DOCSLIB.ORG

Growth Triangle Area Action Plan Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Growth Triangle Area Action Plan Area Action Plan - Statement of Consultation Contents 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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Inspectors Report Into the Examination of the Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk
    Report to the Greater Norwich Development Partnership [Broadland District Council, Norwich City Council, South Norfolk Council and Norfolk County Council] by Roy Foster MA MRTPI and Mike Fox BA DipTP MRTPI Inspectors appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Date 22 February 2011 PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE ACT 2004, SECTION 20 REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION OF THE JOINT CORE STRATEGY FOR BROADLAND, NORWICH & SOUTH NORFOLK DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT Document submitted for examination on 5 March 2010 Examination hearings held between 9 November and 9 December 2010 File Ref: PINS/G2625/429/3 ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT AA Appropriate Assessment AAP Area Action Plan AH Affordable Housing AMR Annual Monitoring Report AWS Anglian Water Services BCR Benefit to Cost Ratio BRT Bus Rapid Transit CABE Commission for Architecture & the Built Environment CBR Core Bus Route CIF Community Infrastructure Fund CIL Community Infrastructure Levy CSH Code for Sustainable Homes DCLG Department for Communities & Local Government DfT Department for Transport DJD Drivers Jonas Deloitte DPD Development Plan Document EEP East of England Plan EPIC East of England Production Innovation Centre EUV Established Use Value FC Focussed Changes GI Green Infrastructure GNDP Greater Norwich Development Partnership HD Habitats Directive HGV Heavy Goods Vehicles HMA Housing Market Assessment IC Inspectors’ Changes JCS Joint Core Strategy KSC Key Service Centre LDS Local Development Scheme LIPP Local Infrastructure Plan and Programme MSBC
    [Show full text]
  • (Norwich Northern Distributor Road (A1067 to A47(T)) Order Examining
    The Planning Act 2008 The Norfolk County Council (Norwich Northern Distributor Road (A1067 to A47(T)) Order Examining Authority’s Report of Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation to the Secretary of State for Transport _______________________________________ Peter Robottom MA(Oxon) DipTP MRTPI MCMI David Richards BSocSci DipTP MRTPI Austin Smyth PhD BA(Hons) FCILT Examining Authority Report to the Secretary of State 1 Template version 0.96 This page intentionally left blank Report to the Secretary of State 1 Template version 0.96 Examining Authority’s findings and conclusions and recommendation in respect of The Norfolk County Council (Norwich Northern Distributor Road (A1067 to A47(T)) Order File Ref TR010015 The application, dated 6 January 2014, was made under section 37 of the Planning Act 2008 and was received in full by The Planning Inspectorate on 7 January 2014. The applicant is Norfolk County Council. The application was accepted for Examination on 4 February 2014. The Examination of the application began on 2 June 2014 when the Preliminary Meeting was conducted by Inspector Elizabeth Hill, who was the originally appointed Examining Authority. On 23 June 2014 the Panel of Inspectors presenting this report was appointed as the replacement Examining Authority under s62 and s265 of the Planning Act 2008 (PI-006 Rule 8). The Examination was completed on 2 December 2014. The development proposed comprises a dual carriageway all-purpose distributor road that would link the A1067 Fakenham Road near Attlebridge to the A47(T) Trunk Road at Postwick. The proposed road would have a length of approximately 20.4 km inclusive of the Postwick works.
    [Show full text]
  • N O R Th S P R O W S to N & O Ld C Atto N B
    North Sprowston & Old Catton Beyond Green Developments Health Impact Assessment October 2012 Application Name (Cover Title 1 GG) Applicant/Client (Cover Title 2 GG) Report Title & Date (Cover Title 3 GG) Application Name (Cover Title 1 GG) Applicant/Client (Cover Title 2 GG) Report Title & Date (Cover Title 3 GG) Application Name (Cover Title 1 GG) Applicant/Client (Cover Title 2 GG) Report Title & Date (Cover Title 3 GG) Beyond Green Developments North Sprowston & Old Catton QA North Sprowston & Old Catton Health Impact Assessment Issue/Revision: Draft Final Date: October 2012 October 2012 Comments: Prepared by: Georgina Dowling Georgina Dowling Signature: Authorised by: Mitch Cooke Mitch Cooke Signature: File Reference: 550156GD02Oct12DR01_HIA 550156GD02Oct12FR01_HIA Health Impact Assessment iii Beyond Green Developments North Sprowston & Old Catton CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 7 NATURE OF THE APPLICATION 7 WHAT IS HIA & NEED FOR AN HIA 7 What is HIA? 7 Need for an HIA 8 Policy & Legislative Context 8 AIMS & VALUES OF THIS HIA 10 Aims 11 Values 11 STRUCTURE 11 MEANS OF ASSESSMENT FOR THE HIA 12 Means of Assessment 12 Primary Data Used 12 THE SCOPE OF THE HIA 13 Geographical Area 13 People Potentially Affected 15 IMPACT PREDICTION AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA 16 2.0 BASELINE CONDITIONS 18 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS 20 Population 20 Deprivation 22 Employment 23 Earnings 24 Housing 24 Education 25 Crime 26 iv Health Impact Assessment Beyond Green Developments North Sprowston & Old Catton Open Space 26 Health 27 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Matter 3 Part B2 ECO TOWN
    Matter 3 Strategy and locations for major growth in the NPA (policies 9 and 10, and Appendix 5), including consideration of related access & transportation issues (policy 6) and other infrastructure issues Part B MATTER 3 ITEM B-2 Part B Old Catton/Sprowston/Rackheath/Thorpe St Andrew growth triangle (part policy 10 and appendix 5) Soundness of the proposal B2 Is this strategic allocation justified, effective and consistent with national policy? No The concentration of development in this sector of the NPA is unjustified because the location is remote from the employment sources, it was selected because of the ECO Town, the infrastructure costs of development are unjustifiable. It will also increase the urban sprawl of the suburbs and draw in an undesirable proportion of available investment. This will be to the detriment of the remainder of Norfolk 1. The origins of the ECO town at NORWICH The decision to launch an initiative to create ECO communities was taken by the Labour Government principally through the office of the Deputy Prime Minister and later brought into the public domain following a headline visit to Sweden by Gordon Brown. The essence of these developments in Europe were re-generation schemes involving run down or de-industrialised urban locations where by linking high density, low energy housing with good facilities, they were able to reduce the carbon footprint of residents. However there was a marked difference between these and the plans put forward in this country. Here the sites were largely rural in nature and many were not brownfield sites as proposed by the PPS.
    [Show full text]
  • The Norfolk County Council (Norwich Northern Distributor Road (A1067 to A47(T))) Order
    Norwich Northern Distributor Road Document Reference: NCC/EX/4 The Norfolk County Council (Norwich Northern Distributor Road (A1067 to A47(T))) Order Applicant’s comment on Relevant Representations Volume 1 - Introduction Planning Act 2008 Infrastructure Planning The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 PINS Reference Number: TR010015 Document Reference: NCC/EX/4 Author: Norfolk County Council Version Date Status of Version 0 11th July 2014 Final 1 Norwich Northern Distributor Road Document Reference: NCC/EX/4 This page has been left intentionally blank 2 Norwich Northern Distributor Road Document Reference: NCC/EX/4 1. Introduction 1.1. This document contains Norfolk County Council’s (NCC’s) comment on a number of Relevant Representations (RRs) received. 1.2. The RRs raised many issues, but analysis of them indicated that there were 9 key topics which were repeated in many of them. Comment have been prepare on these 9 topics, and are presented in this document. This approach has been taken in an attempt to minimise repetition while providing a reasonable overview of the issues raised. The topics are as follows, listed in approximate order of the number of representations which raised them:- . Environment . Traffic . Cost . Associated Development . Link to A47 . Alternatives . Need . Consultation and Planning . Economic Benefits 1.3. In addition to the above, NCC have also provided comment on selected RRs as follows: . All from Districts & Parish Councils & Meetings - Councillors - Political groups . All from Statutory Organisations . All from Landowners (and Agents on their behalf) . All from Non-Statutory Organisations & selected other interested parties 3 Norwich Northern Distributor Road Document Reference: NCC/EX/4 1.4.
    [Show full text]
  • MOD 18 SNUB Response to Main Modifications
    Part 2a. Your Comments on Legal Compliance 3. Are the Main Modifications to the Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk: Broadland part of the Norwich Policy Area legally compliant? (please refer to the guidance notes below for explanation) Yes No X No Comment Please use the space below to provide more detailed comments: See separate letter 3 Part 2b. Your Representation on the Schedule of Main Modifications Please use a separate sheet for each reference number. 4. Please state the relevant reference number that you are commenting on from the Schedule of Main Modifications in the box below (e.g. MM1). If your comment relates to the Sustainability Appraisal Addendum, HRA Addendum or the Additional (minor) Modifications please state this clearly in the box.: MM1 Comments without the relevant reference number will not be accepted. 5. Do you consider the Main Modification you have referenced above to be ‘Sound’? (please refer to the guidance notes for explanation of the term) Yes No X 6. If you consider the Main Modification to be unsound please specify your reason below: (tick all that apply) A. It has not been positively prepared* B. It is not justified* X C. It is not effective* X D. It is not consistent with national policy* X * An explanation of the Tests of Soundness is provided in the guidance notes. 7. Please give details of why you consider the Main Modification is unsound. Please be as precise as possible. If you wish to support the soundness of the Main Modification, please also use this box to set out your comments.
    [Show full text]
  • In Summary We Do Not Agree That the Area Can Support Massive Levels of Inward Migration That the JCS Would Require, Or Is an Appropriate Area for This to Happen
    JOINT CORE STRATEGY RESPONSE: Salhouse Parish Council 6. Please give details of why you consider the Joint Core Strategy Proposed submission content to be unsound, or why it has not been prepared according to the Duty to Cooperate, legal and procedural requirements. Please be as precise as possible. If you wish to support the legal compliance or soundness of the Joint Core Strategy Proposed submission content, please also use this box to set out your comments? This representation is made on behalf of Salhouse residents through their democratically elected Parish Council under Regulation 20 of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012. The quality of this further consultation is very disappointing. The Parish Council view on behalf of the residents is that the JCS is not sound for a variety of reasons as detailed in this representation. We, as the elected representatives, therefore do not support any of the three options put forward by Greater Norwich Development Partnership (GNDP) on behalf of Broadland District Council (BDC). In summary we do not agree that the area can support massive levels of inward migration that the JCS would require, or is an appropriate area for this to happen. Salhouse Parish Council remains convinced on behalf of its residents that the JCS has not properly explored or consulted on all options, and we contend that the evidence shows that is the case. We have highlighted some of the key opportunities that, if taken into account and subject to a proper consultation and development process, would satisfy the locally required growth need, provide a manageable level of growth and protect agriculture, tourism and the character of the area.
    [Show full text]
  • Nntag-Cpre-Norfolk-Cbt-2011.Pdf
    Presentation on DfT Development Pool Overview of Presentation October 2011 The Case Bid and Scheme Confusion Costs, Escalation and Infrastructure not programmed for not Funding the Norwich NDR & Postwick Hub Community Opposition and reasons for it and for Developing a Plan B History, the Changing Package, and No Plan B Greater Norwich Transport Strategy Postwick Hub and its impact on current road users Plan B – modest new Road infrastructure and sustainable Norwich and Norfolk Transport Action Group transport measures CPRE Norfolk Uncertainties of completing Statutory Processes Campaign for Better Transport NDR and Economic Issues Transport adviser: Keith Buchan, MTRU Developers' support for Plan B No necessity for funding during this Parliament Abbreviations Bid and Scheme Confusion NNTAG - Norwich and Norfolk Transport Action Group Norfolk CC BAFB bid is for a half NDR/PH between A47(T) East and A140 north of Norwich airport. NDR - Norwich Northern Distributor Road Norfolk CC previously bid for a three quarters NDR to A1067 which is still in JCS. PH - Postwick Hub Norfolk CC originally consulted on a full length NDR in 2003. GNDP - Greater Norwich Development Partnership It uses the 2003 wider strategy consultation to claim public backing for: NCC – Norfolk County Council a three quarters NDR, a half NDR and Postwick Hub (appeared 2008) JCS - Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk All transport and planning processes have assumed a three EiP - Examination in Public quarters NDR and Postwick Hub as fixed inputs: LTP2 and LTP3; NATS3 and NATS Implementation Plan; CIL – Community Infrastructure Levy Greater Norwich Joint Core Strategy and SEA SEA - Strategic Environmental Assessment Non NDR/PH Greater Norwich Actual Costs of building a NDR Transport Infrastructure in JCS £112.5m = total cost of Half Route (£90.5m Gov funding: £67.5m £m £m £m DfT + £19m CIF + £4m Growth Point) and £22m Local Authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of Meeting Held on August 12Th 2013, in Jubilee Hall, Lower Street, Salhouse at 7.30Pm
    SALHOUSE PARISH COUNCIL minutes of meeting held on August 12th 2013, in Jubilee Hall, Lower Street, Salhouse at 7.30pm. Plans were available for viewing from 7.00pm. Present: Councillor C.Dady (Chairman) Councillor C.McCormick (Vice Chairman) Councillor N. Taylor Councillor S. Heard Councillor N.Ball Councillor Mrs. L. Fielder Councillor Mrs S. Blow Officer: Daphne Wyatt – Clerk Visitors in Attendance: Tom Garrod, (County Councillor) Martin Thrower, (Monitoring Officer, Broadland District Council) and Kevin Webster, (Wroxham First Responders). Thirty five members of the public. 2013 411 APOLOGIES RESIGNATIONS CO-OPTIONS AND ELECTIONS. 411.1. To consider apologies for absence. There were no absences. 411.2 Co-options There were no co-options 411.3 Resignations There has been one resignation. Cllr. R. Rayson., Chairman requested letter of thanks to forwarded and called for a replacement representative for the Salhouse United Charities as this position has now become vacant. It was agreed that the Chairman fills this vacancy. 411.4 Retrospective Formal agreement – Project Working Party – Shop and Post Office. A working group had been agreed previously to deal with this project. Proposed Cllr Dady and seconded Cllr. Fielder. 412 OTHER MATTERS 412.1 Attempted break in at Recreation Ground – Toilet Door. No reply received yet, chased. Have accepted the offer to repair hinges from Salhouse Rovers, which has been confirmed verbally by them. 412.2 (Minute 336a) (Minute 412.2) Reply received from Mr. Proctor, who has agreed to attend our meeting in September. 412.3 Norfolk County Council Ref. 415929– Hedge opposite Post Office. Unable to cut until nesting season has finished.
    [Show full text]