Question 30: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to Gypsies and Travellers, Travelling Show People and Residential Caravans? To help to meet long term need, this consultation specifically invites additional sites for Gypsy
Support
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Representation ID: 21756
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Brown & Co
We support the approach to Gypsies and Travellers, Travelling Show People and Residential Caravans.
We support the approach to Gypsies and Travellers, Travelling Show People and Residential Caravans.
Support
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Representation ID: 22522
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Broadland Green Party
Support: the need for additional sites for Gypsy and Traveller accommodation
I attach the feedback from Broadland Green Party members on the GNLP Consultation.
Each section is identified but not all questions have been answered. However, all questions are included to maintain the numbering.
See attached
Support
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Representation ID: 22680
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Mrs Nicole Wright
Policy 5: Homes
We support this policy except for the part on Self/ Custom- Build Homes
This part of the policy does not address the real need to respond to the demand and choice of bespoke homes in the locations where they are needed.
It does not show a positive, sound and justified approach in the spirit of the NPPF. (Paragraph 16 of the NPPF)
An approach more akin to the Breckland strategy and consistent with the NPPF would be more appropriate.
Paragraph 251 of the Draft GNLP states that: “In line with the Right to Build and the NPPF, self and custom-build housing delivery is promoted through the GNLP on a range of sites. This policy sets a requirement for larger sites to provide self and custom-build plots. The thresholds have been set to ensure that plots are provided across Greater Norwich. Policies 7.4 and 7.5 also promote self and custom-build on smaller scale windfall sites. Overall, this comprehensive approach will both increase the supply of housing in urban and rural areas and provide opportunities for small and medium enterprises to build houses, as well as for self-build.”
However, Draft Policy 7.4 provides no guidance or criteria in relation to self-build and custom housebuilding.
Draft Policy 7.5 needs to allow for consideration of new self/custom-built homes being adjacent to what it describes as “a recognisable group of dwellings”. Please refer to the new Breckland Local Plan (adopted November 2019)
(For refrence:
Policy HOU 05 of the Breckland Local Plan (adopted November 2019)
Policy HOU 05 - Small Villages and Hamlets Outside of Settlement Boundaries
Development in smaller villages and hamlets outside of defined settlement boundaries will be limited, apart from where it would comply with other policies within the development plan* and if all of the following criteria are satisfied:
1. The development comprises of sensitive infilling and rounding off of a cluster of dwellings with access to an existing highway;
2. It is of an appropriate scale and design to the settlement;
3. The design contributes to enhancing the historic nature and
4. connectivity of communities; and
5. The proposal does not harm or undermine a visually important gap that
6. contributes to the character and distinctiveness of the rural scene.
Opportunities for self-build dwellings which meet the criteria set out above will be supported.
Farmsteads and sporadic small scale groups of dwellings are considered as lying in the open countryside and are not classed as small villages and hamlets. These, and isolated locations in the countryside, are unlikely to be considered acceptable.)
The GNLP Homes Objective is defined in the Draft Plan - To enable delivery of high-quality homes of the right density, size, mix and tenure to meet people's needs throughout their lives and to make efficient use of land.
We support this objective
However, the Monitoring Framework, Indicator Code GNLP 39 and indicator demonstrates the shortcomings of this Draft Policy in identifying the sole indicator for monitoring custom housebuilding as:
‘Percentages of sites of 40 dwellings or more (excluding flats) where 5% of plots are provided for custom build.’
The site is ideally situated at the Thickthorn Junction
Gateway Zone on a Green Infrastructure Corridor and the Cambridge Norwich tech corridor. It is adjacent to the
proposed park and ride extension and the planned
Highways England A47/A11 Thickthorn Junction
improvement works.
This proposed allocation was originally put forward for a
larger scale allocation. This is proposed to be reduced in
scale as per the attached plan.
The Stage 2 HELAA Comparison Table identifies the
following potential issues with the site:
Flood Risk and Heritage
However, a recent feasibility study found that there were no insurmountable constraints to development in relation to the above or the following:
Compatibility with neighbouring issues
Site access and transport
Access to services
Utilities infrastructure
Contamination
Ground stability / contamination
Landscape
Townscape
Biodiversity/ Geodiversity
The trustees of the land commissioned a Strategic Gap
Appraisal to assess whether the recent and planned
interventions in the Strategic Gap in any way undermined its function and purpose and whether as a result, there is a need to modify its boundaries or progress a strategy to mitigate the harm and enhance its function and purpose.
The site is ideally located to mitigate the impact of the
neighbouring strategic growth allocations through provision of additional community infrastructure in providing a small number of accessible homes for older people, new permissive footpaths and cycleways to encourage outdoor recreation, and a community hub.
A copy of the Sustainability Appraisal, Revised Site Plans and Strategic Gap Appraisal are enclosed.
The proposals have been modified to ensure that they do not conflict in any way with proposed allocations at
Colney, Cringleford or Hethersett. They will instead serve to mitigate their impact in providing additional community and social infrastructure to address the additional need generated.
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Representation ID: 23207
Received: 12/11/2020
Respondent: Stuart Carruthers
The plan appears to be based on a false evidence base in relation to sustainability assessments and Gypsy / Traveller Accommodation Assessments.
There also appear to be issues with Council's in the Greater Norwich area not acting according to a properly constituted tribunal. Some Council's have registered land to which they have no deeds and relied upon statutory declarations made by solicitors. Others have seized and sold land by over-enforcing enforcement notices.
The Local Plan can not be considered to be sound the failure of Council's in the Greater Norwich area to act according to the Franks report recommendations.
The plan appears to be based on a false evidence base in relation to sustainability assessments and Gypsy / Traveller Accommodation Assessments.
There also appear to be issues with Council's in the Greater Norwich area not acting according to a properly constituted tribunal. Some Council's have registered land to which they have no deeds and relied upon statutory declarations made by solicitors. Others have seized and sold land by over-enforcing enforcement notices.
The Local Plan can not be considered to be sound the failure of Council's in the Greater Norwich area to act according to the Franks report recommendations.