.86 A key theme to both the discussion on Crime and Safety and that on Health was that delivery of service was the key concern not the delivery of buildings to deliver a service in, i.e. not all services will need a new building to work effectively. New buildings should be service-driven. Services should not be building-driven.
3.87 It was also clear that further discussion needed to be had with both Norfolk Constabulary and NHS Norfolk about what they required from the masterplanning process to deliver their service efficiently. Also in the case of NHS Norfolk it was apparent that work was ongoing into future service delivery relating to growth and engaging with their Rapid Action Team (RAT) was a key action.
3.88 It was also clear that health and police service delivery was not just about police officers or doctors. The message that prevention is better than cure was very clear. Prevention measures were thought to take a number of forms, some of which can be very traditionally delivery through planning e.g. designing places to be resistant to crime or creating attractive and useable recreational open space or walkable places to encourage physical activity.
3.89 However, there were a number of other interventions identified which were less traditionally linked to planning e.g. education programmes, promoting property marking, encouraging healthy lifestyles etc. If objectives such as reducing levels of crime or the fear of crime or improving health are to be achieved then the conclusion can be drawn that there needs to be clear linkages between the provision of built infrastructure through the planning process and the delivery of non-physical solutions, which may be delivered through the Council or by other bodies.
29 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.90 Another key point to the discussion was the possible benefit of co-location of certain services and facilities with one another. The process of co-location did not necessarily take the form of a set building for a particular purpose but might just as appropriately take the form of multi-functional or multi-usage space, provided it fulfils the needs of the service provider.
3.91 Conclusions for education were slightly different to those of Crime and Safety or Health. The provision of new buildings to deliver school services is essential. Primary schools would need to be constructed in the development areas and should be within 3 miles of their pupils. The position of the secondary school was more troublesome because it is a facility that will be used by a much more geographically dispersed population.
3.92 With a secondary school, as with medical facilities, accessibility is the key issue. Broadly speaking, it was not considered by stakeholders that those pieces of infrastructure with a wide geographical influence, such as secondary education and health services, needed to be located in a single location, only that they all needed to be very accessible to those that were going to need to use them. Accessibility was considered to be a function of the ability to walk or cycle to a location and the quality and affordability of public transport. It should be noted that the quality of pedestrian and cycle routes was considered as being of potentially more importance than the overall distance to the service or facility in question.
3.93 In terms of the functioning of the highway network it was noted that there is some benefit to be had from aggregating larger pieces of infrastructure that are large traffic generators. This aggregation would make facilitating traffic movements, in all their forms, easier.
3.94 In terms of utilities, the key message was that further work needed to be undertaken to consider the benefits of non-standard solutions to tackling water supply and disposal issues in the area. Water needs to have a central position when considering green infrastructure and masterplanning. Stringent targets for new development, retrofitting schemes for existing properties and education on water issues were all considered to have a place in tackling this issue.
30 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Response to the main issues raised
3.95 The following table outlines how the main issues arising from the Infrastructure Masterplanning Workshop have been addressed in the development of the Area Action Plan.
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
Services
Primary schools should be constructed in Strategic requirements (section 6.0) outline development areas / growth locations and requirements for services and facilities to support should be within 3 miles of pupils. the delivery of Urban quarters or villages in the Growth Triangle (GT). Consideration how people might access the hospital from new growth areas by public transport.
Accessibility to a secondary education and medical facilities.
Design
Preventative measures e.g. designing Strategic policies (6.0) outline opportunities to places to be resistant to crime or creating incorporate preventative measures into future attractive and useable recreational open development areas to promote healthy sustainable space or walk able places to encourage safer lifestyles. physical activity. Green infrastructure policy (Section 6.0) outlines Access to good preventative measures e.g. opportunities for recreational activity. green space, allotments, for new residents of the growth area. Healthy lifestyles. Focal centres of the development areas are considered in the Area Based Policies (Section 7). Health and crime prevention. Intervention programs less traditionally linked to planning e.g. encouraging healthy lifestyles. Needs to be clear linkages between the provision of built infrastructure through the planning process and the delivery of non-physical solutions, which may be delivered throughout the council or other bodies.
Communities need a focal point
Environment
Green spaces could include lakes, or a To meet the waste and energy targets set out in the broad, which can be linked into the water Joint Core Strategy (JCS), the Growth Triangle cycle study. The inclusion of water as part policies have outlined the need to allocate opportunities for future generations to provide a
31 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
of the green infrastructure strategy should home waste recycling centre facility and water be incorporated at every stage of the master efficient developments (Area Based Policies Section planning 7.0, Design Strategic Policies Section 6.0).
There should be a blend of waste and The Green Infrastructure Policy ensures sensitive energy targets applied across the GT and habitats are protected (Section 6.0). set out within the AAP. Could be linked to Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) levels. Design Strategic Policy outlines development needs Type of policy might usefully be to incorporate sustainable water technologies supplemented by a process of reducing including energy and water efficient measures levels of usage in existing properties i.e. (Section 6.0). retrofitting. Any retrofitting process would be helped by also providing education to JCS requires all new development to meet the the existing population. equivalent standard for non-residential buildings to the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 for water Drainage would also be into sensitive river efficiency, rising to level 6 by 2015 (Design Policy corridors, Bure and Broads, so water quality Section 6.0). would need to be carefully managed. Strategic Requirements of Strategic Policies (Section Retro-fitting existing building stock with more 6.0) outlines new urban quarters or villages need to sustainable water using technologies then incorporate on-site sustainable water infrastructure. demands on existing system could be greatly reduced
Non-standardised solutions did not form part of the water cycle studies. Non-standardised solutions should be considered as part of the evidence base for the AAP. Key questions that were outstanding were; what to do with waste water and which are the best ways and places to deal with it.
Green infrastructure
Water needs to have a central position when The Strategic requirements section of the AAP and considering green infrastructure and master the Design Strategic Policy outlines that need to planning. incorporate sustainable technologies to improve water efficiency and manager surface water flooding in existing and new developments (Section 6.0).
Transport
Consideration should be given to the idea Transport Principles in Strategic Policies (Section of the Wroxham Road Park and Ride site 6.0) outline development to be in the form of Public becoming a “public transport hub”. This Transport Orientated Developments (PTODs), could influence the distribution of service enabling different transport methods to converge and facilities. There is an argument to increasing the accessibility to public transport. suggest that the Park and Ride should be moved closer to the possible development Transport strategy develops incorporates cycle areas. routes into the wider cycle network.
32 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Accessibility and affordability of public Access to a secondary school considered in the area transport. It should be noted that the quality based policies (Section 7.0). of pedestrian and cycle rotes was considered as if not more important than Accessibility to facilities and services recognised in overall distance. the Transport and Movement Accessibility Policy (Section 6.0) Accessibility to a secondary education and medical facilities.
Utilities
Key message was that further work needed To meet the waste and energy targets set out in the to be undertaken which considered the JCS, the growth triangle policies have outlined the benefit of non-standard solutions to tackling need to allocate opportunities for future generations water supply and disposal issues in the to provide a home waste recycling centre facility and area. Water needed to central position. water efficient developments (Area Based Policies Stringent targets for new development, Section 7.0, Design Strategic Policies Section 6.0). retrofitting schemes for existing properties and education of water issues were all Design Strategic Policy outlines development needs considered to have a place in tackling the to incorporate sustainable water technologies issues of water. including energy and water efficient measures (Section 6.0).
JCS requires all new development to meet the equivalent standard for non-residential buildings to the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 for water efficiency, rising to level 6 by 2015 (Design Policy Section 6.0).
Strategic Requirements of Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) outlines new urban quarters or villages need to incorporate on-site sustainable water infrastructure.
33 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Options for Growth - Potential Development Sites within the Growth Triangle
3.96 As discussed in the introduction to this chapter, this section provides details of issues raised during a public consultation that ran in parallel to the 'Options for Growth' programme, which sought views on potential development sites that had been promoted for growth across the district.
3.97 The 'Potential Development Sites' consultation was mainly undertaken with a view to producing the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD), and full details of the exercise can be viewed in the Statement of Consultation relating to that document.
3.98 The consultation provided the public and consultation bodies with the opportunity to comment on all of the sites that had been promoted for possible future development across Broadland. The issues raised in these responses could then feed into a subsequent assessment of all of the sites in order to identify those that could be most suitable for future development.
3.99 The detail provided below, relating to the 'Potential Development Sites' consultation, purely focuses on the main issues raised with regard to those sites promoted within the Growth Triangle, as well as detailing how these issues helped to inform the 2013 Area Action Plan Options consultation document.
Response to main issues raised
Issues Raised Broadland District Council Response
Archaeological
Crop marks including ring ditches and possible The need for an archaeological evaluation hengiform monument and the possible site of is recognised in the Area Based Policies Dussindale battle outlined for the Core Development Area 3 A programme of archaeological works was (CA3) (Section 7.0). undertaken as part of Thorpe Business Park developments; however more archaeological works are likely to be necessary. Archaeological evaluation Rackheath archaeological – site lies adjacent to an area of possible medieval settlement crop marks.
Landscape character
Broads a protected landscape of national Issues raised about the landscape character importance. Any further development of this site are addressed in the strategic policies should have due regard to the sensitivities of the section of the AAP (Section 6.0). Broads, and in particular boundary screening, as the site is visible in long views up and down the river, The Design Policy outlines that new and forms part of the ‘gateway' to the city when development needs to respect existing approached by river. There should be suitable villages and settlements and be appropriate to its landscape setting (Section 6.0).
34 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
wording in the policy of any allocation to ensure this New development is not expected to meet is achieved. any current shortfalls in open space Concerned about the possible destruction of provision. Open space standards for farmland, countryside, hedgerows, and rural views. informal and formal open space are outlined Countryside and rural views will be sacrificed and in the policies of the AAP for new the quality of life reduced. development (Green Infrastructure Policy Development would represent substantial urban Section 6.0). extension with encroachment into the countryside resulting in a shortfall of open space provision to Areas of landscape values are considered serve Old Catton, consistent with the objectives of in the Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) to Policy ENVI. establish which areas are suitable for Very large swathe of arable land to east of proposed development. NDR in open countryside, not considered suitable in landscape terms unless strategic decision taken Change is unavoidable to meet the to develop this area. development needs of the current and future population. Character would be spoilt as one of these highest places around Norwich. It all in a small area. Area The Housing Strategic Policy (Section 6.0) was given the classification as being of "high outlines the need to manage the transition landscape value”. of new development between the urban core Sprawl in the countryside is one of our main policy of Norwich and the rural edge of the Urban concerns. The area is tranquil yet close to Norwich. Quarters or Villages. Too little use is made of previously developed and brownfield land. Whilst Little Plumstead hospital is Spixworth is outside the main development a previously developed site, most of the area. developments are on greenfields. Poor relationship to built up area of Norwich. The Strategic Design Policy (Section 6) The existing character of Old Catton as a "village" outlines the importance to create a sense would be lost. of identity. Area is liked at the moment for the feel of the country (rural feel), but will be possibly lost as far as Little Area Based Policies incorporate the Greater Plumstead. Area tranquil yet close to Norwich. Norwich Historic Characterisation and Rural location changed from agricultural to Sensitivity Assessment findings to ensure residential. new development respects the heritage of Beeston character & relationship farm buildings, hall, the area (Section 7.0). parkland settings, and wooded margins. Conservation area should extend to the parishes of Spixworth & Sprowston. Conservation Area Beeston St Andrews (parts of which are special architectural or historic interest) Loss of Spixworth as a village Development would represent substantial urban extension with encroachment into the countryside resulting in a shortfall of open space provision to serve Old Catton, consistent with the objectives of Policy ENVI. Sense of identity.
Current landscape features
35 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Preservation of historic parkland The Green Infrastructure Policy highlights Beeston Historic parkland. Not suitable in landscape areas of significance which need to be terms for uses other than informal open space which retained, preserved or enhanced whilst retains parkland character. meeting the current and future development Requires buffer to historic parkland to north. needs of the population (Section 6.0). Woodland belt needs to be retained. Consideration should be given to the significance of The Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) and the historic park. Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) outlines landscape features which need to be Mature trees on the site are safeguarded. preserved. Concerns building on Racecourse & Belmore loosing tree & green space. The Design Policy outlines that new Loss of current rural character / feel. No reason for development needs to respect existing development. villages and settlements and be appropriate (NCC Rackheath) Area of damp woodland/scrub to its landscape setting (Section 6.0). adjoining The Springs county wildlife site which lies north of Wroxham Road. Development would loose Development is necessary to meet the existing landscape features and is unlikely to be current and future demands for housing as acceptable in landscape terms. outlined by the JCS.
Recreation
Norwich Rugby Ground and Redmayne Playing Field Compensating any loss of recreational land are of strategic importance in terms of playing field has been outlined in the strategic provision within the greater Norwich area. Sport requirements section of the strategic policies England would object to these allocations unless (Section 6.0) and the need to incorporate exceptions E4 of our playing fields policy could be sports facilities within the Growth Triangle, met (i.e. the playing field to be lost as a result of the if relocation of current facilities is necessary, proposed development would be replaced by a is acknowledged in the Area Based Policies playing field or playing fields of an equivalent or (Section 7.0). better quality and of equivalent or greater quantity, in a suitable location and subject to equivalent or better management arrangements, prior to the commencement of development)
Protection valuable habitats
DPDs on Natura 2000 sites designated under the The recreational impact of the anticipated Habitats Directive (SACs and SPAs), and to increase in visitors to the area is recognised demonstrate that the proposals will not adversely in the strategic policies of the AAP to ensure affect the integrity of such sites. that future potential development does not Potential development in the Great Plumstead area, impact sites designated under the Habitats implications for the Broadland SPA and The Broads Directive (Green Infrastructure Section 6.0). SAC, particularly the Yare Broads and Marshes site new development at a suitable distance from the Strategic policies (Section 6.0) outlines the designated sites, and an access management plan importance to buffer, mitigate and enhance must be produced to address visitor disturbance to CWS and other wildlife sites where adjacent these areas. Potential adverse effect that the to development. proposals may have on Natura 2000 sites, an AA is essential. By undertaking an AA, the DPDs will be screened to ensure that they are sound and deliverable.
36 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Whole or parts of sites with CWS designation – would not object if zoned as green space for adjacent development but would seek buffering and enhancement to mitigate for impacts of adjacent development Development in the Racecourse Plantation Local Wildlife Site (retained and left undeveloped). If development essential expect significant mitigation and enhancement for the loss of the site Buffering and enhancement to mitigate for impacts of adjacent development to the County Wildlife Site.
Resource/ Minerals
Within 250m of a Mineral Local Plan Site: Site The Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) Number 77 recognise the need to consider existing Quality agricultural land. resources identified in the Norfolk Minerals Represents Norfolk as a farming country - the land and Waste Core Strategy in the is just too good to concrete over land of this quality development areas proposed. must be kept for future production of food crops. Sand and gravel resources. Existing waste sites The Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) (NCC) acknowledge the disused landfill site within Food production is vital to survival and we must not Rackheath Park, highlighting the need to lose any more to development. Too much of our identify any future potential risks. countryside has been lost to development. Development is necessary to balance the needs of the current and future generations of Broadland.
Flooding / water
Flood plain of the River Bure in addition to the Strategic requirements of strategic policies shallow geology of the site; this would need (Section 6.0) outline the need for investigation. Furthermore, the shallow geology of development proposals to incorporate site S31-01 would also need investigation. However, Sustainable urban Drainage Systems to all 3 sites are associated with existing cemeteries mitigate against the risk of surface water and as such EA guidance suggests that a Tier 1 risk flooding in existing and new development. assessment may be appropriate, provided the site has no prior history of environmental problems. However, some Tier 2 quantitative work is usually undertaken to support the application. No details have been provided as to the number and frequency of burials, which will also determine the possible need for additional Tier 2 studies. It should be noted that if such information is not included at planning application stage, we would object to the planning application. Cause flooding in Pym Close area Surface water flood risk in the area of Sprowston. Surface water disposal is considered at an early stage. Considered at an early stage so that the appropriate methods can be used to ensure that
37 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
flood risk is not increased as a result of the development. (AAP pg.61) Principle aquifer of high vulnerability (Sprowston EA)
Climate change
Concerns about the future of water land for food The Sustainable Development Policy production and the importance of global warming (Section 6.0) recognises the need to meet current and future needs of the population sustainably.
Built environment
Listed buildings Listed buildings are recognised in the Surplus of empty properties heritage component of the spatial portrait Grade 2 buildings at Smee Farm, while the area (Section 2.0) of the built environment in the immediately to the east of it has three grade 2 listed AAP. Listed buildings and conservation buildings at The Grove. areas will be protected from any impact of There are 4 houses of grade 1 listing and other of proposed development due to the which recognised status and are addressed in the Grade 1 church close to GT boundary. Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) Surplus empty properties will not meet the future demands of the population. The Broadland Housing Strategy addresses the use of these properties.
Area Based Policies incorporate the Greater Norwich Historic Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment findings to ensure new development respects the heritage of the area (Section 7.0).
Surplus empty properties will not meet the future demands of the population. The Broadland Housing Strategy addresses the use of these properties.
Area Based Policies incorporate the Greater Norwich Historic Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment findings to ensure new development respects the heritage of the area (Section 7.0).
Pollution / Noise
Noise and disturbance to existing residents. The Design Policy (Section 6.0) outlines that new development in the Growth Triangle needs to respect the existing villages and settlements and to create opportunities for
38 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
integration with existing communities. Strategic requirements recognise that the proposals may influence current settlements.
Transport
Buffer to NDR. Constraints of operational use of AAP policies support and facilitate the airport. delivery of NATS IP in the strategic Development needs to be considered in the context requirements (Section 6.0). of the wider transport requirements of the north east sector of the city (whether or not the Northern A buffer for the NDR is required as part of Distributor Road is implemented). It is considered the Norfolk County Council NDR plans and that a link should be provided between the two is incorporated into the Area based policies radials to aid traffic distribution. Priority should be for the AAP (Section 6.0). given to accommodating public transport movement. Amenity buffer to NDR which would leave only a Strategic transport requirements are small potential area to the north suitable for reflected in the Growth Triangle development in landscape terms. Transportation Plan Policies (Section 6.0) Traffic flow assessments to be fully published and to strengthen connections to the airport. debated locally before development on the scale proposed is constructed. Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) outlined for Cumulative traffic impacts of these sites within GT transport in the AAP are developed from the and neighbouring area in JCS transport evaluation implementation plan for the Norwich Area prior to being formally allocated. Transport Strategy ensuring proposals are integrated with the wider transport network Sensitivity test conducted for full capacity of 10,000 and needs. dwellings. Lacks anything approaching a traffic impact Traffic modelling has been performed to assessment inform the Growth Triangle Transportation Development will create pressure on the A47(T) at Policies and is ongoing (Section 6). the Postwick (A47(T)/NNDR) junction. Need traffic forecast? Transport evaluation test. Sensitivity test The Norwich Area Transport Strategy on full capacity 10,000 dwellings to ensure level of recognises the NDR is essential for the growth can be accommodated in future. Growth Triangle to enable significant Traffic flow assessments important otherwise traffic improvements to public transport (Section congestion and higher concentrated levels of all 6). types of pollution. Traffic management problems. The A47 is a trunk Potential development areas are located road and making the Postwick interchange more outside the Noise Sensitivity Zone and the complex will create problems which do not exist at Health and Safety Zone of Norwich Airport present. (Section 2). Facilities need to be in walking distance. Eco-town encourages use of car. 90% of travel will Opportunities for public transportation be by car. Overloading already congested roads. No prioritisation within the inner ring road are bus service after 6pm. considered in the Area Based Policies Rackheath Eco-town & NDR. Convenient for (Section 7). motorists. Not eco. Too far out for easy cycling into Norwich and for reliable bus services Strategic polices outline transport principles Limited width of St Faiths Rd would cause traffic to ensure that future masterplans of congestion at junction with Repton Avenue.The site individual Urban Quarters or Villages would be affected by aircraft noise, other sites more demonstrate through sustainable transport remote from source of noise would be preferable to strategies how transport patterns will be secure good standard of amenity. implemented at a site level to create
39 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Extra congestion on Pound Land junction and walkable neighbourhoods and development Dussindale Drive with Plumstead Rd east which will in the form of Public Transport Orientated also affect Thunder Lane woodside junctions, and Developments (section 6). Heartsease which will suffer even more so with new supermarket, chaos at roundabout. Permeability across the NDR considered in Danger and stupidity without a massive improvement the strategic requirements of AAP (6.0) to St Faiths Lane and Quater Lane roadways. Old Catton. Links to the NDR are determined by The Roads in area already congested. Existing Norfolk County Council plans for the NDR. community would not benefit from a further development. The area after Repton Avenue along St Faiths Road is small part of countryside that should be retained as green belt area Permeability across NDR - site will be divorced from any new development to the west by the Norwich Northern Distributor Road. No access to NDR To much traffic at post junction will cause severe congestion with what is already proposed for around the area. Additional development in Great and Little Plumstead could lead to increases in commuter-based trips to/from Norwich, Great Yarmouth etc via the A47(T). capacity at the A47(T)/Church Lane junction. geometrical deficiencies with the A47(T) eastbound on-slip against the current Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Standards. Increase in traffic (station road area).
Infrastructure
Lack of infrastructure in this part of Broadland. AAP recognises the challenges and issues Water, schools, health services, recreational facilities of phasing development in the Design etc just do not exist. Policy, the Transport and Movement Policy Sewers over stretched. Infrastructure needed first. and the Phasing. Proposed housing / Business Park developments if constructed ahead of the appropriate Strategic Requirements of Strategic Policy infrastructure will increase traffic volumes on existing (Section 6.0). The Local Infrastructure Plan roads in this area significantly. and Programme (LIPP) supports the need to phase development and identifies infrastructure necessary to support the development proposed within the Growth Triangle.
Services
The local schools are already overloaded and also Strategic requirements (Section 6.0) outline the GP surgery is also full. requirements for services and facilities to support the delivery of Urban quarters or villages in the Growth Triangle.
40 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Growth Triangle Workshops (Sept-Oct 2011)
Aim
3.100 During September and October 2011, three workshops were held within the Growth Triangle, designed for community groups, town and parish councils, and individuals seeking to learn about planning for future development in the area to the north east of Norwich. The workshops were not part of a formal consultation process, but part of a wider programme of community engagement within the area.
3.101 Broadland District Council also felt that, due to a proposed consultation exercise on Area Action Plan options scheduled for spring 2010 being postponed, it should revisit the themes and ideas of the proposed Plan with the public, in advance of more formal consultation, in order to raise awareness of the issues once more.
Timescale
3.102 The three workshops took place on the following dates and at the following locations:
Date Village Venue
27 September 2011 Thorpe End St. David’s Church Hall
13 October 2011 Rackheath Holy Trinity Church
24 October 2011 Sprowston Parish Council Offices
Consultees
3.103 The workshops were aimed at residents, town and parish councillors, and members of community groups based in and around the Growth Triangle.
3.104 Places were limited to 40 at each session and those wishing to attend were asked to book a place by contacting the District Council.
Description
3.105 The sessions were publicised in a variety of ways, including:
An advert in the Autumn 2011 edition of Broadland News (see Appendix 4) Publicity at consultation exhibitions during September/October 2011 Adverts in parish/town newsletters Flier sent to Parish/Town Councils and local community groups (see Appendix 4)
41 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.106 Attendance was broadly made up of interested residents, members of residents associations and other local community groups, parish/town councillors and other elected representatives. The table below shows attendance in more detail.
Thorpe End Rackheath Sprowston
Resident x 18 Resident x 8 Resident x 6
Thorpe End Residents Rackheath Parish Council x 4 Spixworth Parish Council x 5 Association x 3 Salhouse Parish Council x 2 Resident x 4 Friends for Thorpe Woodlands x 2 Thorpe (Afternoon) Townswomen's Broadland District Council x 3 Guild x 2 Norfolk Ramblers x 1 Old Catton Parish Council x 3 Broadland District Council x 1 St Faiths Parish Council x 2 Rackheath Church Council x 1 Salhouse Parish Council x 2 Rackheath Community Trust x 1 Thorpe St Andrew Town Council x 1
Postwick Parish Council x 1
Landowners Group Ltd x 1
Beeston StAndrew Parish Meeting x 1
Spixworth Parish Council x 1
Beyond Green Developments x 1
3.107 Each event shared the same agenda (see Appendix 4) which comprised a series of presentations and interactive group working.
Results summary
3.108 A full analysis of the results of the workshop is available in the document entitled, 'Report on the ‘Making sense of planning in the area’ workshops, September/October 2011'. A summary of the main issues to arise from the events is provided below.
3.109 The responses across each of the three workshops follow a broadly similar pattern, with key issues such as retaining a sense of rural distinctiveness and identity, building community spirit and ensuring the provision of decent quality community services and facilities being prevalent at each of the three events.
42 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.110 The final group exercise at each of the three events, ‘Be A Planner!’, asked participants to place tiles representing approx. 10,000 new homes on a base map of the Growth Triangle, in the locations where they thought future housing could be located.
3.111 Although this posed quite a challenge for many participants, who were not entirely comfortable with the scale of development and with the notion of allocating housing in the area, it was an important exercise in terms of demonstrating the approximate land-take of physical development in the Growth Triangle and in terms of understanding the various options and constraints which could influence the pattern of development.
3.112 The workshops provided a valuable opportunity for officers of the Council to meet with residents and community stakeholders to share knowledge and information relating to the future development of the Growth Triangle, to build relationships with key individuals and groups and to gather any particularly relevant evidence to inform the development of the Area Action Plan.
Response to main issues raised
3.113 The following table outlines how the main issues arising from the Growth Triangle Workshops have been considered by Broadland District Council in the development of the 2013 Area Action Plan Options consultation document.
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
Environment
Retain current landscape features The Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) and Area Based Policies (Section & enhance 7.0) outline landscape features which need to be conserved.
(e.g. rural / woodlands / greenspaces)
Green infrastructure links - create & The Green Infrastructure Policy (6.42-6.52) states how the Green enhance Infrastructure Network will be developed in the Growth Triangle.
Recreation (include allotments) These points raised are addressed in the Green Infrastructure Policy (6.42-6.52) Protection valuable habitats
Creation of wildlife habitats
Biodiversity
Flooding / water Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) incorporate the need for new developments to incorporate sustainable urban drainage systems to reduce the risk of surface water flooding.
Water recycling The Strategic Requirements and the Design Policy (Section 6.0) highlight the need for developments to incorporate water conserving technology.
43 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Low carbon living The Sustainable Development Policy and Strategic Requirements (Section 6.0) incorporate low carbon living.
Design
Overall design Design issues raised have been incorporated into the Design and Housing Policy (Section 6.0). (e.g. built up area, open spaces, scale)
Housing quality & design Housing design requirements are stated in the Housing Strategic Policy (Section 6.0). (e.g. mix /affordable / density)
Social
Characteristics / identity The Sustainable Development and Design Policies highlight the need to create places which have their own distinct sense of identity (Section Concerns building community 6.0) and the Area Based Policies (Section 7.0) strive for villages or urban quarters to operate with a degree of self containment to create an individual identity.
Individual need rather than the The Design Strategic policy outlines that the master planning process developer will need to be a participative process, and that the community will need be incorporated into the design process as outlined by Broadland’s Statement of Community Involvement and The Community Involvement Protocol (Section 6.0).
Quality of life Economic Development Policy (Section 6.0) recognises the opportunity new development can present to improve current and future resident’s quality of life.
Transport
Noise and visual impact transport The Design Policy (Section 6.0) outlines that new development in the Growth Triangle needs to respect the existing villages and settlements and to create opportunities for integration with existing communities. Buffers will be applied, for example the Northern Distributor Road buffer outlined by Norfolk County Council.
Sustainable transport Transport and movement policies promote the use of alternative sustainable transport outlining transport principles to ensure that future (e.g. cycle routes, walkable master plans demonstrate how transport patterns will be implemented community, links to city, alternatives at a site level, to Public Transport Orientated Developments (Section / public transport) 6.0).
Transport design Transport Principles Policy outline the importance to design residential streets to support cycling, walking and to promote low traffic speeds (e.g. traffic management / calming (Section 6.0) measures)
44 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Permeability across Northern Strategic policies (Section 6.0) ensure the NDR is permeable and the Distributor Road (NDR) Green Infrastructure Policy (6.42-6.52) states the green infrastructure network needs to link to the wider countryside. (Green bridge, humans & wildlife)
Transport links (e.g. airport) Strategic Policies (Section 6.0) outlined for transport and movement in the AAP are developed from the implementation plan for the Norwich Area Transport Strategy to ensure proposals are integrated with the wider transport network and needs.
Parking Strategic Policies and Transport and Movement Policy outline parking provision (Section 6.0).
Economic
Accessibility and increase in The transport and movement policy highlights the need to reduce the Services (e.g shops / schools / distance that residents travel to meet their day to day needs, including health / leisure facilities) access to services (Section 6.0). Public Transit Orientated Developments (PTODs) and walkable neighbourhoods are promoted through the transport and movement policy, integrating new developments with existing and proposed communities (Section 6.0).
Employment / training opportunities Employment and training opportunities have been incorporated into the Economic Development Policies of the AAP, incorporating the Greater Norwich Economic Strategy vision and the Joint Core Strategy (JCS) strategic employment sites allocated in the Growth Triangle (Section 6.0). The Economic Development policy highlights that developer(s) need to submit an Economic and Retail Strategy as part of any planning application to ensure a sustainable local economy is developed, generating accessible employment opportunities (Section 6.0)
Employment allocations Existing employment allocations outlined in the JCS have been incorporated into the Strategic Policies (Section 6.0)
Infrastructure to support The Local Infrastructure Plan and Programme (LIPP) identifies infrastructure necessary to support the development proposed within (e.g. water & cost / sewerage / the Growth Triangle and has been incorporated into the strategic policies of the AAP (Section 6.0). drainage / utilities / at beginning)
Recycling Facility /Tip Strategic Policies Area based policies include the provision for a domestic recycling facility within the Growth Triangle (Section 7.0).
Community facility / centre (e.g. Area Based Policies highlight the need for a community facility / centre scouts, cubs etc) enabling villages or urban quarters to strive to operate with a degree of self containment (Section 7.0).
Communication infrastructure. Communication infrastructure is recognised as a movement and accessibility issue. Strategic requirements recognise the importance of (e.g. broadband) supporting the integration of a strong communication infrastructure into new developments (Section 6.0).
Additional comments
45 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Alternative development in small JCS considers alternatives to development. Small pockets of pockets development will not meet the current and future housing demand in Broadland.
Phasing AAP recognises the challenges and issues of phasing development in the Design Policy, the Transport and Movement Policy and the Strategic Requirements (Section 6.0). The Local Infrastructure Plan and Programme (LIPP) supports the need to phase development and identifies infrastructure necessary to support the development proposed within the Growth Triangle.
Community purchase (Assist local Objectives of AAP and the Growth Triangle Vision recognise the need residents in buying up local area of to create opportunities and support communities in managing community green and wooded areas) assets.
AAP Strategic Policies identify that it will be important to identify appropriate management structures for community assets and their future maintenance (Section 6.0).
Block off Green Lane Appropriate transportation strategy has been developed to support development areas outlined. (Transport and movement strategic policy)
Development focused around Proposed core development areas support the implementation of the existing green network green infrastructure network (Green Infrastructure Policy (6.42-6.52)
Not to link Plumstead Road with Layout and connection routes to the NDR are outlined in Norfolk County NDR Council NDR Plans.
Plan for more usage of brownfield To meet the current and future demands of Broadland Greenfield sites sites and better use of existing are required to be released. Using the existing housing stock to meet unused housing to minimise demands is consistent with Broadlands Housing Strategy. extending housing boundaries
Bring empty homes back into use Using the existing housing stock to meet demands is consistent with before building new houses Broadlands Housing Strategy. However to meet the current and future demands of Broadland Greenfield sites are required to be released.
Link road without additional Improvements to the current transport infrastructure are only possible housing/development to support new proposed developments (Transportation and movement strategy, strategic policies Section 6.0).
Not to have a train halt in Broadland Improvements to existing transport network and rail connections to the Business Park area support the overarching Transport and Movement strategy in the area.
Elderly Specialist, flexible, adaptable housing to accommodate requirements outlined in the Housing Policy (Section 6.0). More residential care e.g. retirement villages (Y)
Comments against development Boundary of the AAP outlined and the need has been identified in the JCS.
46 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Options Consultation (March-June 2013)
3.114 The 'Options' consultation programme, which took place during spring/summer 2013, was again made up of several elements and aimed to seek the views of the public and consultation bodies on a range of further refined options relating to development within the Growth Triangle. The 'Options' consultation marked the final consultation stage before a draft of the Area Action Plan was produced for submission to the Secretary of State.
3.115 The various exercises making up the Options consultation included:
1. The 'Options' consultation document itself 2. Area-based workshops 3. Focus groups with service providers 4. Consultation with youth groups
3.116 Each of these exercises is dealt with separately in the following sections of this chapter.
47 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Options Consultation - Consultation Document
Aim
3.117 The Options Consultation relating to the Area Action Plan aimed to seek the views of the public and of consultation bodies on a range of options for the future development of the Growth Triangle. These views would help to inform the Council's development of the proposed submission Area Action Plan.
3.118 The consultation sought views on drafted policies (and alternatives, in several cases) and, although not technically a consultation on a draft of the proposed Area Action Plan, the consultation document did approximate the submitted Area Action Plan in its structure, with a vision, a set of objectives, a spatial portrait of the area, a series of strategic policies and a series of area-based policies.
3.119 In particular, the consultation asked:
Are the vision, objectives, issues and challenges, as drafted in the document, suitable? Is anything missing or do any of them need amending? For each of the strategic policies within the document, does the policy need to feature in the Area Action Plan and, if so, does it need to be amended? There were also some particular questions relating to open space and transport. For each of the area-based policies, are the sites in question suitable for particular types of development / land use?
Timescale
3.120 The Options Consultation took place over twelve weeks, between 18th March and 10th June 2013.
Consultees
3.121 The consultation was open to the public, but it was also targeted at parish and town councils based in and around the Growth Triangle, as well as other specific and general consultation bodies, as identified in Appendix 5.
Description
3.122 The consultation document was made available in hard copy and electronically. This was made available, in different formats, at the following locations:
Hard copy Electronic copy
Broadland District Council offices Online Consultation Portal Libraries in Broadland (incl the (http://broadland-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal) Millennium Library, Norwich)
48 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Hard copy Electronic copy
Old Catton Parish Council offices Broadland District Council website Dussindale Centre, Thorpe St. (www.broadland.gov.uk/ldf) Andrew CD (available at 'hard copy' locations) Diamond Centre, Sprowston
3.123 A standard response form was produced by the Council (see Appendix 5) to assist people in submitting their comments.The forms were made available in hard copy and electronic formats at the above locations and asked for peoples' views on the questions within the document.
3.124 Although the Council's preference was for respondents to use the Consultation Portal, first and foremost, for submitting responses, or (for hard copy responses) the consultation response form, any form of written response that was submitted before the consultation deadline was judged an acceptable submission.
3.125 In addition to the consultation document, a four page summary leaflet was produced (see Appendix 5), setting out information relating to the Area Action Plan and the Growth Triangle and providing information relating to the consultation, such as where documents could be inspected and how people could get in touch with planning officers to discuss these issues.These summary leaflets were also made available in the locations above.
3.126 Drop in surgeries were held in various scheduled locations during the first four weeks of the consultation period. These offered an opportunity for members of the public to talk to a planning officer in a location accessible to them about the issues raised within the consultation document. Details of the surgeries are as follows:
Old Catton Parish Council offices - Tuesday 19 and 26 March and Tuesday 2 and 9 April, between 9.30am and 12.30pm.
Dussindale Centre, Thorpe St. Andrew – Monday 18 and 25 March and Friday 5 and Monday 8 April, between 1.30 and 4.30pm
Rackheath Holy Trinity Church - Wednesday 20 and Tuesday 26 March and Wednesday 3 and 10 April, between 1.30 and 4.30pm
Sprowston Diamond Centre - Thursday 21 and 28 March and Thursday 4 and 11 April, between 9.30am and 12.30pm.
49 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.127 In addition, static displays providing summary information regarding the consultation were erected at the venues in Old Catton, Sprowston and Thorpe St Andrew, specified above.These are public locations, meaning that residents could visit the displays to learn about the consultation, read the documents and take a response form for completion, if they wished.
3.128 Publicity regarding the AAP Options consultation was carried out in the following ways:
Publicity technique Details
Press releases Articles submitted to parish newsletters/magazines/websites in and around the Growth Triangle
Council media Article in spring 2013 Broadland News magazine
Article in spring 2013 Business Focus magazine
Poster A4 poster advertising the consultation
Material sent to consultees Pack of consultation materials sent to consultees listed in Appendix 5
Notifications Notification letter/email sent to all those registered on the online Consultation Portal
Notification emails sent to ward members
3.129 Copies of some of the publicity material from the options consultation has been included in Appendix 5.
Results summary
3.130 2,861 individual comments were received to the 40+ set questions. By far the most contentious issue, which drew 2,223 comments, was the prospect of development or a link road affecting Thorpe Woodlands.
3.131 Many landowners, developers and their agents replied to the consultation, most of which have had their land interests promoted for some time. However, a couple of new proposals emerged - land north of Thorpe End, and land south of Rackheath.
3.132 For each of the questions asked within the consultation document, the responses received have been summarised, as set out below.
Spatial Portrait Question
3.133 In summary, views expressed included:
50 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Describing the Area Action Plan as “wild speculative growth”. Asserting that the Growth Triangle is a “disastrous and unsustainable idea”. Some respondents criticised the out-of-date information, such as on business activity and flights from Norwich International Airport. That the problem of the world’s growing population means agricultural land should not be used for development. The Historic Environment Service made points over paragraph 2.0.24, suggesting reference is added to: the cropmark complex around Rackheath; Thorpe End conservation area; Rackheath Hall; Sprowston Manor; historic parkland at Beeston St Andrew; Ancient Woodlands; an extensive linear settlement at Rackheath; and remnants of the former airfield at Rackheath. The timing of the consultation was also criticised, given that a Planning Inspectorate examination of the Joint Core Strategy was still happening. Environmental damage through the loss of habitats, especially from the demand on water resources harming the Broads. The Broads Authority point out that the Growth Triangle is in close proximity to their administrative area. Clarity is sought on what functions the green infrastructure links will serve. Norwich City Council write that the Greater Norwich area supports 52% of the county’s employment; and that this is a better figure to use than saying 43% which refers to the Norwich urban area. One response suggested that the Spatial Portrait explains how the Growth Triangle could operate as a second centre of employment in Norfolk, reducing “over-dependence” on Norwich City Centre, but also recognising the relationship to the Broads. Norwich and Norfolk Transport Action Group (NNTAG), whose campaigns include opposition to the Northern Distributor Road (NDR), identify additional environmental assets “The Owlery (County Wildlife Site) – The Springs, which forms a tributary stream of the River Bure, is a wetland area designated as County Wildlife site (CWS) between Beeston St Andrew and Rackheath – Groundwater contained in underlying chalk”.
Issues and Challenges Question
3.134 Responses made on the Issues and Challenges question were almost wholly negative and advocated a much reduced amount of development. A summary of the responses is as follows:
Phrases like “fostering identity” are said to have an unclear meaning and better, more up-to-date information is requested for inclusion in the Area Action Plan. The whole principle of building is opposed, with the description of “obscene urban sprawl” used by one person.
51 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Some people challenged the need for development, citing the amount of empty homes that should be returned to use first, or the availability of office space in Norwich for conversion. There were also comments about planning for the “indigenous” population – existing local residents – only. Planning consultancy Pegasus who are promoting land to the east of the railway referred back to the National Planning Policy Framework and maintaining a five-year supply of land for housing. It was commented that 7,000 homes would equal 14,000 cars, that construction of the NDR is not certain, and would bring the destruction of the area’s “culture”. The Environment Agency were supportive, agreeing with the issues and challenges raised in the AAP. NNTAG are concerned about the carbon footprint of the Growth Triangle, and that delivery of the NDR ahead of improved public transport could entrench car dependency. The Green Party wrote of emissions from journeys around Norwich, and while saying intentions are commendable, felling woodland would undermine people’s sense of community identity. Making reference to Design for Community Safety was recommended.
Vision Question
3.135 Several comments said 10,000 homes are unnecessary, that the prospects for jobs are unrealistic, the environmental impact is too high, transport infrastructure will not cope, and there were some cynical attitudes to the planning system and development industry. Specific comments were:
Beyond Green who is the promoter of land in the Western Sector (CA2) argues that effect on the environment can be benign and high design standards create attractive townscapes that compensate for the loss of landscape. Pegasus Planning says that the vision for the Growth Triangle should maximise employment. Wroxham Football Club reflects on the need for sports and recreation to be mentioned in the vision, as well as citing the example of St Edmundsbury Council and the stadium planned for Bury Football Club. Salhouse Parish Council wants the vision to reference the distinct character of Broadland – farmland, open water, woodland, heathland, thriving local shops. Persimmon Homes/Taylor Wimpey/Hopkins Homes who are working to develop land in the South-east sector (CA1) say issues such as energy and sustainable construction are matters for the Building Regulations, not the planning system. The Diocese of Norwich are promoting land adjacent to St Mary and St Margaret Church to provide a new vicarage and multi-use building for senior
52 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
citizen meetings, youth groups, scouts, children’s nursery, Sunday school and faith meetings; in a location central to both new and existing communities. The vision was considered to be unrealistic on the basis of modern society and family life revolving around the car. Another respondent felt the vision was poorly articulated and recommended rewording, such as from “will have been” to “will” or “will be”. The Environment Agency suggests a rewording to “water resources will have been managed to reduce stress upon the water environment in terms of quantity and quality, and public transport will offer a real alternative to the use of the private car”. The Green Party say that if agricultural land if lost from food production it should be replaced with allotments, community gardens and farm projects.
Objectives Question
3.136 A summary of the main points follows:
Pegasus Planning argues for the early delivery of housing, with a suggested rewording of: “To ensure the provision of housing, including the early delivery of homes, which creates a balanced community …” Wroxham Football Club echoes the comments of Sport England in having new indoor and outdoor facilities to meet the demand of circa 16,000 people living in 7,000 new homes. Socially Conscious Capital points out that only publically accessible greenspace will be able to deliver the defined vision of supporting recreation and leisure needs of the populations. Salhouse Parish Council makes particular points: removing the phrase “at least” when talking about 10,000 new homes; economic development should include provision of premises for small businesses like florists; the context of the word “equity” is unclear; that large-scale development will overwhelm the environment so Objective 9 seems inappropriate; and provision of adequate off-street car parking; The Norfolk Historic Environment Service advocates a new objective similar to paragraph 156 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Stop Norwich Urbanisation contends that the objectives do not pass the test of being SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Timely. Natural England add their support to the Environment objectives, numbers nine and ten. The RSPB suggest mentioning the green linkages that go across and outside the Growth Triangle’s boundary, so that the whole landscape to the north east of Norwich is connected. One respondent said the Objectives were “sound and reasonably well articulated”. NNTAG discuss the principle of equity, referring to the disadvantage suffered by those people without access to a car. Their proposed wording change
53 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
being: “ensure ease of movement and accessibility by sustainable transport for all within and between new and existing communities so that people do not have to depend on a car”.
Sustainable Development Question
3.137 The question on sustainable development drew responses that were wide-ranging, but often arguing for much less than 10,000 new homes. Loss of agricultural land and the UK’s imports of food got mentioned, plus a whole mixture of issues like lack of jobs, poor building design and construction, traffic congestion, environmental degradation, social deprivation and crime. Some specific points included:
Put urban quarters with higher densities closer to Norwich, having timescales or trigger points for reviewing policies in the Area Action Plan, and a policy to minimise light pollution. One person said the aims were laudable but only amounted to rhetoric. Norwich City Council stated their support for striving for high standards of sustainability development through area-wide renewable energy and water efficiency measures for large scale development so as to achieve, as well as co-operating on finding sites for Gypsies and Travellers. Natural England considers the inclusion of a sustainable development policy as essential. One response said making carbon footprints smaller and energy conservation were themes deserving clearer mention. While supporting sustainable development, NNTAG do not support the quantum of development proposed in the AAP.
Housing Question
3.138 In summary, there were some constructive comments about self build, cohousing, mixing in flats, bungalows, and retirement housing, plus improving energy efficiency standards and design. One person said about getting away from the usual “estate scenario”.
Economic Development Question
3.139 A couple of comments – including from Salhouse Parish Council – talked about giving certainty to businesses, such as shops. Stop Norwich Urbanisation talked about the creation of local businesses as opposed to just national chain stores; but also made several criticisms, such as the Broadland Business Park and Rackheath Industrial Estate being held back by the lack of public transport. More specific points included:
One person referred back to past big factories in Norwich, how they were in walking distance of homes, and that modern business parks are soulless.
54 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Norwich City Council is concerned for the promotion of office accommodation in the City. Changes in recent years are consents for office development at Broadland Business Park and national planning policy rules that allow the conversion of offices to residential use. Another response recommended safeguarding land for a new large food store as part of a District Centre, which is not solely reliant on journeys by car. The Environment Agency gives its support to the statements on “Cleantech” and points out the potential links to work by the New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership. CgMs on behalf of Rackheath Eco-community promoters Barratt Homes adds clarification: the 25ha of employment is not limited to the Rackheath Industrial Area, but instead could be opportunities across the whole Eco-community, of which an example is a new rail freight terminal.
Design Question
3.140 A short summary of the points made includes:
Salhouse Parish Council stated that a design policy could lead to bland developments, so instead a panel involving local people should be established. Pegasus Planning argues that master-planning the Growth Triangle must take in to account maintaining a five-year supply of developable land. A joint response from Persimmon Homes/Taylor Wimpey/Hopkins Homes said that Core Area 1 can not be planned as a single entity. A second comment from the same group of house-builders said matters of district-scale energy and water efficiency – whilst being important – should be left to Building Regulations, giving flexibility to consider other solutions like fabric first conservation measures. Stop Norwich Urbanisation says that developers are on record as saying houses need garages to be sellable; and, that three storey homes designed by Beyond Green are under the flight path to Norwich International Airport. One respondent wrote about linking the design policy to the transport strategy, as well as promoting innovative design provided it did not become prescriptive. Norwich City Council recommends the new Building for Life methodology and explains some of its experience in using the scoring system. Natural England advocates new developments being designed so as to incorporate and link to Biodiversity Action Plan habitats. The RSPB recommends design standards that automatically include nest boxes for species like swifts, starlings, and sparrows – for which South Norfolk Council is praised. In one comment it Is thought the word “possible” should be dropped from the phrase “designed to the highest possible standards”.
55 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
The Environment Agency supports linking green infrastructure to design, points out that the built environment can add to habitat connectivity, and says the Growth Triangle provides the opportunity for innovation. The Green Party suggests more emphasis to ideas like building orientation for solar energy and the Secure by Design code.
Local Priority Links Question
3.141 Relatively few responses were received to this question, but in summary, however, one comment suggested linking to Whitlingham. The view from Stop Norwich Urbanisation was that a new rail-link would probably not happen. Salhouse Parish Council spoke of village separation, a mix of open space, heath, woodland and open water. Norwich City Council’s response reiterates the importance Mousehold Heath and Thorpe Ridge.
Green Infrastructure Network Question
3.142 A mixture of views were expressed, with some people arguing for no development; while others talked about how best to word the policy, and which particular pieces of land that have ecological value.
Some comments, such as from Stop Norwich Urbanisation, discussed how new development is incompatible with green infrastructure. Promoters of land at Redmayne Fields commented that a green infrastructure corridor passing through their site did not preclude future development. One comment referenced paragraph 182 of the National Planning Policy Framework, recommending that a full study of environmental designations is carried out; for example, understanding the impact on historic parklands by new development nearby. Norfolk Wildlife Trust’s comment agreed with the AAP’s approach of specific sites being protected for green infrastructure, and wants the policy to encompass “any new county Wildlife Sites that may be identified”. Another person wanted clarity on whether the green infrastructure was offering cycle ways and footpaths, or would be wild and open spaces for ecology. The principle of ecological “stepping stones” that lead to the Broads and wider countryside is reaffirmed by Norwich City Council. One respondent seeks a more ambitious approach of landscape and woodland corridors that lead to locations like the River Yare, connect Harrison’s Plantation to Rackheath; and recognise places like Red Hall Park, St Mary’s Church in Sprowston, plus All Saint’s Church in Rackheath. The Town Close/Golden Triangle orWellsley Road/Cotman Roadare cited as a good local examples of the transition between urban and edge-of-urban landscapes. Natural England in their response gives support to the Green Infrastructure policy and identification of land to buffer impact on the Broads, plus reaffirms how new areas of open space should divert visitor pressure away from the most sensitive ecological habitats.
56 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
The RSPB reply discusses its concerns if the Broads’s buffer zone became the recreational open space for residents of the development in Rackheath. The Environment Agency says that new green spaces are not a direct replacement for established and complex sites like Ancient Woodland. NNTAG relate the discussion back to green spaces reducing the urban heat island effect via trees offering shade and cooling.
Sports Pitches and Children’s Play Question
Sport England said local demographics and rates of participation should be factored in to decisions about recreational space, and that the new Playing Pitch Strategy for the GNDP is recommended as the evidence source to use. Wroxham Football Club echoed what Sport England said. Salhouse Parish Council thought some recreational space – small parks and informal sports areas – should be dog free. The Green Party response was in favour of enforcing the Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace Standard. In one comment the approach of a compensatory land transfer mechanism was advocated.
Allotments Question
3.143 Very few responses were received to this question, but what was said included:
Salhouse Parish Council replied that allotment provision could be at the expense of more general open space and gardens. Stop Norwich Urbanisation supported the idea of more allotments, for the reason that new houses have small gardens where there is not the space for growing fruit and vegetables.
Informal Open Space Question
3.144 A relatively small number of responses were received. What was mentioned included fly-tipping, how green spaces in inner cities look “tired”, and the importance of open space that runs through new developments.
Planning consultancy Pegasus spoke of how standards like “Fields in Trust” should be used expediently, so not to hold up or ransom development proposals. One response was in favour of a site appraisal/survey approach, based on a place’s context, rather than a simple target. Natural England said “the delivery of 4.19 hectares of informal open space per 1000 (the current district average) should be assessed as part of the AAPs Habitats Regulation Assessment to ensure it delivers sufficient open space to reduce recreational effects upon the [conservation sites like]
57 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
SAC/SPA/Ramsar.” The RSPB echoed the support of 4.19 hectares per 1000 people so as to minimise recreational impacts on the Broads.
Norwich Area Transport Strategy Question
3.145 The main points made included:
Norfolk Wildlife Trust is concerned about funding the Northern Distributor Road (NDR) from Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). A couple of comments argued for retaining the existing Salhouse Rail Station. There were more general comments that were negative about the whole growth agenda, including the NDR and the Postwick Hub. The concept of the NDR and bus rapid transport was said to be flawed by one respondent. One person said the NATS Strategy was outdated, failing to properly integrate the potential of theInner Link Roadand more local railway. The Green Party and NNTAG support an alternative Inner Link Road, opposing the NDR on the grounds of isolating places outside its route, adding to urban sprawl and traffic by adding pressure to build on adjacent open space, and the project’s cost absorbing excessive amounts of CIL and section 106 monies.
Strategic Transport Requirements Question
3.146 The main points made include:
The view from Pegasus Planning is that theSalhouse Roadto Plumstead section of the inner orbital link should be required under paragraph 6.7.28. Salhouse Parish Council does not want to see the existing rail station closed and questions if the gradient of land at Rackheath would be suitable for a new station. Problems of traffic congestion are also raised by Salhouse Parish Council who would like to see studies, for example on the two bridges on the approaches to Wroxham and Hoveton. Stop Norwich Urbanisation argue against the NDR, instead saying investment should go in to better east-west connections associated to the A47, A11, and A12. Norwich City Council give their support to the policy but suggest more emphasis to more cycling, both along orbital and arterial routes. The idea of tram/trains – possibly alongPound Lane– and improvements to the Broadland Business Park link is proposed by one respondent. NNTAG oppose the idea of a Bus Rapid Transit corridor alongSalhouse Road/Gurney Roadfor its impact on Mousehold Heath.
Transport Principles Question
58 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.147 The most detailed response to this question came from Lawson Planning who referenced the National Planning Policy Framework requirement to deliver development throughout the plan period, the need to bring forward employment land in the short-term, and finding less constrained sites that can come forward before projects like the NDR. Other comments were more general, such as the existing roads not coping or the importance of linking to national cycle routes.
Norwich City Council gave their support to the policy and reiterates commitment to joint projects like the expansion of the Norwich Cycle Network. Another respondent said how controlled parking provides an income stream and that on-street parking need not detract from a street’s attractiveness. One person said that control of construction traffic should be incorporated in to the policy, as too expansion of the Bittern Line. Other than being predicated on the Northern Distributor Road NNTAG supports much of the policy.
Strategic Requirements Question
3.148 The Strategic Requirements Policy covers a wide range of topics – design, the environment, infrastructure – so the comments received were broad-ranging. Main points were:
Sport England said “Recreational Facilities” is too vague so should be changed to “indoor and outdoor facilities for sport and recreation”. Norfolk Constabulary asked that their strategic requirements be added to the policy, as the higher population resulting from development will put added pressure on their service. Socially Conscious Capital emphasised the creation of a linked network of “public” green spaces. Norwich City Council’s support for the policy has a caveat about the type of employment to be provided at Rackheath Industrial Estate and the priority of promoting office development in the City Centre. One comment received questioned whether the “movement studies” to fully understand the strategic requirements set. Natural England welcomes the inclusion of Green Infrastructure in the strategic requirements, as the provision of sufficient open space is important to avoiding adverse visitor pressure on the Broads. The RSPB agrees with the requirement for a landscape buffer to the Broads. The Environment Agency agrees with the emphasis given to water efficiency and highlights the importance of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) being incorporated early in to the design of schemes. Other comments tended to be more general, concentrating less on the wording of the policy, instead arguing that new development should not go ahead, and that existing infrastructure – such as hospitals and healthcare – were struggling to cope now.
59 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Core Development Area 1 Question
3.149 Land within Core Area 1 is being promoted by several developers and/or planning agents who commented on this question, such as Barton Willmore, Socially Conscious Capital, Persimmon Homes/Taylor Wimpey/Hopkins Homes. Other comments challenged the need for houses, questioned whether transport solutions could be found, and explained that services like doctors were already over sub-scribed.
A reoccurring comment was avoiding development near Thorpe End and retaining the distinctiveness of Thorpe End Garden Village. It was said that the CA1 is too big, and concern was raised over implications on wildlife. Preserving woodlands was mentioned several times. An idea from one respondent was for a cycleway/footway from the “Great Plumstead slip-road off the NDR to Woodside, Thorpe St Andrew”, to help students getting to Thorpe High School. One respondent made observations over the value of agricultural land, and further investigations of green infrastructure potential, constructing an Inner Orbital Link, and the best location for a secondary school. Bidwells on behalf of their client who is a landowner in Rackheath says that a modest amount of development of their site could facility public access, providing new open space. One comment emphasises the importance of adequate green space between villages and suburbs.
Land North of Thorpe End Question
3.150 Several responses were negative about development for encroaching in to the countryside and the risk to harming the character of Thorpe End Garden Village.
One comment went as far as to say that the impact on the environment and to people already living in the surrounding area is unnecessary, immoral and irresponsible. Striving to create new woodlands, accessible to the public, came forward as an idea, with reference made to Sheringham Park, Houghton Park and Holkham Park as examples. The suggestion was made of linking up trails for walkers and cyclists, through Thorpe End, and on to Whitlingham Country Park.
Land at Gazebo Farm Question
3.151 Hardwick Planning confirmed that the land is being promoted, and although near to theNorthern Distributor Road, is argued as suitable for development.
60 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Other comments tended to be very much against development; reasons being harm to the environment, the risk of urban sprawl, or being too close to the NDR. NNTAG say delete the NDR and retain the land for agriculture. The issue of noise and pollution affecting nearby homes is raised.
Land to the East of the Railway Line Question
3.152 Pegasus Planning confirmed that the land is promoted for development, as well as submitting a comprehensive report and concept plan (comment ID GT2903). Proximity to the NDR and Broadland Business Park are given as reasons. Reference is made to the National Planning Policy Framework, an example being to maintain a five-year supply of land for housing, and how this land could fulfil such requirements.
Most other comments were negative about development, citing harm to wildlife and the problem of losing Greenfield land. An alternative view was that development here is better than on woodlands. It was also said that the railway line forms a boundary line to development. Other replies considered other options like recreational open space or allotments. One person expressed the view that the land could come forward for development once the “strategic movement issues” are resolved and in conjunction with a new district centre on part of the Business Park.
Oasis Leisure,Thorpe St Andrew Question
3.153 Lanpro Planning Services who are promoting this land made a representation to explain the ambition to build older people’s housing to support and enhance the existing leisure facilities while simultaneously taking account of the many trees onsite and not closing the Leisure Club. Many of the other comments raised concerns that included:
The worry that leisure facilities in and around Thorpe St Andrew would be further diminished by redevelopment of the Oasis land. That nearby streets, likeBooty Road, could not cope with the extra traffic from more housing. Woodlands are vital to people’s wellbeing and should not be harmed. Developments like Dussindale provide enough housing. A comment makes the point of the leisure facilities being an important community asset, the sensitivity of the landscape setting, and the potential transport corridor alongPound Lane. The RSPB does not oppose development on the site but identifies its importance as an ecological buffer to Thorpe Woodlands.
Land Adjacent Pig’s Park (North of Thorpe End) Question
61 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.154 Lanpro Planning Services wrote in to say that the land is suitable for development with the benefit of being near to Core Area 1 and theNorthern Distributor Road. Another respondent said that it could be a suitable continuation of Thorpe End; but, the majority of comments were against. Reasons put forward included:
The land is not near to transport links. Farmland should be retained.
Thorpe Woodlands Question
3.155 This question prompted the vast majority of responses, with almost all respondents opposing the idea of development on any part of Thorpe Woodlands. A summary of points made is as follows:
Hundreds of people replied on the theme of saying no to development but supporting public access to the woodland. Many respondents spoke of the vital reliance of people to the environment, some equating development of woodlands to vandalism. Several detailed comments talked about the wildlife found, like White Admiral and Purple Emperor butterflies. The woodlands are looked upon with fond memories, some people having used the area for many decades. There is social history associated to the Woodlands, for example the Home Guard were said to have trained there in the 1940s. The notion of protecting the Woodlands for future generations was raised many times. The area is popular amongst dog-walkers. Ancient Woodland designation is discussed many times as a reason against development. Worries exist to the consequences of new homes, like traffic congestion and more air pollution. The need to build more homes is challenged given that developments like Dussindale have already gone ahead. Keeping house-building to Brownfield sites was advocated. Bringing back in to the use the country’s 700,000 empty homes is put as a reason against more. Others acknowledge the need for new homes but not at the expense of cutting down woodland. The intrinsic natural beauty of the Woodlands is thought to be a reason against development. A publication by the Forestry Commission in to the benefits of trees in capturing carbon from the atmosphere is cited; as is the State of Nature report that discusses the 60% decline in major habitat types. The issue of global warming is put reason not to lose more woodlands to development. Thorpe Woodlands is designated as a County Wildlife Site and so protecting wildlife is a repeatedly put reason for no development.
62 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
A variety of species are identified as living in Thorpe Woodlands, of which the Tawny Owl, Song Thrush, Slow Worm, Adder, and Great Crested Newt are mentioned. The tree species at risk were another reason against – Horse Chestnut, Ash, and Oak. The ecological value is reinforced by a report of woodpeckers, foxes, pheasants and deer. Thorpe Woodlands gets described as the hub where green corridors come out from Norwich and out to the countryside. Friends of Thorpe Woodlands discuss having the expertise and volunteers to help in the management, as well as having good links with other organisations like the Norwich Society, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, and Norfolk Wildlife Trust. The change in the UK’s landscape is a concern to several people who mentioned statistics like there only being 12% woodland coverage, compared to 44% in other European countries. The stress on species is used: stating that the Corn Cockle flower is extinct and a further 317 are on the brink. The importance of green spaces is compared with problems of obesity, sedentary lifestyles, and diverting children away console games. Retaining woodlands is equated with protecting the tourism trade in Norfolk. A response came from Norfolk Wildlife Trust voicing their opposition to zone Thorpe Woodlands for development; that land meets the criteria as a County Wildlife Site; and how the debate over Ancient Woodland is unhelpful when in actual fact the Woodlands is part of a mosaic of heath, woodland pasture, and woodland across the area. Pegasus Planning who are not the development promoters but have an interest in other sites say that blocks of woodland help in separating the other proposed residential areas. A reference is given to national charity the Woodland Trust who is spending £2.9 million over the next five years to replace woodland, and how this is at odds with the idea to build homes on Thorpe Woodlands. Thorpe Woodlands is praised in many, many responses as a place to walk, cycle, exercise, play or observe nature. Some comments expressed the opinion of Thorpe St Andrew being overly developed, so any new homes should be put elsewhere. In arguing against building on woodland one respondent put that agricultural land has lower wildlife and amenity value so is a better choice. Social problems arising from “urbanised sprawl” was a concern. Problems with infrastructure include school capacity, and the poor road system aroundPlumstead Road. In one comment an appeal was made for foresight, as shown in London, where the City has expanded but large green spaces have been retained at its centre. One response contained reference to a BBC report of research of 5,000 households over 17 years that found green spaces had a significant positive effect psychological wellbeing.
63 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
In their reply the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) spoke of their opposition to the Greater Norwich Joint Core Strategy, cited the National Planning Policy Framework requirement to protect irreplaceable habitats, and calls on the Council to make a commitment to protect Thorpe Woodlands. A resident in their response spoke of no restriction on public access existing for at least 44 years, and the limited woodland management by the owners (as shown by the affects of the 1987 storms still being visible). The response goes on to the idea of purchasing the Woodland – perhaps from sources like the Lottery or general fund raising – and if that fails leaving it as plantation. Mousehold Heath is pointed to as a good example of what could be achieved at Thorpe Woodlands by several people. A hostile opinion about the greed of developers and planners was also expressed on a few occasions. Socially Conscious Capital is the promoter and wrote in to say that there should be a new Public Open Space and/or development; their detailed response includes information on the ecological condition of the Woodlands. One respondent supports new development, and says that the land is privately owned so any access is essentially an illegal trespass. While being against development on Thorpe Woodlands, one person wrote of how Racecourse Plantation is further away from existing residential areas so preferential to other parts of the Thorpe Woodlands. Norwich City Council points out that Thorpe Woodlands is a strategic focal point for green infrastructure so any development would need to show it did not undermine this.
Salhouse Road to Plumstead Road Orbital Link Question
3.156 The question covers the two options of an eastern or western route and how the road should be designed. After the question over development of Thorpe Woodlands, the issue of thePlumstead RoadtoSalhouse Roadorbital link got the most replies. The overwhelming majority opposed the western route, preferring the eastern route running around Thorpe Woodlands and past the edge of Thorpe End. Others opposed a link road altogether, saying thatWoodside Roadcould be used, or that theNorthern Distributor Roaddeals with the matter. The main points made included:
One person saidPlumstead RoadandSalhouse Roadare unnerving for cyclists. Reducing speed limits is good for cyclists, but cars do not have to be omitted in order to make roads safe for cyclists. The eastern route passes close to some gardens on the edge of Thorpe End. An acoustic barrier could be constructed protecting properties in Thorpe End from noise disturbance. It was said by one respondent that the western route could cause more traffic congestion on the junction withDussindale Drivethan the eastern route.
64 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Another view was that the link road should be restricted to public transport, walking, and cycling. A respondent also suggested having peak-time bus lanes and restrictions on heavy traffic at night. Several people spoke of existing traffic congestion being exacerbated and protecting wildlife being the priority instead. The view was expressed that neither option is desirable as it would lead to rat-running. The RSPB think that either route would cause impact, so a route that is limited to public transport, cycling, and walking is preferable. Natural England refers to paragraph 118 of the National Planning Policy Framework and say that bisection of a County Wildlife Site should be avoided.
South-East Sector: Core Development Area CA1 Policy Question
3.157 The main comments made included:
Norfolk Wildlife Trust supports the criteria for green infrastructure links between Thorpe Woodlands and Rackheath; but cautions against the loss of larger green areas, and that the opportunity exists for improving semi-natural areas (of which Triangle Wood is given as an example). One respondent wrote of water efficiency and low-carbon energy use being written in to the CA1 policy as a way to emphasise the higher standards required in the Growth Triangle. The representation from developers Persimmon/Taylor Wimpey/Hopkins affirmed that their land in CA1 is available; then argues that CA1 need not be masterplanned as a single entity. General points were made about people’s reliance on the natural world and the destruction of woodlands. Other respondents were critical of theNorthern Distributor Roadproposals, raising concerns of environmental harm, noise, and visual impact on landscape north of Thorpe End. In respect to railways it was commented that more specific information be included and the whereabouts of new stations specified. In one comment it is said that the implementation of the Salhouse Road Bus Rapid Transport should not be a priority and that the focus of large-scale neighbourhood centre should be Broadland Business Park. Norwich City Council caveat support for employment space in CA1 with the priority for promoting jobs in the City Centre. The Environment Agency makes reference to policies about the extraction of sand and gravel that underlay part of CA1 and that the former landfill site at Rackheath Park may need degassing.
Core Development Area CA2 Question
65 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.158 As the major applicant, Beyond Green broadly agrees with the policy as written, but points out that Beeston Park is mainly to the east of Core Development Area 2. A wording change is put forward for “extensive planting” as part of or alternative to an undeveloped strip of land south of the proposedNorthern Distributor Road.
The response from Sprowston Town Council said the feel of the area should be more sub-urban as opposed to urban; as well as that cycle and pedestrian friendly centres did not require the realignment of theNorth Walsham Road. Norfolk Wildlife Trust seeks a more specific mention of joining green infrastructure assets in to a network. While partially agreeing, one comment raises questions for further consideration, like the landscape sensitivity around Beeston Park, the use of land in the vicinity of Wroxham Road as a secondary school, and noise from nearby aviation. Another person suggests compensatory measures to the loss of agricultural land, such as allotments, community gardens, and small urban farm projects.
Land Adjacent to Redhall Farm Question
3.159 In summary the comments received said:
Sprowston Town Council feels that development here should be resisted so as not to encroach on farmland, to have a green buffer to the NDR, and that the Airport Public Safety Zone affects part of the site. Beyond Green argues for land east of the Red Hall Farm complex to be included in Core Area 2, for the reason of preserving and celebratingBeeston Laneas the primary route in to the historic parkland. Clarification is also given by Beyond Green that the Red Hall Farm complex itself is promoted for uses like a farm shop and plant centre, whilst the remainder is not due to being within the Public Safety Zone. One person expressed the opinion that some residential development could be acceptable, providing it is not at the expense of existing assets like the equestrian facility and the quality of the landscape.
Land Adjacent to Norwich International Airport Question
3.160 One respondent said that there would be little environmental impact from development on this site. Being close to the Airport Industrial Estate leads Sprowston Town Council to think the land is sustainable for development that in turn allows for more green space around St Mary and St Margaret’s Church, Millennium Woodland and the allotments. Although measures to mitigate against noise from aircraft is mentioned as well. Some comments referred to the proximity to the Airport curtailing residential development, and that employment could be a better alternative.
Land Adjacent to Hill Farm House Question
66 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.161 The few responses received were negative about an allocation on the basis of being too isolated, along the flight path to Norwich International Airport, and taking development to the edge of the Northern Distributor Road. Norfolk & Norwich Transport Action Group's (NNTAG) view is to protect the land as part of the setting to Beeston Park and that the land is poorly related to development sites.
Wroxham Road to Spixworth Road Orbital Link Question
3.162 Cornerstone Planning on behalf of the landowners for Redmayne Fields does not want a new orbital link to preclude access to their site.
Other responses included saying yes to cycles but no to traffic; plus moving the Park & Ride nearer to the NDR thus allowing access to the proposed high street from the existing roundabout. Whilst supporting the concept of an orbital link, one person commented “artificially low speed controls” should not be imposed and a more direct route across the Wroxham Road Park & Ride may be possible; so as to better serve employment and economic development opportunities.
Spixworth Road to Norwich International Airport Orbital Link Question
3.163 Beyond Green wrote that the primary east-to-west streetof their development proposal would be open to all traffic. On the issue of a vehicular link in to the Norwich Industrial Estate causing too much congestion on St Faith’s Road, Beyond Green’s view is a suitable mitigation could come from preventing traffic turning on to St Faith’s Lane from the new east-to-west route. Sprowston Town Council’s opinion is for the link in to the Airport Industrial Estate to be buses, cycles and pedestrians only.
Beeston Park Question
3.164 Beyond Green expressed their support for an urban edge country park, as it matches their planning application, but questioned the boundaries. Land east of Park Farm, North Farm and the northern part of Coopersholes plantation is expected to remain in agricultural use. Beyond Green’s ideas feature Beeston Hall becoming a hotel, restaurant/conferencing facility. Norfolk Wildlife Trust point out that existing areas of biodiversity can be enhanced through the restoration of the arable area to parkland.
Western Sector: Core Development Area CA2 Policy Question
3.165 Beyond Green argues for extending CA2 north towardsBeeston Laneand to fields south of Red Hall Farm, with the Public Sector Safety as the northern boundary. In representing landowners at Redmayne Fields Cornerstone Planning supports the western Core Development Area. Other comments were more negative saying that there will too many homes or development should be spread over more locations.
67 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Land South of Rackheath Village Question
3.166 The main representation to the question came from agents on behalf of Norfolk Homes who have an interest in land adjacent toGreen Lane West. Arguments were advanced on the close relationship to the existing village, rounding off development to the NDR route, and the ability to mitigate intrusion if the new road is built. The proposed land is 16 ha and Norfolk Homes are committed to making a prompt start on development if allocated.
Gospel Park Question
3.167 No responses were received to this question
Osier Carr Question
3.168 No responses were received to this question
North Rackheath Question
3.169 Norfolk Wild Trust answered that more information should be gathered in order to assess whether the land north of Rackheath could mitigate impact on the Broads, adding that more work is needed on the recreational impact of visitors to the Broads.
Other comments focused on creating a more gradual transition from the urban to rural, and a green edge to Salhouse to protect the village’s character. The Broads Authority poses the question of whether the open space to the north of the Eco-community will serve as both an ecological buffer and recreational open space. A similar point is made by Natural England, who recommend using the Habitats Regulations Assessment process to understand the visitor pressure that can be diverted away from the Broads; for example, providing an open recreational space that is attractive to dog walkers.
Northern Sector Vision Question
3.170 Salhouse Parish Council wrote about wanting a rural transition to the Broads north of Rackheath. A green edge to Salhouse is advocated in order to retain the village’s distinctiveness and to preserve the Bittern Line’s attractiveness to tourists.
The Broads Authority acknowledge the relatively early stage in the planning process, but are interested to see questions of what will be provided and by who, and are unsure about leaving such matters to a project-level Habitats Regulations Assessment. The Environment Agency emphasise the importance of any site decontamination being investigated and remediated.
68 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Northern Sector Policy Question
3.171 There were relatively few responses, but submissions tended to be detailed:
The National Grid welcomed the identification of the gas pipeline and buffer zone on the features map; explaining how to maintain safe, unrestricted access for maintenance no permanent structures are allowed. A landowner in Rackheath commented on the availability of their land, and how the bringing forward of the “main” development should not prejudice “smaller” sites. Salhouse Parish Council spoke of how the Growth Triangle north of Rackheath should be more rural, “not a sharp transition with hard boundaries” to the Broads. Norfolk Wildlife Trust thinks the policy for CA3 should have a sentence about the delivery of green infrastructure network like CA1. Norwich City Council supports the policy as an effective summary of the local key requirements, but that an assessment of the type of employment to be provided at the Rackheath Industrial Estate is suggested. The representation on behalf of the Barratt Homes by CmGs Consulting supported the option pieces of land south of Rackheath and at Gospel Park as being consistent with the overall Eco-community Masterplan, and discussed how the proposals comply with the Eco-towns Planning Policy Statement.
Housing Distribution Question
3.172 Beyond Green made the point for a higher proportion of development in the Western Sector, saying that other sites such as land at Norwich Rugby Club and adjacent to Fifers Lane Nurseries in addition to their outline application for 3,520 dwellings could raise the total capacity to 3,900 homes.
The representation from Socially Conscious Capital says that the South-east sector is the most sustainable, as well as pointing out that unless the amount of development in each sector is based on an analysis of site deliverability it is a perfunctory exercise. A few comments about the Northern Sector said that less housing would help in creating a better transition from the development hinterland to the fully rural area nearer the Broads. Socially Conscious Capital says that the South-east sector (CA1) is the most sustainable location, but also comments that it is unclear whether an assessment has been made of site viability and deliverability on which the housing distribution is based.
District Centre Question
3.173 The main points raised were:
69 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Beyond Green pointed out that their planning application incorporates a high street that could evolve in to a District Centre. Developers of White House Farm – Persimmon Homes, Taylor Wimpey, and Hopkins Homes – believe that their development can be served by the existing centre based on Tesco at Sprowston. Salhouse Parish Council would prefer to see a district retail centre further south in the Growth Triangle, nearer the greater densities of population. An alternative perspective was given in another comment where it was said Broadland Business Park could become a subsidiary town centre to Norwich City Centre.
Secondary School Question
3.174 Very few responses were received. What was said included:
Concern about the secondary school being delayed if it was situated at Rackheath. Salhouse Parish Council responded that facilities, like the secondary school, should be located further south where there is the greatest density of population. One person expresses the view that the secondary school should be along the route of an Inner Orbital Link, perhaps in the Western sector or in the vicinity of the proposed train halt at the Broadland Business Park.
Home Waste Recycling Centre Question
3.175 A few responses, including from Salhouse Parish Council, argued for new a home waste recycling centre to be to the south of the Growth Triangle.
One person suggested that the south-east and north of the Growth Triangle could be served by the existing recycling facility at Strumpshaw, so new provision should go to the Western sector. The Environment Agency has a preference for what they call “on the go” recycling facilities for paper, plastic bottles, and other non-bulky goods like small electrical items in locations such as public as parks.
Major Sports Facility Question
3.176 In reply Sport England wrote of the operational and economic benefits in co-locating facilities on one major site; that a study is being done in conjunction with the GNDP on where new facilities should go; and, stipulated that when existing sites/clubs (like Norwich Rugby Club) move an equivalent replacement is ready in advance.
Wroxham Football Club seconded much of what was said by Sport England, but pointed out that different sports have different standards laid down by
70 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
their respective governing bodies that may not always make co-location practical. A public swimming pool was also appealed for. One comment suggests a facility of the scale and prestige of the UEA Sportspark.
General Comments Question
3.177 Unsurprisingly the general comments question received opinions on a broad range of subjects.
Hellesdon Parish Council objected to the Area Action Plan due to loss of amenity, farmland, and inadequate water supply. The response from Salhouse Parish Council raised the problem of light pollution, called for more research on the location of facilities, the problem of noise from roads (as exampled by the A47), and criticised the quality of data in the AAP document (like business statistics for the area). Stop Norwich Urbanisation wrote of the time it takes to reply to the AAP consultation and says many people do not bother to reply as their views are not taken seriously. Norfolk County Council, as the Mineral and Waste Authority, welcomes the AAP’s policy over safeguarding assets like sand and gravel, as well as complying with Minerals and Waste Core Strategy. Postwick with Witton Parish Council states the importance of Postwick Hub. One resident provided some ideas on a preserving Thorpe End Garden Village’s identity, youth recreation (e.g. a BMX track), a “green bridge” over Low Road, and an opportunity for public open space to host livery stables. Another resident argued for retaining Thorpe Woodlands, as a wildlife resource but with free public access that is monitored. Other responses spoke of subjects like: Delivery vehicles operating outside peak times to minimise disruption. Examples of good and bad planning – Poundbury was complemented. The importance of interesting community centres. A wide range of types to meet the need of both single households and large families. The problems of investing in projects like theNorthern Distributor Roadduring the economic downturn. Development needs adequate infrastructure, should include solar and windpower technologies, plus not be at the expense of woodland, ancient pastures or wildlife. The Broads Authority supports the mention in the Area Action Plan to mitigating the potential recreational impacts of new development and welcomes further discussion on what and how such measures will be implemented.
71 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
One respondent gives an account of water management issues affecting the area aroundBlue Boar Laneand the need for further Strategic Flood Risk Assessment work. Natural England’s interest is in Habitat Regulations Assessment and looking further in to the matter of visitor pressure on the Broads. The RSPB raises the subject of water abstraction and effluent disposal not harming water quality and quantity in the Broads.
Response to main issues raised
3.178 A full report of Broadland District Council responses to the issues raised through this consultation document is available as a technical appendix to this document, entitled 'Area Action Plan Options Document 2013 - Issues Raised in Consultation and Broadland District Council Responses'.
3.179 The table below picks out a summary of the main issues raised, drawn from the detail provided under 'Results summary', and provides an outline of how Broadland District Council has given consideration to these issues in the development of the Area Action Plan.
Main issue raised Broadland District Council response
Housing
Objection to the principle of large-scale Broadland District Council has an obligation under the NPPF development and loss of greenfield to meet its full and objectively assessed need and demand /agricultural land for housing, including unmet need arising in adjacent areas. The adopted Joint Core Strategy Area established the objectively assessed needs. The need for and rationale behind the identification of the Growth Triangle and its related level of development has been most recently set out in documents SDJCS 3.2, SDJCS 14 &14.1 (Homes and Housing Topic Paper (2012) and its addendum), DV35 and DV36 which supported the recently completed examination in public into the Joint Core Strategy.
This evidence, and the strategy which resulted from it was supported by the Planning Inspectorate following an Independent examination. The purpose of the AAP is not to revisit the rationale behind the housing numbers identified, rather to manage the levels of growth which area established by the proposed Joint Core Strategy for the Growth Triangle in the most sustainable manor possible.
Ensuring Housing Delivery Paragraph 4.4 of the Issues and Challenges section identifies the key requirement of the Area Action Plan not only to deliver 10,000 homes overall but also at least 7,000 homes by 2026. Appendix H of the Area Action Plan Sustainability Appraisal (2014) sets out the approach to
72 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
allocations, including that deliverable site were preferred in the first instance to address the ongoing deficit in housing land supply. Evidence of Broadland’s pragmatic and proactive approach to addressing housing land supply issues is found in the permission for Brook Farm, Thorpe St Andrew (600 homes), Pinebanks/Griffin Lane, Thorpe St Andrew (302 homes), Cucumber Lane, Brundall (150 homes), Mill Lane, Horsford (125 homes) and the resolution to grant planning permission for North Sprowston and Old Catton (3,520 homes) all in advance of the completion of the plan making process.
New development should comprise a JCS Policy 4: Housing Delivery requires housing proposals mixture of different housing types that to contribute to the mix of housing required to provide provide choice balanced communities.This is considered to be an adequate policy mechanism to ensure an appropriate mix of housing and therefore further policy guidance within the AAP is considered unnecessary.
Energy and Water Efficiency of new Policy 3 of the JCS sets out specific requirements in terms Homes of energy and water. In addition, on 13 March 2014 Government published a ministerial statement and supporting note in respect of the Housing Standards Review consultation. This clarified Government’s intention to consolidate technical standards into Building Regulations but, in order to provide appropriate flexibility to address local circumstances, to also include optional higher standards that would be triggered at the discretions of the Local Authority through the Local Plan process, and therefore being subject to the normal evidencing need and testing of viability. The details of transitional arrangements and the handling of legacy developments have not yet been published.
Therefore it is not considered necessary or appropriate to include additional requirements (to the JCS) within the AAP.
Form of Development
Concerns about development being ‘urban Not all urban extensions are necessarily Urban Sprawl, and sprawl’ with no defined edges. Loss of the proposals for the Growth Triangle are not considered to community identity, including development be such. Policy 1: Form of Development makes clear the joining up with Thorpe End resulting in the intention to create distinct places with their own character, loss of its distinct, ‘garden village’ identity and facilities as part of mixed-use developments. character. Policy GT2: Green Infrastructure identifies clear limits to development in the form of preserving a landscape edge to the built area of Norwich and providing open spaces beyond development North of Rackheath Village. Policy GT3 provides for high quality public transport, walking and cycling links between proposed areas of development and key employment sites and the city centre.
73 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
A critical mass of development provides scope for a range of services and facilities, including the provision of primary and secondary educational facilities, and appropriate policies are included to secure such amenities. These provisions mean that the form of development planned for the Growth Triangle will be materially difference from the half-hearted form of town which might typically be associated with Urban Sprawl.
An object example of the form of development sought within the Growth Triangle is provided by the plans for the North Sprowston and Old Catton scheme, which are an example of how high quality extensions to existing settlements can be planned.
Environment
Effect of development on Biodiversity, the The issue of water resources, and the impact of increased Water Environments and Water demand on international habitats was fully considered Resources through the JCS process.The Environment Agency, Natural England and Anglian Water continue to work together and with the Local Planning Authority to address this issue.
The Habitat Regulations Addendum (2012) explains how demand within the first 5yrs of the plan will be met. The Water Cycle Study 2b (2010) explains potential long term solutions for the supply and disposal of waste water. The conclusions of both of these documents are supported by the findings of the North East Water Cycle Study (2013), which confirmed that the interventions planned by Anglian Water will provide adequate headroom to accommodate proposed growth, and that it is highly likely that the Whitlingham WWTW will be able to deal with the increased discharge.
Anglian Water’s Draft Water Resource Management Plan (2013) identifies the specific solutions that will maintain the supply demand balance for water.
In the event of unforeseen problems, Policy 3 of the JCS provides a backstop, protecting habitats should appropriate infrastructure not be able to be put in place.
Impact on environmental and heritage Generalised objectives regarding the protection of the assets within the Growth Triangle Historic Environment are already set out under objective 9 of the Joint Core Strategy. It is not considered that a further generalised objective within the AAP meaningfully enhances this position.
74 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Objectives 6 & 7 of the AAP set out location specific interventions that will protect the historic environment in the Growth Triangle, further detail in relation to these objective is contained within Policy GT1: Form of Development, GT2: Green Infrastructure and within the Area Based Policies of the AAP.
In particular the historic parks and gardens related to Beeston Hall, Rackheath Hall and Sprowston Manor, coterminous with the most sensitive areas of the growth triangle as identified within the Historic Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment (2009), are identified as part of the landscape setting to the future edge of Norwich within Policy GT2. Policy GT2 also includes provision to maintain a degree of separation around Thorpe End. The requirement for archaeological investigation at Rackheath as a consequence of the crop marks and historic large linear settlement in this location has set out in Policy GT16: North Rackheath.
Very large number of strong objections Thorpe Woodland has not been allocated for development. against developing on Thorpe Woodlands Thorpe Woodlands was discounted as a reasonable alternative, primarily on the grounds of impact on biodiversity of large scale development and ongoing uncertainty about whether any form of development would be acceptable on similar ground. The latter leading to concerns about the deliverability and developability of the site, and thereby its suitability as an allocation site.
The very large number of strong public objection to development was also taken into account when making this judgement.
The rationale for identifying Thorpe Woodlands as an unreasonable alternative is set out within Appendix D of the Area Action Plan Proposed Submission Sustainability Appraisal (2014) Technical Appendix.
Green Infrastructure
Protection of Internationally designated AAP Policy GT2: Green Infrastructure sets out a range of wildlife sites from Recreational Impact measures to mitigate recreational impact on international sites. This includes identifying three large public parks: Beeston Park, Harrisons Plantation and the North Rackheath Buffer. The first two of these sites have already been secured by the grant of planning permission and are forecast to be delivered within the next 3 to 5 years.
It addition to these requirements further informal open space, in accordance with the Council’s adopted standards, or their replacement will be required. Specific enhancements to
75 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
informal open space and enhanced connections between GI assets are required as part of the Area Based Policies of the AAP.
These policies have been considered as part of a Habitat Regulations Assessment, which concludes that “there is sufficient confidence for negative impacts on site integrity on International Sites from the development in the Growth Triangle to be considered unlikely”.
Green infrastructure policy should provide Environmentally important sites are afforded general strong protection for biodiversity and protection under Policy 1 of the JCS. It is not considered require its enhancement that further generalised protection needs to be included in the AAP.
Policy GT2: Green Infrastructure identifies Primary and Secondary GI Corridors, the enhancement of which will support the improvement of the network. Policy GT2 also safeguards a landscape setting to the future urban edge of Norwich, the setting of Thorpe End and identifies specific areas for the provision of large new public parks: Beeston Park, Harrisons Plantation and North Rackheath Buffer.
Importance of strong links between green AAP Policy 1: Form of Development states that Masterplans infrastructure and design (for new developments) should illustrate how homes, jobs, services and facilities have been integrated with walking, cycling and public transport facilities/services and green infrastructure. The proposals for orbital road / cycling links and links between Rackheath and the urban fringe of Norwich set out in Policy GT3: Transport will provide effective connections between the large new public parks to be provided through the development of the Growth Triangle and identified in policy GT2: Green Infrastructure.
A need for both indoor and outdoor sports The AAP no longer contains a specific policy requirement facilities for sports pitches and childrens play. Current standards are set out in Policy RL7 of the Broadland District Local Plan Replacement (2006) and replacement standards are set out within the proposed Development Management DPD.There is no evidence that provision in the Growth Triangle should be different from provided across the rest of the district.
The proposed policy of the Development Management DPD recognises that regards should be had to updated information in the form of the indoor and outdoor place facilities strategy once it is completed.
Transport
76 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Reliance on the Northern Distributor Road The delivery of the Norwich Area Transport Strategy is (NDR) and increasing car dependency important to the achievement of sustainable transport in the Growth Triangle. The NDR is a critical part of the NATS strategy. NATS and the NDR form part of the baseline of the AAP.
Whilst the scale of development proposed within the Growth Triangle is dependent upon the delivery of the NDR, the case for the NDR is not dependant on the delivery of development within the Growth Triangle.The scale to which development can occur ahead of/in the absence of the NDR is set out in the contingency section of the Monitoring and Implementation Framework
The NDR is only one part of the Transport Strategy that supports development within the Growth Triangle. The supporting text to AAP Policy GT3: Transport makes clear that the transport strategy includes expansion of park and ride facilities, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), Enhanced Core Bus Routes and an improved cycle network as well as potential rail enhancements.
Broadland’s Annual Business Plan (2014/15) makes provision for additional feasibility work in relation to the Salhouse Road BRT/Cycling Corridor, North Walsham Core Bus Route and a first stage of a new cycleway between Thorpe St. Andrew and Wroxham, which will link Rackheath to Thorpe St. Andrew and Broadland Business Park.
The Greater Norwich Infrastructure Plan (GNIP) (2014-15) identifies potential funding for improvements to the Salhouse Road BRT/Cycling corridor in 2015/16. Enhancements to the cycling along Salhouse Road, which connect the area to Norwich City Centre will be delivery within 2015 as part of wider cycling enhancements through the Push the Pedalway Programme, part of the DfT Cycle City Ambition Programme.
Enhancements to bus services, including improved frequency of service, to serve the permitted developments at White House Farm, Sprowston and North Sprowston and Old Catton have already been secured via S106 agreements that form part of those planning permissions.
To enable the delivery of transport improvements, AAP Policy GT3: Transport makes specific provision for orbital links suitable for public transport between Broadland Business Park and Norwich Airport Industrial estate, safeguards Salhouse/Gurney Road for necessary improvements, requires new development to be in the form of Public Transport Orientated Developments (PToDs) and identified key cycle improvements. This policy is supported by the provisions of the area specific allocation policies,
77 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
which include requirements for major developments to provide travel plans incorporating measures such as improved local bus services. Therefore it is considered that the AAP and the implementation mechanisms which support it are well placed to afford existing and future residents of the Growth Triangle sustainable travel choice to access employment, as well as other services and facilities. These measures will also improve cycle and public transport access to Rackheath Industrial Estate.
The AAP seeks to reduce the need to travel through the delivery of new developments in the form of mixed use walkable neighbourhoods as set out in Policy GT1: Form of development and improve walking, cycling and public transport links to key strategic employment sites through the delivery of orbital road/cycle links, safeguarding corridors for the improvement of cycle and public transport links to Norwich and seeking that developments be delivered as Public Transport Orientated Developments.
Enhancement of local rail links should be Land has been safeguarded for the provision of a new rail a priority for the AAP halt at Broadland Business Park as part of the planning permission for Brook and Laurel Farm and the requirement has been carried forward into AAP Policy GT9: Broadland Business Park (North Site). Improved frequency of services along the Bittern Line and a new station at Broadland Business Park is identified as medium term aims within the Norfolk Rail Prospectus (January 2013).
The potential for improved rail services are only one element of the transport strategy for the Growth Triangle, see above.
Employment
Smaller, local businesses should be The Area Action Plan makes provision for employment in preferred to larger business chains accordance with the adopted JCS, this includes both extensions to existing strategic employment sites and the provision of smaller scale employment land as part of mixed use development, the policy relating to the latter being set out in GT1: Form of Development of the AAP. This should provide land to meet the needs of a wide range of employers from large regional or national companies and local businesses.
Not enough new jobs to support housing The JCS sets out a strategy which will support the delivery growth. of at least 27,000 new jobs within the Greater Norwich Area. Within the Growth Triangle this includes a significant new extension to Broadland Business Park, a new business park associated within Norwich Airport, 25ha of land for employment at Rackheath and small scale employment opportunities provided as part of the mixed use
78 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3 developments within the Growth Triangle. The Area Action Plan makes provision for employment in accordance with the adopted JCS.
The Greater Norwich City Deal (2014) seeks to deliver an additional 13,000 new jobs beyond the targets set out within the JCS, 40,000 total. It will achieve this through:
Innovation initiatives to help existing business to expand and enable new small and medium sized enterprises to capture and commercialise research and academic excellence in life sciences and biotechnology at the Norwich Research Park, the digital creative cluster in the city centre and the aviation cluster based around Norwich International Airport. Providing essential housing, transportation and utility services necessary to meet the infrastructure needs of a growing and expanding local economy A LEP wide skills programme that will provide a locally responsive skills system to maximise employer involvement and investment and increase apprenticeships and graduate internships.
Planning Permission already exists for a further 57,500m2 of employment floor space at Broadland Business Park. In fact, the overall JCS requirement for additional land for employment at Broadland Business Park has already been satisfied by the grant of planning permission. This is set out in paragraph 4.6 of the Area Action Plan.
The key infrastructure constraint to the delivery of these planning permissions is an improvement to Postwick Junction.Work began on improvements to Postwick Junction in May 2014 and is due to be completed in Summer 2015.
The Norwich Aeropark, within the bounds of Norwich Airport, has also been granted planning permission.This permission provides for over 40ha of land for employment, including detailed permission for 15,035m2 of light and general industrial and storage and distribution floorspace and outline permission for a further 80,000sqm for similar uses.
Furthermore a resolution to grant planning permission for further land for employment has also been made in relation to North Sprowston & Old Catton, providing an additional 1,600m2 of land for employment.
AAP Policy 16: North Rackheath sets out specific requirements for a further 25ha of employment land at Rackheath. A new 35ha business park related to Norwich Airport is identified within the Broadland Site Allocations Development Plan Document.
79 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Therefore there are considered to be strong grounds to consider that the provision of new jobs alongside housing will be delivered within the Growth Triangle, and across the Greater Norwich area.
Infrastructure / Delivery
Inadequacy of current infrastructure and Significant improvements to infrastructure are planned as lack of confidence about delivery of part of the proposals for the development within the Growth planned improvements. Triangle, and across the Greater Norwich Area as a whole.
The improvements which are of direct relevance to the Growth Triangle include: the NDR and improvements to Postwick Junction; a new secondary school; upto seven new primary schools, including early years facilities; new community buildings, improved public transport and cycling facilities, large new public parks and a range of sports pitches and children’s playspace.
The Monitoring and Implementation section of the AAP includes explains the approach to implementation being taken by the Greater Norwich authorities and a NE Infrastructure Package is included as an appendix to the plan. This package is drawn directly from the Greater Norwich Infrastructure Plan and Broadland’s Annual Business Plan, which are both key documents relating to infrastructure planning as explained within the relevant chapter of the AAP.
It is notable that the construction of Postwick Hub is already underway and is due to be completed by Summer 2015. The NDR is due to be considered as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Programme (NSIP), with its examination expected to be determined in Winter 2014/15. Work is already underway on significant improvements to cycling infrastructure in Norwich as part of the Cycle City Ambition Programme, this includes a first phase of improved cycle links to the Growth Triangle, which will eventually extend to Rackheath, to be delivered in 2015. Three Primary school sites within the Growth Triangle have already been secured as part of the grant, or resolution to grant, of planning permission as have two large public Parks: Harrisons Plantation and Beeston Park; space for community buildings and libraries and space for health care facilities.
The Broadland Business Plan for 2014/15 includes a number of pieces of work which necessary to support the delivery of infrastructure, these include: feasibility and scheme development in relation to the Salhouse/Gurney Road BRT Corridor, North Walsham Road Core Bus Route, Wroxham
80 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
to Thorpe St Andrew Cycleway and the two Green Infrastructure Primary Corridors identified within the plan: Mousehold Heath to the Broads and Thorpe Ridge.
Policy GT2 of the AAP identifies the approach to the provision of Green Infrastructure, including identifying the location of major public parks. Policy GT3 identifies key transport schemes. The Area Based Policies, particularly GT6, 10, 12 & 16 identify particular site specific infrastructure requirement of development.
Timing for delivery of, and location of, a Policy GT12: North Sprowston & Old Catton identifies new secondary school. Doubts over Broadland’s preferred site for a Secondary School west of suitability of Rackheath as a location Wroxham Road on the site of the existing Sprowston Park because of accessibility issues for the & Ride. A second “reserve” site is safeguarded within Policy future schools catchment area. GT16: North Rackheath in case the first site cannot be secured.
The preferred site addresses would be more accessible to existing and future sites within the Growth Triangle inside the proposed route of the NDR, where the majority of development is focused, although there would still be accessibility issues related to further development North of Rackheath Village.
The Greater Norwich Infrastructure Plan (GNIP) identifies that scheme development is currently underway, and indicates site transfer in 2016/17 and funding for phase I in 2019/20. This is reflected in the NE Infrastructure Schedule which is included as an Appendix to the AAP.
81 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Options Consultation - Area-based Workshops
Aim
3.180 In addition to the primary form of consultation, the Options consultation document itself, Broadland District was keen to engage and interact with residents and other stakeholders in order to understand their concerns, ambitions and priorities.
3.181 One of the ways in which this was achieved was through the undertaking of three area-based workshops, held in three locations around the Growth Triangle around which it was proposed the growth would broadly be based (i.e. Rackheath, Sprowston, Thorpe End).
3.182 The events were structured around the particular area-based policies from within the consultation document that were relevant to the location of the workshop. Participants were asked for their opinions on the policies relevant to that particular area and these were captured as part of the consultation process, informing the development of the proposed Area Action Plan.
Timescale
3.183 The workshops were held at the following times and venues:
Date Venue Time
Tuesday 16th April 2013 Diamond Centre, Sprowston 19:00 - 21:00
Thursday 18th April 2013 Trinity Church, Rackheath 19:00 - 21:00
Thursday 25th April 2013 Thorpe End Village Hall 19:00 - 21:00
Consultees
3.184 The workshops were primarily aimed at residents living within and around the Growth Triangle, as well as Parish/Town Councils and representatives of community groups operating in the area.
Description
3.185 Written invitations were sent by email or letter to all of the Parish/Town Councils based within the Growth Triangle area, as well as representatives of community groups taken from the District Council's consultation database.
3.186 In addition, those residents who attended the earlier Growth Triangle Workshops, which took place in September-October 2011, were sent an invitation to take part in these events.
3.187 The events were also publicised via:
82 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
The Broadland District Council website (www.broadland.gov.uk) Press releases sent to Norwich Evening News and the Eastern Daily Press Article in spring 2013 edition of Broadland News (see Appendix 5) Article in parish magazines local to the Growth Triangle Static displays based at Old Catton, Sprowston and Thorpe St. Andrew AAP Options consultation summary leaflets which were made available at libraries in Broadland, as well as at the Millennium Library, Norwich (see Appendix 5)
3.188 Spaces were limited to 40 per workshop, so bookings were taken on a first come, first served basis.
3.189 The structure of each workshop followed a similar format, being based on an initial presentation, setting out the context for the consultation, and followed by group working to address each of the proposed area-based policies in the consultation document. Groups were each assisted by a facilitator from within the District Council's Planning Department and discussions were assisted by the use of large scale maps highlighting different policy options, and other supporting information.
3.190 Group discussions and resolutions were recorded and fed back by the facilitators at each table.
Results summary
3.191 Attendance at each of the three workshops was as follows:
Workshop Number of Breakdown of participants location participants
Sprowston 9 3 parish councillors; 1 county councillor; 2 members of Sprowston Residents Against Beyond Green; 1 member of Safer Neighbourhood Action Panel; 2 residents
Rackheath 15 5 parish councillors; 1 Broadland District councillor; 1 member of Rackheath Community Trust; 1 member of Salhouse church; 1 member of Stop Norwich Urbanisation (SNUB); 1 planning consultant; 5 residents
Thorpe End 19 1 town councillor; 18 residents
3.192 The following presents summary notes of the main issues and conclusions reached at each of the workshops.
Sprowston
83 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.193 Comments and questions that were written on post-it notes at the beginning of the workshop included:
Scale of development --The area will become larger with the additional site identified to be included. Scale seems excessive to housing figures presented at present time regarding the requirement.
Housing Type – No provision for older people housing. No social housing. What is affordable? How many homes?
Infrastructure – Redirection ofNorth Walsham Road. What commitment is there to upgrading the infrastructure prior to any development? What mitigation measures have been identified?
Services – Existing emergency services – N&N is the other side of the city. Current failings in education/health/social services need addressing now
3.194 Comments made about the area now and for the future were:
+ Now + Future
Unspoilt countryside Linking the fragmented cycle Retired population – quiet/stable/community network Low crime Potential to relocate Park and Park and ride Ride site closer to NDR to Woodland/countryside enable smoother link road Excellent Town Council-run recreation ground Close to employment in Norwich Residential/edge of countryside Green spaces/open fields (church lane, wilks farm drive, recreation ground etc)
Trade vs traffic flow
NDR
Limited opportunities to expand infrastructure e.g. North Walsham Rd
- Now - Future
Doctors surgery at capacity Roads would be at ‘breaking N&N is over stressed point’ Volume of traffic alongWroxham Road/North Loss of productive farmland Walsham Road “Fear” of rat runs Cycling is not realistic or attractive for many Relocation of North Walsham people Road Weakness of the economy in the sub-region Connectivity between green Infrastructure to cope with development spaces - accessibility Holistic view Economic viability in area (employment)
84 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.195 Responses to specific consultation questions:
Brought a house because it backed onto fields North of the NDR could be better? Possibly better access off the NDR Sprowston is big enough already Perception for the new town south of Crostwick Close in association to the NDR Proximity to Norwich is not crucial, people travel to Dereham, Cambridge etc Prefer to develop land at Redhall Farm instead of CDA2 Concern over being too close to airport – noise and 1:10,000 safety zone Reduce urban sprawl, allocate as ‘Green Belt’.
Q27:Red Hall Farm: No – don’t want to encroach on farmland if not needed for housing, also airport safety zone
Q28:Airport: Yes develop airport employment hub sustainable as housing developed alongside, thus free up further green space in green hub, around church, wood, allotments etc. Develop green corridor to Beeston Park and Ride also between Wroxham and North Walsham roads.
Q29:Hill Farm House: Too isolated, sporadic development
Q30:Wroxham to Spixworth Road Link: Yes but from Park and Ride site.
Park and Ride site not in right place, needs to be nearer NDR
Q31:Exit to Orbital Link: Yes due to support for question 28
Q32:Beeston Park: Yes to country park but not at expense of other open space. Recreational areas/formal open space needed.
Q33:Policy: Provision of social, functional centres should not require realignment of North Walsham Road.
Focus on connectivity rather than making significant employment available.
Rackheath
3.196 Comments and questions that were written on post-it notes were:
Northern Distributor Road & Community Infrastructure Levy – How much does the NDR need the CIL contributions of development?
Joint Core Strategy & the Growth Triangle – I have examined the information on the website but can not find any real assessments of alternatives.
85 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – How does CIL in pieces help fund the immense regional upgrades in infrastructure, drainage etc. that are required, which need to be miles in length rather than yards?
Walking and Cycling – How are the ‘spoke’ roads to be upgraded for safe cycling and walking?
3.197 Comments made about the area now and for the future were:
+ Now + Future
Proximity to Norwich Improvement of community feel Countryside and coast More likelihood of health care facilities Feeling of community (friendly place to Improves public transport live) Good public transport Proximity to farmland Woodland and green bits
- Now - Future
Cutting of night bus service Potential loss of farmland Salhouse bus service not good Traffic problems at Wroxham Bridge Feeling of Salhouse being forgotten worsened. No healthcare facilities Loss of community identity Lack of cycleways/footways (particularly Construction disruption on site and longer links including orbital and need surrounding roads lighting) Can Whitlingham take the sewage? Who pays?
3.198 Responses to specific consultation questions:
Q34: Land South of Rackheath: Mixed views. Concern about noise from NDR and rat-running aroundVera Road. Concerns around flooding/drainage.
Q35 and Q36: Gospel Hall: Small sites. Don’t really form part of the ‘core’
Q37: North Rackheath: Muck Lane as natural ‘break’ limit development to south of the road
Q38: Vision:
Respecting existing local character is perhaps more important than going for max sustainable homes. Still aim for high ‘eco’ standards, but not at expenses of character. Perhaps needs to be greater acceptance that the car is a reality Concerns around flooding Distinction between ‘working from home’ and running a business from home.
86 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Q39: Policy:
Social housing mixed in with market housing Needs an attractive ‘centre’ based on old principles. Inclusion of religious facilities.
Policy and Vision General:
School could be much more i.e. include sporting facilities etc and make it a real community hub School/hub central to the Rackheath development area to encourage walking/cycling Police facility with school/hub What about fire services? Don’t be hamstrung by the past – break the mould What about crime? Impact on provision at the prison Getting more from less – agriculture wise Could the alternative examined be more visible on the website information title “Alternatives Examined in the formulation of the JCS”? Important to keep at least part of the runway Celebrate the past – link up green spaces Secondary school: tie it into the industrial estate for training, so yes in Rackheath But where are the jobs coming from? If you don’t allocate the land for employment then it won’t happen
But what is the strategy behind it?
Loss of agriculture is a big negative
But there will be allotments as part of the development
DCLG housing projections show 7% less growth in Norwich area Where is the money for healthcare? Would want to see health and dental care provision in village
What about provision by Boots/Virgin Health Care for example?
South of Rackheath Village:
Leave as open land as a buffer to the NDR Core development area more suitable with proximity to the rail station Focus community around the facilities and services rather than keeping them distanced
87 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Gospel hall?:
Speak to Plymouth brethren No strong feelings
Osier Carr?:
Again it is too removed from the main community
Thorpe End
Comments made about the area now and for the future, were:
+ Now + Future
Peaceful setting Potential long distance cycle routes Access to city (car and bus) More resources for dffierent age groups Access to Broads and coast in village (Thorpe End) Village environment – high class – Extract the best parts of Thorpe End’s housing variance –open spaces – the graden village feel. area’s openness (layout) – garden Green spaces linked in to green village ethos – sits well in setting. corridors. Geographical boundary –a physical Potential to improve drainage. barrier. Reflect/retain/enhance. Proximity to the city in a semi-rural Public access to Thorpe Woods. environment – accessibility. Better links to the Business Park. Feeling of near to rural setting. Separate character and garden village setting. Trust in neighbours, privacy, but also sense of community. In practice, there is public access to Thorpe Woodlands – ancient woodland designation in part? Commercial plantation? Informal use but not formalised.
- Now - Future
Access to the countryside Increasing traffic. Problems with transport network closer Concerns about NDR and its role – to city. Congestion/accessibility for bypass? Link road? Traffic backing up pedestrians and cyclists. at roundabouts. How long planning process is going on Lose tranquil/peaceful atmosphere/clean for. air/ rural nature. Walkways alongPlumstead Roadand If setting of village is lost through high school are inadequate. development then it will be ruined. Traffic management is insufficient If joins onto Norwich then the village will –Green Lanein particular – speed be lost – don’t lose a sense of place. management is poor.
88 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
+ Now + Future
Waste treatment sewerage facilities Orbital road is a potential barrier to (drainage) – future development should accessing open space. address this. Fear of extra traffic. Poor access east alongGreen Lane– Doubts over school capacity. trouble turning right. Too many houses without the Rat running alongGreen Lane. community facilities and physical Cycling is dangerous on busy roads. infrastructure. Little Plumstead school is NDR could compound the traffic over-subscribed. problems. Pedestrian and cycle ways are terrible. Poor bus service. HGVs use Green Lane, ignoring signs.
3.199 Responses to specific consultation questions:
Question 17: Core Development Area CA1
Probably right but need to protect identity of Thorpe End, and create identities of new places. Why not a new town, rather than an urban extension (Panxworth). Preference for ‘bolt-on’ developments that are smaller. Leave the land near Thorpe End to maintain the separation. More homes equals more traffic. There is a paradox of high housing need but housing completions are low. Sceptical about BRT. Agreement over wanting to create a new district centre. Feeling that recent developments lack ‘heart’. There should be early construction of community buildings, etc, if development goes ahead. Don’t want to lose character of Thorpe End by building right up to its edge. Short gardens to western edge. North of Salhouse Road could be developed in a way that could integrate the landscape. Actually wouldn’t upset too many people and could form its own village. Stop development at proposed green way south ofSalhouse Road. Area immediately north of housing onSalhouse Roadup to proposed cycle way could be happily developed. Maintain a sense of detachment – ‘bring the countryside in’.
Question 18: Land North of Thorpe End
No, should be kept as green buffer. Preference to expand northwards if that avoids eroding the separation of Thorpe End from the rest of the urban fringe.
89 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
If develop all of CA1 then concern of developing this area would just become one big sprawl. Ribbon development isn’t appropriate. Leave a strip of green along south and north of the NDR to give a kind of ‘green belt’.
Question 19: Land at Gazebo Farm
No strong feeling.
Question 20: Land to the East of the Railway Line
No, concerns around proximity to the NDR/Business Park + affect on desirability. Well-connected to the NDR. Higher densities may allow for less developed areas – detached from services and rest of houses – good vehicular access to A47 – exactly opposite to Thorpe End – crammed, no chance of sense of place/community. Core areas seems to make sense rather than areas like this.
Question 21: Oasis Leisure,Thorpe StAndrew
Unsure of land, no firm view. Could have potential for housing, but concern over trees on site (specimen trees). Ok, provided the existing leisure facilities are kept. Seems sensible. Good place to retire to. Difficulty in finding places like this Good access to facilities.
Question 22: Land Adjacent Pig’s Park (North of Thorpe End)
There is a need for recreational facilities in Thorpe End, possibly allotments? Preference to expand Thorpe End northwards if this preserves the strategic gap to the rest of the Norwich urban fringe. No to Pig’s Park – to small to provide schools, etc
Question 23: Thorpe Woodlands
Kept as a green lung, but possibly some development to enhance the woodland and make public. If Thorpe Woods is developed then cannot claim a sustainable development. Secure Thorpe Woodlands as an enhanced park.
Question 24: Salhouse Road to Plumstead Road Orbital Link
90 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Undecided? Group members favouring either option. Opposed to link road betweenSalhouse RoadandPlumstead Roadbecause it bring more traffic through Thorpe End. Concern about link road being too close to Thorpe End and there being no sound proofing. If a link has to be built then would be madness to go through the Woods. Minimal impact as possible on nature. If you build link road then people won’t use NDR. However, can see the benefit of going through woods as would mean that Thorpe End isn’t surrounded by woods.
Question 25: South-east Sector: Core Development Area CA1 Policy
Feeling is that it’s going to be built and in the core area proposed. Nightmare scenario is that there is development that suits the developer rather the area. Protect Thorpe End as much as possible – so CA1 makes sense. Think carefully about traffic and do some serious work on it.
Response to main issues raised
3.200 The tables below summarise how Broadland District Council has considered the main issues raised in the three different workshops, helping to inform the Area Action Plan.
Sprowston
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
The current failings in Planners at the Council have had a considerable amount of contact education/health/social services with colleagues who work in education, social services and health. need addressing now. The Information has been shared about how many homes are likely to be capacity of existing emergency built in the Growth Triangle over the coming years in order to give services is also a query, as the services the opportunity to prepare for the increased demand that a Norfolk & Norwich Hospital is higher population will being. Concerns about the capacity of services the other side of the City. are appreciated, but actual – or perceived – shortcomings are not a reason to prevent new house-building. Instead, the task is how best to run services and facilities, as well as how to plan for expansion. For example, most health-care commissioning decisions rest with Clinical Commissioning Groups, and NHS England. To-date initial discussions have taken place about a health facility on the Beyond Green development, but not new hospital provision, and certainly not a replication of the Norfolk & Norwich Hospital, which is a centre of regional importance.
91 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
The choice of land adjacent to Bus Rapid Transport – a description used to describe fast, frequent the Airport Industrial Area might services that may use oyster card-style systems – is a main component avoid having to release land of the Norwich Area Transport Strategy. Over recent years there has around Church Lane for been substantial progress on bus services that should give some housing. confidence; examples being the new bus station and various road upgrades to incorporate bus lanes.
Questions about why so many The boundary and house-building target in the Growth Triangle is set homes are needed, what by the Joint Core Strategy, for which there is a substantial evidence constitutes affordable housing, base including a Strategic Housing Market Assessment, and several the relative merits of different topic papers that give further explanation – available from types of housing, and how http://www.gndp.org.uk/our-work/joint-core-strategy/evidence-base/. many homes should be The requirement for 33% affordable housing on larger schemes is also especially for older people? evidence-based, and taken from the Joint Core Strategy (Policy 4). Affordable housing is important for providing choice and quality of housing, and is an established part of national planning policy. Likewise, it is necessary to provide a wide range or specialist housing, such as to provide for the support and care needs of older people. The JCS includes a requirement for housing with care; and, opportunities will be sought for such schemes in the Growth Triangle. This was considered adequate, with no additional policy requirement needed for the AAP, leaving further details to the planning application stage.
Seeking commitments to Some opportunities do arise for forward funding infrastructure, upgrading infrastructure before especially where existing provision is at capacity. There are limits to any development takes place, this approach due to the reliance on developer-funded obligations and what mitigations have being phased with house-buildings in order to deal with cash-flow already been identified? matters. For services and facilities that rely on customers to sustain themselves, under-utilisation can become a difficulty if not enough residents have moved into the area to support shops, schools, ad healthcare. The approach being taken by the Council is to speak to as many providers of infrastructure and facilities as possible as to increase the profile of the Growth Triangle, and to assist the forward-planning by partner organisations.
Rackheath
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
How much does the NDR need the CIL £86 million has been committed by Central Government to contributions of development? fund the NDR from Postwick to the A140 near the Airport. The remaining section to the Fakenham Road will be met from other sources, probably including CIL, but the amounts are undecided as yet.
Assessments of alternatives to Following the High Court judgment in February 2012 further development in the Growth Triangle? work was carried out on the Joint Core Strategy to demonstrate the consideration of alternative options for large-scale growth.
92 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
The Joint Core Strategy was readopted in full in January 2014. In the meantime the preparation and consultation for the AAP has continued. The Issues and Options consultation in 2013 showing the choices in site for how best to accommodate a minimum of 10,000 homes in to the Growth Triangle.
What will be the funding mechanism for The challenge of securing funding for infrastructure schemes infrastructure of regional importance? of a regional importance is ongoing. The primary funding streams are likely to be via Central Government, for which the case is being made through the New Anglia LEP.
How are the ‘spoke’ roads to be The spoke road, like the Plumstead, Salhouse, and Wroxham upgraded for safe cycling and walking? Roads, will be improved through a combination of developer obligations and direct investment by the County Council (who are the highways authority).
Concern about the noise and drainage Solutions will vary depending upon the on-site circumstances issues associated to the alternative sites at each junction or section of road, but improvements are likely south of Rackheath, adjacent to Green to include road widening, provision of new cycling lanes and Lane East and West. footpaths, and junction signalling changes.
Concerns about respecting the existing For sites adjacent to the proposed NDR route, like the southern character of the Village and accepting edge of Rackheath, noise disturbance is obviously an issue. that the car is the predominant form of In deciding whether to allocate for development the Council transport. needs to decide whether suitable noise mitigations are achievable, then balance these against the other benefits or dis-benefits in the site selection process.
Concern about whether facilities can Part of the reasoning for pursuing a large new residential cope with the extra people and where quarter, such as the Eco-community, is to create a big enough the jobs will come from. population centre to sustain schools, shops, and other facilities. The Council is having ongoing conversations about how education, healthcare, transport, and other community facilities can increase along with house-building bringing more people in to communities.
Thorpe End
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
The opinion that the character of Thorpe The Council made a conservation area designation for Thorpe End should be protected by not building End Garden village in 2010. The village, which was up to the edge of the existing village. established by Percy and Leonard Howes in the 1930s, follows the Garden Village tradition made famous by Ebenezer Howard. While later house-building does not always follow the garden village tradition there is a case for retaining a degree of separation between Thorpe End and the Norwich urban fringe. Emerging plans for the South of Salhouse Road land indicate a landscaped edge to Thorpe End, and this subject is expected to be a source of negotiation as the proposals progress to a full planning application.
93 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
A degree of scepticism as to whether Bus Rapid Transit is a key part of the Norwich Area Transport Bus Rapid Transit will be well-used. Strategy. The Salhouse Road is a favoured BRT route for its direct access to the City Centre via Gurney Road. It passes several existing communities, as well as being well-located to over 5,000 new homes along the Salhouse Road and at the Rackheath Eco-community.
The view that new facilities, like Opportunities may arise for expanding existing services early, construction of community buildings, especially if they are already at capacity; but in general the should happen early. potential to forward-fund brand new facilities is limited. Resources tend to become available as and when required, plus there are questions of under-utilisation if a facility is built before a sufficient number of residents have moved in to the community to sustain it.
That the land North of Salhouse Road Land North of Salhouse Road (otherwise referred to as North (White House Farm North) is preferable White House Farm) has been promoted for development as over fields near Thorpe End for a continuity site to White House Farm South, which has development. Reasons are to take the permission for 1,233 homes. The suitability of an allocation pressure away from Thorpe End, and and the prospects for housing delivery will be incorporated in give the option to build a new garden to the site selection process. village.
The land north of Thorpe End should The conservation status of Thorpe End as a Garden Village be protected from development, but that creates a case for considering a landscaped edge to the expanding northwards could be village. Current information, suggests that the land is either preferable if that avoids eroding the not being promoted, or would be landscaping associated to separation to Thorpe End from the rest the Land South of Salhouse Road scheme. of the urban fringe.
The strong opinion that Thorpe The promotion of Thorpe Woodlands has received a strong Woodlands should be protected as a public reaction. The land is a designated County Wildlife Site, green lung for the area. and the ecological advice received, suggests that large-scale housing development would not be appropriate.
Opposition to building a link road A new link road to connect the new quarters from The Airport through Thorpe Woodlands; and, mixed Industrial Area to the Broadland Business Park is being views about whether a link road near to proposed as a way to improve walking, cycling, and public Thorpe End is better or worse than no transport, as well as improving vehicular access. It is link at all. envisaged to be a 20-30 MPH street design, and so fulfils a different purpose to the NDR proposals. The Beyond Green, White House Farm, and Brook Farm schemes already incorporate sections of the link road, for which the Salhouse Road to Plumstead Road section is logical continuation. Given the opposition, and ecological arguments surrounding Thorpe Woodlands, the route adjacent to Thorpe End is preferred.
94 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Options Consultation - Focus Groups
Aim
3.201 As part of the Area Action Plan Options consultation programme, Broadland District Council sought to undertake some specific consultation activity with consultation bodies relating to the proposed strategic policies within the document. In particular, the Council wished to engage with technical bodies which have a remit aligned to the suggested strategic policies within the Options consultation document.
3.202 In order to achieve this, the Council decided to run two focus group sessions for particular consultation bodies. The first session was entitled 'Infrastructure, Planning and Delivery' and the second, 'Green Infrastructure, Landscape and Ecology'.
3.203 The resulting discussions from these focus groups was used to inform the proposed Area Action Plan document.
Timescale
3.204 Both of the focus groups were held at the Broadland District Council offices on 9 May 2013, one during the morning and one during the afternoon. Each session lasted for two hours.
Consultees
3.205 The focus groups were specifically aimed at consultation bodies (service providers, developers, landowners and agents, local government representatives etc.) which were deemed to have an interest and professional experience in the strategic matters being discussed.
3.206 In order to ensure the focus groups ran effectively, it was important to ensure that there was a manageable number of participants during each session, each of whom being given the opportunity to offer valuable input on the matters being discussed.
3.207 Invite letters and emails were sent to approximately 50 appropriate consultation bodies with interests in the Growth Triangle, asking whether they would be interested in attending one or both of the focus group sessions.
Description
3.208 The structure of each focus group followed the same format (see Appendix 5). Each session featured a main facilitator (an officer from the Council's Planning Department), a note-taker to keep a record of the discussion, and several, tabled maps and other appropriate supporting documents to aid the discussion.
95 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.209 Following introductions, there was a discussion of the key questions from within the Options consultation document, relating to the theme of the focus group.These were largely based on the strategic policies proposed within the document.
Results summary
3.210 The following presents notes of the discussions from each of the focus group sessions.
Infrastructure, Planning & Delivery
3.211 Organisations represented: Beyond Green, NHS Norfolk, Norfolk County Council, Environment Agency, Norfolk Police, Thorpewood Medical Group, Land Trust.
3.212 The Area Action Plan was introduced by the Principal Planning Officer and discussion began on the ‘big ticket’ items. A key contributor was Beyond Green.
12 hectares for a secondary school 2 primary schools in Core Development Area (CDA) 2. The main square could be a local district centre, which gets scaled up according to demand for shops, etc. Blue Boar has a district centre status, but there is a question of what a district centre should be like. (Beyond Green has its own vision for what constitutes a district centre.) Beeston Park is integral to Beyond Green’s proposal. Rackheath has the original secondary school site but land now being safeguarded in CDA2, and another option is to relocate the Sprowston Park & Ride.
3.213 Focus was given to the Local Investment Plan & Programme (LIPP), asking whether the right projects were identified, as well as what had been achieved already.
Catton Park improvements are ongoing. The Rackheath Eco-education centre is built. A need is known, but not precisely defined, for a health and social care facility in the Growth Triangle. Existing fire services are thought to be adequate. Ambulance services will need expansion but are not quantified. The Constabulary is clear about having two beat office facilities and a deployment base at Postwick.
3.214 Debate switched to the subject of co-locating facilities, with the views of Beyond Green being influential.
96 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
The question of what to co-locate should be reversed to say what can not be co-located. A recycling centre is an obvious use that should stand alone. The Beyond Green philosophy is to create a high street, comprising terraces are adaptable buildings that could be leased to retailers and other businesses. For example, does a dentist need anything different to a just a first floor space above a shop?
3.215 The location of the secondary school became a talking point, with parallels drawn to the towns of Marlborough and Holt.
Beyond Green are trying to ‘inject’ energy into a place, for which a school is good and bad – bringing people in to a place but large playing fields ‘dilute’ the critical mass of town centres. It was suggested that a few options from the County Council on where the secondary school could go would be helpful. CDA2 is a linear ‘east/west’ site that a 12ha secondary school could make the design more complicated. Redhall Farm could work as the school, but is distant from other CDAs. Sprowston Park & Ride might be moved nearer to the Northern Distributor Road (NDR), then free up the land for the school. East of Beeston Park is inaccessible for walking. The secondary school has to be based on the public transport network.
3.216 Debate once again reverted to the subject of co-location.
Co-locate anything that is not loud, smelly or huge! Liaison through NHS England – Clinical Commissioning Groups, provider GPs, and the County Council as public health authority. A ‘blue light facility’ (police and ambulance) was done in Attleborough. Multi-functional green spaces, synergy of walking, cycling and recreation. Adaptable high street buildings in a terrace that could be leased to dentists, etc, possibly even crèches or pre-schools. ‘Blue light facilities’ in some ways are a kin to vehicle distribution centre. Schools and hospitals are obvious exceptions to being part of a traditional high street. The design and character of the CDAs will vary, so the urban approach of Beyond Green need not apply everywhere. ‘Anchor’ stores or smaller, independent retailers are key investors that are still be approached, engaged, and hopefully signed up to the North East Growth Triangle. A pattern seen in Thetford is supermarkets co-locating with GP surgeries. Beyond Green have different vision to their high street: independent stores supplemented by a smaller supermarket; not swallowed up by a giant superstore. However, the key point is maximising ‘foot-fall’ and community facilities add to making shops more viable.
97 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.217 The discussion at this point moved towards the delivery and long-term management of infrastructure.
The Police and Crime Commissioner will want a stake in planning; for which the Constabulary can facilitate. The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and LIPP are recognised as complicated. The concept of a ‘whole place business plan’ was introduced to explain how both private and public sector investment relate together. (Each CDA should be regarded as a whole place.) The phasing and constraints posed by cash flow need to be understood – examples being the ‘landed estate or garden villages models’. Payment in kind for CIL is an emerging topic. Waste electrical recycling could happen at local sites, rather than by a car journey to a large recycling centre. Avoid the secondary school being “equally inaccessible from everywhere”. The experience of the Land Trust is most residents want to avoid real ownership, but want an ‘emotional’ or genuine say in the use of green space, buildings, etc. Lump sum endowments are vital to taking on land and buildings. To exceed a basic safe and maintained level of investment in green spaces recent experience of the Land Trust shows that higher endowments are important. On the subject of health care it was noted that more pressure on hospitals means increased work for GPs. Beyond Green are investigating the feasibility of a self-contained “water grid” and are liaising with Anglian Water. Their view is environmentally better options may exist to connecting CDA2 to a new strategic sewer to Whitlingham. Managing relationships with the Environment Agency, Anglian Water, Natural England and developers is the main task for spatial planning. The water cycle study work gives a ‘back bone’ to the forward planning role.
3.218 The Principal Planner summed up the key points from the discussion and the focus group closed.
Green Infrastructure, Landscape and Ecology
3.219 Organisations represented: Beyond Green, The Landscape Partnership, Greater Norwich Development Partnership, Environment Agency, Land Trust, Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Broads Authority.
3.220 The Principal Planner began by asking whether the starter questions posed were the correct questions, and if there should be anything else to talk about.
3.221 Long-term management and improvement is the key topic to green infrastructure.
98 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Regard to water-use up to 2027 should not ignore the existing stock. Consultation and awareness raising to help understand implications on habitats like the Broads. Do linkages stop beyond the NDR? How to ensure developers keep to their commitments/ especially when timing and phasing changes. Must be alive to existing and future, private and public, funding e.g. Tax Increment Funding.
3.222 The discussion turned to the current application in Core Development Area 2, with the representative from Beyond Green adding his thoughts – before having to leave early for another engagement.
Beyond Green regards their green infrastructure as a comprehensive part of scheme and does not rely on CIL. The Beyond Green model is to make houses more viable through green infrastructure, not less. Urbanism is not to be confused with arguments like ‘making homes feel part of the countryside’. Another view is that ‘town is town and countryside is countryside’. Beyond Green have an agreement with the Environment Agency on a solution for Sustainable Urban Drainage on their site. Green infrastructure adds to the development value.
3.223 The discussion began to widen out again to the whole Growth Triangle, concentrating on what information is currently available, ideas for planning policy, and what further studies are needed.
The built environment has wildlife value as well – e.g. bats. Green corridors through schemes may be difficult to achieve with some developers. How wide does a green corridor need to be before it has ecological value? Dartmoor has specific bat corridors. Green infrastructure ticks so many boxes, both for people and species, but there is a technical challenge in identifying which corridors serve what purposes. Dog walking is often at odds with species protection. Retention of green infrastructure is better, as opposed to engineering new green infrastructure, plus it is financially cheaper to the developer. Not having ‘dark corridors’ will harm bat species. Designing for specific species is good, but remember that what works for one animal often suits other species too. There is a temptation to buffer all green spaces, but for larger areas that have their own critical mass this is not necessary.
99 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
A distinction exists between an ecological network compared to green infrastructure for walker and cyclists. Presumption in favour of more detail, such as to classify the ecological value. The spectrum runs from tarmac cycleways to natural spaces with controlled access to the public. A good policy could be to have open spaces adjacent to green corridors. Another policy could require developers to design their green infrastructure to link to other sites. There are several NDR crossing points for wildlife: a brown bridge over Middle Road; a bridge under the Bittern Line; the Newman Road crossing; and at the junction with the Spixworth Road. The locations for bat gantries are known already: Quaker Farm, St Faith Lane; the back of Beeston Hall; on the Dewing land; at the Springs by Dobbs Beck; a bat under-pass west of Rackheath Industrial Estate; a dark corridor at the Newman Road bridge;Toad Lane in Thorpe End; Smee Lane; and, the bridge with a hedgerow at Middle Road. Land south of Gazebo Farm has an option as open space. Routes for health walks should be incorporated in and around the CDAs.
3.224 Attention now focused on the Salhouse Road green infrastructure corridor.
Whilst the Salhouse Road is an obvious route to Mousehold, it also has a key function for urbanisation and transport. Realistically, the aspiration is for stepping stones, such as Harrison’s Plantation. An idea is for a trail linking through Thorpe End, railway, Wroxham, and through to Rackheath. Should there be a stronger policy to define categories of green infrastructure? Information green infrastructure should be combined, for example that gathered for the NDR and held by promoters like Beyond Green. Beyond Green are complementing their development with Beeston Park. A similar outcome in CDA1 is more difficult due to the fragmented land ownership. Reoccurring themes can be summed up as water, viability, sustainable drainage (SUDs), and multi-functional space for people. Being clear on data should make decisions easier for developers. More detailed mapping on utilities, such as power lines or gas lines, could indicate safeguarded places without development potential, so better used as green infrastructure. Policy must be explicit on splitting ecological from recreational green infrastructure. Behaviour change should be instilled early, breaking habits like people driving to the Broads by making Beeston Park and Thorpe Woodlands local destinations.
100 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Don’t retrofit SUDs, instead masterplan at the outset. Infiltration testing must be done early. Some SUDs do drainage, while others do ecology. More guidance on dealing with sites with poor infiltration might be helpful to developers.
3.225 The Principal Planner summed up the key points from the discussion and the focus group closed.
Response to the main issues raised
3.226 The following table outlines how Broadland District Council has considered the main issues arising from the Infrastructure, Planning and Delivery Focus Group.
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
The choice of location for a secondary There has been regular discussion between the District school includes a debate about whether Council and the County Council on the importance of it adds to or dilutes the foot-fall and identifying the secondary school location early. The design of a compact local centre. Rackheath Eco-community was an originally a frontrunner, but as this scheme has not progressed at the pace original the alternative of somewhere in or around the Beyond Green scheme is under consideration.
Co-location of services and facilities in The co-location of shops, businesses, schools, and other to a local centre is generally considered community facilities is agreed with, and the GT1 Form of a good thing provided the use is not too Development policy is considering requirement over the noisy, smelly or takes too much land. master-planning of schemes and the requirement for mixed use schemes. The exceptions are relatively few but include large-scale recycling facilities and ‘blue light’ deployment bases for police, ambulance and fire.
The creation of a local centre probably In striving to achieve mixed use walkable and sustainable benefits from some form of anchor store neighbourhoods’ attention is being given to how residents in provided it is not too large to undermine the new communities will be able to meet their day-to-day other retailers. needs. Questions like 'can I walk to a shop to buy a pint of milk or loaf of bread', or 'is it realistic to walk my children to school', are important. Distinctiveness of place, reducing transport-based carbon emissions, and the satisfaction of residents with where they live, all feed-in to the benefit of mixed use developments.
The Beyond Green proposal includes a The Beyond Green planning applications went before the high street, and community facilities are Council’s planning committee in September 2013, where a regarded as a way to increase foot-fall resolution to grant consent was given. The scheme, both in at the centre of the development. terms of its location and characteristics, fulfils the objectives of the emerging Area Action Plan.
101 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
Should community trust models be The Council remains open to various asset management considered for managing community models, and will negotiate with the respective Growth Triangle buildings and green space then it is vital development applicants as schemes come forward. The to endow the new organisation with a Land Trust’s point about the importance of endowing lump sum. management organisations with the capital to invest, and to ensure the necessary revenue streams are available long-term is acknowledged. Officers are aware of successful examples such as at Letchworth, or the Milton Keynes Parks Trust.
A key role for spatial planning is Previously, during, and after the Issues and Options co-ordinating the relationships with consultation regular contact has been held with all kinds of organisations like the Environment infrastructure and service providers. These include the Agency, Anglian Water, and Natural Environment Agency, the County Council. Health Services, England to manage infrastructure and others. Wherever possible, officers have sought to open investment. a dialogue where infrastructure providers and statutory bodies are encouraged to proactively put forward their preferred solutions, as well as respond to any concerns that the draft AAP raises.
The pressure on health care services is Partnership arrangements with the health sector date back expected to increase and spatial planning to the Broadland Community Partnership work, but have must be alert to these pressures. changed since the NHS reorganisation under the Health and Social Care Act 2013. Contact has been made and sequent meetings held with the CCGs for Broadland, and with NHS England in Cambridge. This approach has highlighted the implications of the Growth Triangle in terms of population increase, and sets a basis for the planning of new health services, as well as ways to encourage people to live healthier, more active lifestyles. Whilst the outline plan from Beyond Green includes the proposal for a new health centre, detailed decisions of how existing provision is expanded, as well as if, when, and by what means a new GP surgery is provided, will be a commissioning decision for the health service in the future.
The integration of smaller recycling Initiatives and facilities to encourage better recycling rates facilities, such as collecting points for in new residential neighbourhoods would be welcomed, but cardboard, glass, plastic, etc, can be the main recycling centre is not a suitable immediate placed in local centres, but larger neighbour to homes. Correspondence with County Council facilities need a more a standalone colleagues suggests that a minimum site size for a modern location. recycling centre is 4,000m2.
Upgrading of Whitlingham Treatment Ongoing consultation has taken place with Anglian Water to Works is a feasible option, but Beyond ensure that in principle solutions exist for planning on the Green remains open to exploring scale of the Growth Triangle. Assurances have been given alternative options. about investment in supply and water recycling infrastructure. Anglian Water has indicated that a new strategic sewer is required to serve the North East that can be requisitioned in
102 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
parts by the various development promoters. Whether developers choose other water recycling options, other than connecting to Whitlingham, is a matter for discussion with Anglian Water that the Council will participate in at the planning applications stage.
3.227 The following table outlines how Broadland District Council has considered the main issues arising from the Landscape and Ecology Focus Group.
Issue Raised Broadland District Council Response
Ensuring developers keep to their green The point about holding developers to their commitments is infrastructure commitments, even when accepted, but the availability, viability and deliverability of timing and phasing of building changes; schemes are important concerns. A district-wide viability plus, being alert to the various private assessment has been prepared, in which typologies compare and public funding opportunities. with some of the Growth Triangle’s emerging schemes. Evidence indicates that sustainable developments, with high-quality green infrastructure, are achievable. For schemes at the stage of a planning consent, commitments made are expected to be delivered; and, as the Local Planning Authority, the Council has the powers to take enforcement action. Only in the most exceptional circumstances, and with compelling evidence, will developers be able to renegotiate their green infrastructure commitments.
The potential to see green infrastructure Developers are certainly encouraged to see green as a way to add value to a development, infrastructure as a way to add value, as opposed to an not as a cost that reduces profitability. obligation that represents reduced profit. However, this is more of a viability issue, and will be negotiated as schemes reach a planning application; especially if on-site provision is being made in lieu of CIL.
Terms like “urbanism” not being confused The danger of semantics entering debates about urban with phrases like “making homes feel part design terminology is understood. There are many different of the countrywide”. terms, which get used with greater or lesser precision, and often mean slightly different things to different people. Developers in the Growth Triangle are not limited to one particular style of architecture or urban design. The Council encourages different styles of urban design, provided it is of sufficient quality. See the text for Policy GT1.
Green infrastructure is multi-purpose The point about green infrastructure being multi-functional, serving both ecology and people, but but often being for one use more than another is accepted. some uses do pose conflicts. An A Green Infrastructure Strategy is evolving for the Growth example being dog walking being at odds Triangle, which under Policy GT3, lists a series of projects. with species protection. Leading to a In the list of projects, differentiation is being made between question on how best to categorise green landscape buffer, woodland parks for recreation, open space, infrastructure. and green infrastructure linkages.
103 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
The mitigations being taken for the NDR The Northern Distributor Route is following the NSIP process, need to be remembered. Such as the bat and being planned separately to the Growth Triangle, but is gantries, for which the locations are being taken in to account. known: Quaker Farm, the back of Beeston Hall, the Dewing land, the Spring (Dobbs Beck), the under-pass west of Rackheath Industrial Estate, a dark corridor at the Newman Road bridge, Toad Lane in Thorpe End, Smee Lane, and the hedgerow at the Middle Road bridge.
The ability to facilitate green The Green Infrastructure Strategy underpinning GT 3 infrastructure at the crossing points of recognises the NDR mitigations and the crossings to link the NDR: a brown bridge over Middle habitats together. Road, a bridge under he Bittern Line, the Newman Road crossing, and the junction with the Spixworth Road.
The importance of master-planning in Policy 20 of the JCS gives an explicit requirement for SUDs at the outset. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems, and a repetition was not considered necessary in the Area Action Plan.
104 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Options Consultation - Consultation with Youth Groups
Aim
3.228 The District Council considered it important to seek the views of younger people living in and around the Growth Triangle on how the area should develop in the future. Monitoring of previous consultations had identified this group as being under-represented, whilst potentially having a major interest in the future development of the area (as future house-buyers etc.).
3.229 A specific programme of engagement activity was therefore planned and carried out with young people living in and around the Growth Triangle.
3.230 The activity focused on what young people in this area currently like and dislike about the neighbourhood in which they live and what improvements they would like to see to the north east area of Norwich.
3.231 The engagement activity took the form of an approach to three separate youth groups based in the area, in order to carry out a brief, interactive exercise designed to elicit their ideas and ambitions regarding future development in the area.
Timescale
3.232 Officers from the Council’s Planning Department visited three youth groups, at Sprowston, Rackheath and Thorpe St Andrew, in late May / early June 2013. Details of these sessions are listed below:
Date Youth Group
Tuesday 28 May 2013 Sprowston Youth Cafe
Tuesday 4 June 2013 Rackheath Youth Council
Wednesday 12 June 2013 Thorpe St. Andrew Youth Club
Consultees
3.233 The consultees at each session were young people living in and around the Growth Triangle area, aged between (in most cases) 12 and 16 years old.
Description
3.234 The activity focused on what the young people in each particular area currently like and dislike about the neighbourhood in which they live and what improvements they would like to see to the north east area of Norwich (i.e. the Growth Triangle).
105 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
3.235 In each case, participants were asked to write their comments on an appropriately coloured ‘issues flag’ and then stick the the flag in the relevant place on an A1 map showing the entire north east area of Norwich. The flags were colour-coded according to the following different categories;
1. Community Identity 2. Community Facilities 3. Natural Environment 4. Economy 5. Transport & Movement
Results summary
3.236 There was a good degree of participation at each of the three sessions, with a range of suggestions being made.
Overall picture
3.237 The graph below shows an analysis of all of the comments received from each of the groups. Comments have been grouped, where relevant, into common themes.
106 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.238 The themes are based on the most common characteristics within the data sets as a whole. Two of the most popular types of comment relate to the need for more retail (shopping) in the area and more and better buses and bus stops. Comments relating to the need for new and better parks, sports centres and maintaining habitats were also popular.
3.239 Some of the themes that were least common but could benefit the north east area are schools, trains and improved parking and bike storage.
Sprowston
3.240 Several of the most recurring comments by the Sprowston Youth Café members related to buses and bus stops and cycling.The young people involved suggested bus stops on Gurney Road (at Mousehold Heath), North Walsham Rd (at the junction of Barkers Lane), and a rapid bus service on Sundays from the Sprowston Park and Ride, as well as from the Postwick Park and Ride.
3.241 Another remark made was that Norwich should become more like Holland for cycling and cycle routes. There were also cycle lanes suggested on Cozens Hardy Road and on Falcon Road West. The group also proposed expanding the Norwich International Airport as well as the introduction of helicopter rides at Norwich international airport. Within ‘Miscellaneous’ are the more unique ideas such as
107 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
quirky architecture on Salhouse Road, a Drum and Music Studio in the Broadland Business Park, and keeping the ‘Pick Your Own’ farm at White House Farm, Sprowston.
Thorpe St Andrew
3.242 Thorpe St Andrews Youth club’s top 3 themes were, Fast food, Sports centres and skate parks. Fast food theme included Nandos, KFC, and MacDonald’s near Dussindale. Sports and swimming centres were specified to a Swimming near Griffin Lane, Sports Centre with Gym and a Gym Centre, including a swimming pool both in Dussindale. Skate parks were wanted on the Laundry Lane Recreation Ground, in Thorpe Woodlands and on Pound Lane Recreation Ground, as skate parks around the Norwich area are not accessible without using public transport from Dussindale.
3.243 The second most popular groupings were parks, retail and employment opportunities. Retail space was wanted for a Games Workshop and shops in general. More employment opportunities were wanted within the Thorpe St Andrew area and it was suggested that there could be more local newsagents for paper-rounds.The young people suggested a park that offers outdoor Table Tennis and Basketball courts near Dussindale.
3.244 Other ideas were: a 'Captain America's' diner near Dussindale, a theatre on Pound Lane Recreation Ground, new trains with improved parking and bike storage; a BMX track on Pound Lane recreation ground, as the only park in the Norwich area that currently contains a BMX track is Sloughbottom Park. More woodlands and a dog agility course near Thorpe End was suggested.
Rackheath
3.245 The top five suggestions by members of the Rackheath Youth Council related to provision of a new theme park, retail outlets, new and better buses and bus stops, and provision of a theatre/cinema. The group was keen to have a theme park attraction west of Little Plumstead, and specified a space museum (like NASA) or a dinosaur park.
3.246 Retail outlets are of high interest within the Rackheath group, like a milk shake bar and sweet shop. Theatres were a popular theme with a cinema being suggested within the general vicinity of Rackheath and a theatre suggested at Rackheath Village Hall.
3.247 Bus routes were a recurring theme, with a quicker route alongNorwich Roadto Wroxham being suggested, as well as a bus shelter on the Norwich Road/Vera Road junction and the Green Lane/Norwich Road junction.
108 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.248 In the ‘miscellaneous’ section there were unique ideas such as a zip-wire through the woods, in the tree belt near Wilde Road, a monorail around Rackheath and a place like Wroxham Barns near Green Lane East.
Conclusion
3.249 The three youth groups showed a major interest in facilities available to the community, now and in the future. Demand for more buses and bus stops as well as improved retail were two of the biggest issues for members of the youth groups.
3.250 There were many unique and individual suggestions, some quite extravagant, which have been grouped within the ‘miscellaneous’ theme, for the purpose of this summary. Many of these suggestions relate (in its broadest sense) to the issue of transport and access.
3.251 All three groups took part positively in giving their ideas. Many helpful suggestions were made, as well as the workshops being fun and good-humoured.
Response to the main issues raised
3.252 The details below illustrates how Broadland District Council has considered the main issues arising from the three workshops in the development of the Area Action Plan.
Sprowston
As development proposals come forward the customer base for new and improved bus services is expected to grow. Officers have made contact and met with representatives from the County Council who deal with public transport. The Gurney Road is an important route, offering the potential for BRT in to the City Centre. The North Walsham Road is also an important radial route, and with the development proposed (such as the Beyond Green scheme) new and more frequent buses services are expected to become viable over the next 10-20 years. Cycling is also an important priority, as shown in the recent Cycle Ambition Programme across Norwich, where additional investment is being made. Whilst commitments about Cozens Hardy Road and Falcon Road West cannot be made, the logic of what is said is agreed with. Cozens Hardy Road is on the purple ‘Outer Circuit’ pedalway; and, in the coming years it is likely that further investment will come forward. Similarly, Falcon Road West is a good suggestion for cycling investment and while there are no projects in the immediate pipeline, connecting in to the purple pedalway and improving access to the High School and Sparhawk Park may become considerations for the future. The more idiosyncratic suggestions, like for a drum and music studio, are not really within the gift of planning system to provide, but may come as a planning application if a commercial provider was to make the investment. Loss of the
109 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
‘pick your own’ fruit and veg at White House Farm however will happen, at least form this location, as White House Farm has a permission for house-building by a consortium of Taylor Wimpey, Persimmon, and Hopkins Homes.
Thorpe St. Andrew
Fast food restaurants and take-aways come under the ‘A’ use classes order, but rely on a willing commercial operator. To encourage new restaurants and take-aways over the next 10-20 years in the Growth Triangle new developments will be required to incorporate mixed-use local centres. Mixed-use centres are likely to be sought at the Rackheath Eco-community, North Sprowston and Old Catton, South of Salhouse Road, and East of the Business Park. The aim being to secure uses like shops, food outlets, and various other facilities and services that are easily accessible, and able to meet peoples’ day-to-day needs. The requirement for sports centres has been evidenced through a study commissioned for the Joint Core Strategy that said the Growth Triangle area would require six new sports halls, each hall having a minimum of two courts. Some facilities are likely to be co-located with the secondary school, where precedence can go to student use in the daytime and community use in the evening. Other sports halls could be co-located with other community buildings. Exact locations are unknown, at present, and will be determined as the master-planning of new developments is finalised, but are most likely to be near to local centres. The land for, and possibly the construction of skate parks is likely to be provided in conjunction with formal open space, for which a strategic green infrastructure policy is being written, and will be specifically required in site allocations. Depending on the negotiation of individual development schemes, section 106 agreement obligations and Community Infrastructure Levy are likely funding sources. Ongoing management will again vary according to particular circumstances; possibly with the parish council or a management organisation/trust taking responsibility.
Rackheath
Development in and near to Rackheath is likely to create the demand for more retail, certainly in terms of convenience shopping. The allocation of the Eco-community is set to include a local centre. Depending on the operators that may want to open a business, a milk shake bar, sweat shop as suggested by the Youth Council, may come about in the medium to long-term. The policy options under consideration suggests housing allocations include a mixed-use element, encompassing A1 shops, A2 financial and professional services, A3 restaurants and cafes, A4 drinking establishments, A5 hot food takeaway, and B1 business.
110 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
Plans for the Growth Triangle are being made in conjunction with the Norwich Area Transport Strategy. Bus Rapid Transit and improvement to core bus routes are important priories. The Salhouse BRT corridor is envisaged to go directly in to the Eco-community and the Wroxham Road is identified as a core bus route. The potential for increasing the frequency of services and infrastructure, like shelters and dedicated bus lanes is good in the medium to longer term, but exact details are presently unknown. Imaginative ideas like a theme park, woodland zip-wire, and monorail are unlikely, but not impossible. Much depends on the ambitions of operators, commercial viability, and would be dealt with by a planning application for the Council to assess. Questions will inolve impact on the environment, disturbance to nearby residents, and whether the proposal creates new jobs. The onus is very much on entrepreneurs, now in the future, to come up with businesses that are suitable environmentally, socially, and economically in their land use.
111 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
GNDP Design Review Panel (Sept 2013)
Greater Norwich Development Partnership (GNDP) Design Review Panel
Aim
3.253 As a final consultative step prior to the production of the proposed submission draft Area Action Plan, Broadland District Council decided to take the plan to the GNDP Design Review Panel to seek its professional advice and recommendations on the proposals and the approach being taken.
3.254 The Design Review Panel was set up to provide independent expert advice to the GNDP and its constituent Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) on the quality of development proposals. The panel covers schemes across the whole GNDP area (Norwich City, Broadland DC, South Norfolk DC and part of the Broads Authority). LPAs (including the County Council) refer schemes to the Panel for review.
Timescale
3.255 The date set for the Design Review Panel to consider the proposed Area Action Plan was 12th September 2013.
Consultees
3.256 Twenty one independent experts sit on the Design Review Panel. These individuals are drawn from a variety of different backgrounds including architectural practices, planning consultancies, housing associations, and environmental/sustainability consultancies. The panel gives advice on masterplans, identifies cost-effective, timely design changes to projects and offers expert views on sustainability.
3.257 The panel has an advisory role. It is a non-statutory consultee in the planning process and the panel’s comments can be a material consideration in reaching planning decisions.
Description
3.258 An approach was made by Broadland District Council to the Design Review Panel, with the purpose of reviewing the proposed Area Action Plan and associated Broadland Pattern Book, which is intended to guide the form and quality of development within the Growth Triangle.
3.259 It was decided that the AAP proposals and Pattern Book would be considered at the Review Panel meeting of 12th September 2013.
112 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Consultation Activity 3
3.260 The meeting involved approximately eight representatives (including the chair), selected from the pool of twenty one panel members. The aim is to have at least two members representing each area of expertise so that a substitute is available when a member cannot participate due to a conflict of interest.
3.261 The view of the panel was summarised by the chair during the meeting. This was subsequently written up by the GNDP support officer in a letter to the District Council.
Results summary
3.262 The key issues raised during the meeting of the Design Review Panel were as follows:
The scope for the Pattern Book to look to the city of Norwich for design styles as well as rural Broadland, given that much of the development will extend the City’s urban fringe. The possibility of giving extra emphasis to the importance of energy efficiency as an integral component of good design standards. The lack of discussion about ‘gateways’ into new communities being an omission from the design guidance. The lack of discussion regarding the green spaces between development in order to create cycling and walking links The scope for the Council to create something new and unique, rather than aspiring to traditional house styles.
Response to the main issues raised
3.263 The following outlines how Broadland District Council has considered the main issues arising from the GNDP Design Review Panel consultation.
The remit of the Design Pattern Book was to study existing high-quality developments in Broadland. It does not limit or constrain developers in applying contemporary styles or taking inspiration from other places, but merely aims to inform the reader of what makes Broadland a distinctive place already. The Council has shown a strong commitment to energy efficiency issues, the Eco-education Cube at the Rackheath Industrial Area being a prime example. Policy 3 of the Joint Core Strategy gives a basis for requiring enhanced water and energy standards, and so extra policy requirements in the AAP were seen as unnecessary; especially in light of the Government’s Housing Standards Review. The subject of gateways in to new developments is dealt with under Policy 2 of the Joint Core Strategy, and is felt to be adequately addressed without further requirements in the AAP. However, a way in which the consideration of gateways, and other scheme layout issues, will be incorporated is through
113 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation 3 Consultation Activity
the GT1 stipulations for promoter/developer-led participative master-planning processes and to provide design and access statements. The point about the green spaces between developments is accepted, and captured in policy GT 3. A Green Infrastructure Strategy with a series of projects and smaller location specific schemes is envisaged that will provide benefits for ecology, as well as enabling an improved network of walking/cycling routes. The impression that the Pattern Book means that the Council is only seeking traditional housing design is incorrect. There is much to recommend some of the historic housing designs, streets, courtyards, and squares, but contemporary designs are certainly not ruled out. The emphasis being on quality of the built and natural environment, not holding to one particular style or form.
114 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 1: Parish assessment survey form
Broadland Site Specific Allocations DPD
Parish Assessment 2008
Parish ……………………………………………………………………......
Contact details Name………………………………Address..…………………………..
Tel. no. ……………………………………………………………………
Please set out below (and on map where applicable) any key constraints, issues or suggestions relating to planning for the future of the parish.
1. Environment
Are there any areas of particular environmental importance?
Please list and mark on map.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2. Housing
(i) If a Settlement Limit is defined for the town / village should it reflect the existing Settlement Limit ?
…………………………......
If no, please mark suggested boundary on map.
(ii) Are there any sites that should be particularly considered for “market” housing development?
Please list and mark on map
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
(iii) Are there any sites that should be particularly considered for an “affordable” (ie social housing) exception site development?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3. Employment
Are there any sites that should be particularly considered for employment development?
Please list and mark on map
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
115 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 1: Parish assessment survey form
4. Transport
Are there any transport issues in the Parish that need to be taken into consideration?
Please list and mark on map
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5. Community facilities (inc. recreational open space)
(i) Are there any community facilities (new or extensions) that are actively being sought?
Please list and mark on map
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
(ii) Are there any other community facilities that are likely to be needed in the foreseeable future?
Please list and mark on map.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
6. Any other comments?
Thank you for your assistance. Please return the completed form and map by Friday 11th April in the pre-addressed envelope, or send it to :
FAO Isabel Whitehead, Policy Unit, Broadland District Council, Thorpe Lodge, 1 Yarmouth Road, Thorpe St. Andrew, Norwich, NR7 0DU.
116 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development'
Questionnaire
Site Allocations Development Plan Document
Principles for development and potential sites
Questionnaire
The Site Allocations DPD will identify or “allocate” areas for specific types of development, such as housing, employment, community facilities etc. It will also include the definition of development boundaries or settlement limits for those places, identified under the Joint Core Strategy, where some further growth may take place.
Consequently, at this time we are seeking views on the principles for development in Broadland’s communities. We would also like your views on whether the currently defined settlement limits, as set out in the Broadland District Local Plan (Replacement) 2006, are still appropriate or whether they should be amended in some places. We would also like your suggestions of any particular sites in Broadland that should be considered as possible allocations for development.
The following questionnaire has been designed to help you present your ideas and views. a) Parish details
1. Please specify below which parish you are completing this questionnaire on behalf of.
……………………………………………………………………………………… b) Principles for development
2. What are the three things you like most about your community?
1.
2.
3.
3. What are the three things you like least about your community?
1.
2.
3.
117 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development'
4. Does your community need anything to help improve the quality of life for residents? (please refer to your community's Parish Plan, if applicable).
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
c) Settlement Limit
5. Do you think the current Settlement Limit (see enclosed map) is appropriate and should remain as it is?
Yes
No
Please briefly state your reasons:
6. If you think the current Settlement Limit should be amended please indicate where, in red ink, on the enclosed map (N.B. Amendments to include land in the Settlement Limit should normally be no more than 0.2ha or 0.5 acre).
d) Site Proposals
If you wish to promote a site to be allocated for a specific development please provide details on the enclosed ‘Initial Site Concept’ form (several copies of this have been enclosed in case you wish to promote more than one site).
Please note, you may wish to refer to your answer(s) to Question 3 when filling in this form.
e) Contact details
Title First Name Surname
Job Title
Organisation
Address
Postcode Tel. No.
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. Please submit your response to the address listed on page 1 before Monday 12th January 2009.
118 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development'
'Initial Site Concept' form
Initial Site Concept Form Guidance Notes
As part of its work on producing the Site Allocations and Area Action Plan Development Plan Documents, Broadland District Council needs to consider sites that may be appropriate for development.
Selected sites will be identified or “allocated” (or for smaller sites included within a defined boundary of a settlement) in the Site Allocations DPD. Alternatively they may be identified as part of major development under the Area Action Plan proposed for the North East of Norwich. Selected sites will need to accord with the “higher level” Joint Core Strategy being produced by the Greater Norwich Development Partnership, as well as the East of England Plan (RSS) and national planning policies.
The Initial Site Concept form is intended to give a brief (1 page plus diagram) summary of any site proposed for development. This will be used by the Local Planning Authority to assess the proposal, including its use for consulting with statutory undertakers and other bodies, and the general public.
Given the large number of sites that are likely to be proposed by landowners, developers and others, only a proportion of sites will be allocated. This will be based on an assessment, having regard to the Joint Core Strategy and other higher level planning policies, as well as the relative merits of a site, e.g. in terms of sustainability and general planning considerations, compared to other sites under consideration.
If a site is chosen to be allocated in the Site Allocations or Area Action Plan Documents, a revised Site Concept Statement may be produced by the District Council to accompany the allocation. This Statement may be used as informal guidance or may be progressed to adoption as a Supplementary Planning Document.
Proposers of development should complete the Initial Site Concept form, including a map of the site on an Ordnance Survey base at an appropriate scale, from which the location (in relation to adjoining areas) is clear. This should be annotated diagrammatically with the key components of the proposed scheme. If proposers of development wish to submit further supporting information it should be ensured that anything of significance is covered in the Concept form.
Completed Concept forms should clearly state the type of development that is proposed, and include reference to the proposed scale of provision of (or contribution to) related elements such as affordable housing, formal and informal open space, infrastructure provision etc as appropriate.
119 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development'
Instructions for completion of form
This sets out the basic matters for a potential development.
Settlement – insert name of the settlement close to the site, and parish name if different
Site address – insert brief address e.g. “north of The Street”
Site Reference – leave blank (put in by LPA)
Site area – insert total area in Hectares
Existing site / use – insert brief description of the sites’ existing use and any particular features or attributes
Development proposed (incl. scale) – insert brief description of sites’ proposed use (eg. “Residential development comprising approx. 1 Ha of 30 houses, of which 50% will be “affordable housing”, and approx. 1 Ha of open space, recreational provision and green infrastructure).
Concept (design, layout, density, mix, access, green infrastructure etc illustrated on concept diagram) – insert brief description of the key elements of the scheme, and illustrate these diagrammatically on the concept map / diagram.
Sustainability Considerations
To provide brief comments on the wider sustainability considerations (including relationship to nearby communities, wider infrastructure and compliance with the proposed Joint Core Strategy)
Statement on viability and confirmation by owner of willingness to develop, with suggested timescale – Insert brief statement to confirm that the proposed scheme is financially viable and achievable, including that the owner(s) is willing for the site to be developed, and setting out the proposed timescale for development.
120 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development'
INITIAL SITE CONCEPT FORM
N.B.This form is intended to give a very brief summary of your proposal e.g. in the form of bullet points If necessary, please use additional pieces of paper to complete your answers.
(Insert or supply concept plan here [on OS base at a standard scale])
Settlement
Level in Settlement Hierarchy
Site address
Site Reference (LPA)
Site area
Existing site / use
Proposed Development (inc scale)
Proposers Contact Details
Name:
Address:
121 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development'
Address:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Site Assets
Provide brief comments on assets pertinent to the development site
Landscape Character:
Historic Features:
Views:
Trees:
Other:
Concept – Elements
Provide brief comments on the elements of the proposal and illustrate on the concept plan where appropriate:
Design:
Access / Transport:
Layout:
Green Infrastructure / Landscaping:
122 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 2: Consultation Material - 'Principles for Development'
Density:
Mix use:
Affordable Housing:
Water Management:
Nature Conservation:
Energy Efficiency:
Social Infrastructure:
Other:
Sustainability Considerations and Development Practicalities
Provide brief comments on the wider sustainability considerations:
Viability – Timescale
Provide a brief statement on ownership, viability and proposed timescale:
Return Form to:
Planning Policy Team, Broadland District Council, Thorpe Lodge, 1 Yarmouth Road , NORWICH, NR7 0DU - by 5th June 2009
123 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
List of consultees
The following is a list of those organisations that were consulted by the Council during the consultation on 'Options for Growth':
Anglian Water Services Ltd
Breckland District Council
British Gas Properties
British Telecommunications plc.
Broadland Business Forum
Broadland Community Partnership
Broadland Disabled Peoples' Forum
Broadland Older Peoples' Partnership
Civil Aviation Authority
CPRE Norfolk
East of England Development Agency
East of England Regional Assembly
EDF Energy
English Heritage
Environment Agency
Go East
Greater Norwich Housing Partnership
Great Yarmouth Borough Council
Health & Safety Executive
Highways Agency
Historic Buildings & Monuments Commission for England
Home Builders Federation
Hutchison 3G UK Limited
Mobile Operators Association
National Grid
Natural England
124 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
Network Rail
Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership
Norfolk Chamber of Commerce
Norfolk Constabulary - Central Area
Norfolk Constabulary - Estates Department (HQ)
Norfolk Constabulary - Rural Area
Norfolk County Council
Norfolk Geodiversity Partnership
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology
Norfolk Police Authority
Norfolk Primary Care Trust
North Norfolk District Council
Norwich City Council
Norwich International Airport Ltd.
Npower Limited
NTL UK
O2 (UK) Limited
Orange PCS Limited
All Parish & Town Councils based within the Norwich Policy Area (17 in total)
Secretary of State for Transport
South Norfolk District Council
The Broads Authority
T-Mobile UK Limited
Transco
Vodafone Limited
All other individuals registered on the Council's Consultation Portal were notified about the consultation, via email or letter.
125 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
Publicity material
126 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
127 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
128 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
129 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
130 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
131 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
132 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
Consultation with schools
133 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
134 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
135 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
Infrastructure workshop
The following is a list of all those organisations invited to and represented at the 'Infrastructure Workshop' events discussed in section 2 of this document:
Anglian Water Services Ltd
Bidwells Property Consultants
Broadland District Council
Brown & Co. Property & Business Consultants
Building Partnerships Ltd
EDF Energy
Environment Agency
FirstGroup - Eastern Counties Buses
Gerald Eve Chartered Surveyors & Property Consultants
Government Office for the East of England
KBC Asset Management Ltd
Keymer Cavendish Ltd
National Grid
Natural England
Network Rail
NHS Norfolk
Norfolk Constabulary
Norfolk County Council
Greater Norwich Development Partnership
Norfolk Fire Service
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology
Norfolk Wildlife Trust
Savills Ltd
Shaping Norfolk's Future
Sport England
Thorpe & Felthorpe Trust
Transco (National Grid)
136 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 3: Consultation Material - 'Options for Growth'
137 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 4: Publicity Material - Growth Triangle Workshops
Workshops flyer
138 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 4: Publicity Material - Growth Triangle Workshops
139 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 4: Publicity Material - Growth Triangle Workshops
Workshops agenda
140 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 4: Publicity Material - Growth Triangle Workshops
Broadland News article - Autumn 2011
141 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
List of consultees
The following is a list of all of the specific and general consultation bodies that were consulted by Broadland District Council during the Area Action Plan Options consultation.
Anglian Water Services Ltd
Barton Willmore
Beeston Estate
Beeston St. Andrew Parish Meeting
Beyond Green
Bidwells
Breckland Council
British Telecommunications plc.
Broadland Older Peoples' Partnership
Broads Authority
BTCV Eastern Regional Office
Building Partnerships
Campaign for the Protection of Rural England
Civil Aviation Authority
CPRE Norfolk
Department for Transport
EDF Energy
English Heritage
Environment Agency
Friends of Thorpe Woodland
Great & Little Plumstead Parish Council
Great Yarmouth Borough Council
Health & Safety Executive
Heathwood Gospel Hall Trust
Highways Agency
142 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
Historic Buildings & Monuments Commission for England
Home Builders Federation
Homes & Communities Agency
Hoveton and Wroxham Medical Centre
Hutchison 3G UK Limited
Ifield Estate/Pegasus Planning Group
Ifield Estates
Lanpro Services Ltd.
Mobile Operators Association
D. Jeans Properties / Chaplin Farrant Ltd.
National Grid Gas Distribution
National Grid Plc
National Power
National Trust
Natural England
Network Rail
NHS Norfolk
Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership
Norfolk Chamber of Commerce
Norfolk Community Health & Care Trust
Norfolk Constabulary
Norfolk Constabulary - Estates Department (HQ)
Norfolk County Council
Norfolk Geodiversity Partnership
Norfolk Homes
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology
Norfolk Police Authority
Norfolk Primary Care Trust
143 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
Norfolk Rivers Internal Drainage Board
Norfolk Sports Alliance
Norfolk Wildlife Trust
North Norfolk Clinical Commissioning Group
North Norfolk District Council
Norwich City Council
Norwich Clinical Commissioning Group
Norwich International Airport Ltd.
Npower Limited
NTL UK
Old Catton Parish Council
O2 (UK) Limited
Orange PCS Limited
Postwick Parish Council
Rackheath Parish Council
RIBA Norfolk
Salhouse Parish Council
Savills/Gurney Settlement Trust
Savills/Thorpe & Felthorpe Trust and John Gurney Charitable Trust
South Norfolk Council
Spixworth Parish Council
Sport England
Sprowston Town Council
Tesco/Martin Robeson Planning
The Morley Agricultural Foundation
The Trafford Estate
Thorpe St. Andrew Town Council
T-Mobile UK Limited
144 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
UK Power Networks
Vail Williams LLP
Vodafone Limited
Woods Hardwick
Thorpewood Surgery
In addition, eleven local landowners were also targeted as part of the consultation.
145 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
Consultation response form
146 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
147 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
148 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
149 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
150 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
Broadland News article - Spring 2013
151 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
152 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
Summary leaflet
153 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
154 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
155 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
156 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
Focus Groups Agendas
157 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
158 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 5: Consultation Material - Options Consultation
159 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 6: Letter of feedback - Design Review Panel
160 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 6: Letter of feedback - Design Review Panel
161 Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Appendix 6: Letter of feedback - Design Review Panel
162 If you would like this information in a different format, such as large print, audio, Braille or in a different language please call (01603) 431133 and we will do our best to help. www.broadland.gov.uk