Object
Publication
Representation ID: 23694
Received: 14/03/2021
Respondent: Jean Hawke
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
I am writing to point out the illegality and unsoundness of the plan to develop a second site in Aylsham under reg19 of the draft involving 250 more houses there. I also abject to the building of 300 houses in reg 18 in the first place, but I believe that this may have slipped through. It is regrettable that the proposals were not put before Aylsham town council and Broadland for consultation first. I also hope it will not force the TC into taking legal action.
As a long term resident of Aylsham since 1956 (65 years) I think that both these proposals, especially reg 19 will be the end of Aylsham as
“the jewel in Broadland’s crown as said by Barbara Hornbrook some years ago
The GNLP blueprint is riding roughshod over Aylsham as a market town, and its scattergun proposals on where to build are town planning vandalism. Just because 2 plots seem to be available it is a BAD IDEA
to go ahead willy nilly and build on them, not realizing the potential damage to the Town they will be sure to cause. Maybe this is the Norwich tunnel vision view point. Those producing the GNLP have not considered the strains already placed on the infrastructure caused by the recent building of the Willow Park and Bure Meadows estates (550 houses then)
Let alone the probable of a further 550 homes( maybe 2000 more people)
There MUST be more to planning than just putting up houses. Builders will be cheering. But the quality of life here will decline and Aylsham will become just a dormitory town for Norwich, lose its cittaslow status and its reputation as a nice place to live. Pressures on the infrastructure: water, drainage, sewage, doctors surgeries, school places, wear and tear on roads, traffic and parking. The town is congested enough now without another 2000 people and their cars. There will probably be a call for another supermarket which will adversely affect the local shops.
Finally, I have suggested in the past, that new small hamlets could be built individually or in addition to already declining villages. These could have a market square, a community hall, recreation area and shops built into the design. They could be distinct villages and not tacked on to the edges of distinctive Market towns like Aylsham. Just tacking more houses on to the edges of Market Towns is a lazy and unimaginative way of town and country planning
I am writing to point out the illegality and unsoundness of the plan to develop a second site in Aylsham under reg19 of the draft involving 250 more houses there. I also abject to the building of 300 houses in reg 18 in the first place, but I believe that this may have slipped through. It is regrettable that the proposals were not put before Aylsham town council and Broadland for consultation first. I also hope it will not force the TC into taking legal action.
As a long term resident of Aylsham since 1956 (65 years) I think that both these proposals, especially reg 19 will be the end of Aylsham as
“the jewel in Broadland’s crown as said by Barbara Hornbrook some years ago
The GNLP blueprint is riding roughshod over Aylsham as a market town, and its scattergun proposals on where to build are town planning vandalism. Just because 2 plots seem to be available it is a BAD IDEA
to go ahead willy nilly and build on them, not realizing the potential damage to the Town they will be sure to cause. Maybe this is the Norwich tunnel vision view point. Those producing the GNLP have not considered the strains already placed on the infrastructure caused by the recent building of the Willow Park and Bure Meadows estates (550 houses then)
Let alone the probable of a further 550 homes( maybe 2000 more people)
There MUST be more to planning than just putting up houses. Builders will be cheering. But the quality of life here will decline and Aylsham will become just a dormitory town for Norwich, lose its cittaslow status and its reputation as a nice place to live. Pressures on the infrastructure: water, drainage, sewage, doctors surgeries, school places, wear and tear on roads, traffic and parking. The town is congested enough now without another 2000 people and their cars. There will probably be a call for another supermarket which will adversely affect the local shops.
Finally, I have suggested in the past, that new small hamlets could be built individually or in addition to already declining villages. These could have a market square, a community hall, recreation area and shops built into the design. They could be distinct villages and not tacked on to the edges of distinctive Market towns like Aylsham. Just tacking more houses on to the edges of Market Towns is a lazy and unimaginative way of town and country planning