The map shows housing allocation in the Growth Triangle is proximate to Broads National Park. How will the impact of proposals within GNLP area be balanced and aligned with those in adjacent, separate (in terms of strategic planning oversight) areas?
There will likely be an increase in pressure on facilities within the Broads National Park as a result of residents from new developments, leading to increased disturbance on designated species (this disagrees with HRA findings), and increased wear and tear on infrastructure. How will the tariff system proposed be managed and funds allocated to provide for example vehicle charging points, repair of trails, gates etc within outside of the GNLP area. The Greater Norwich area can’t be viewed in isolation to surrounding areas managed by other authorities.
The RSPB is disappointed that HRA conclusions suggest the plan will be sound as there will not be any adverse effects on integrity of Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites, but in several areas this is due to reliance on plans that have not yet been completed such as the Norfolk RAMS and GI Strategy. Until such plans and approaches are finalised, they cannot be relied upon and cannot be taken to as a measure to demonstrate that the GNLP policies will be sound. The RSPB looks forward to seeing revised HRA recommendations based on an evidence base that is final and has certainty that it will be in place by the time the plan is adopted.