GNLP2058

Showing comments and forms 1 to 5 of 5

Comment

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17096

Received: 16/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Brian Frith

Representation:

Forncett Parish Council: We consider ourselves 'borderline' service villages, and, although some development would not be ruled out, concerns over lack of facilities, transport links and narrow local roads mean that any development should be in keeping with our village situation and surroundings and on a scale which is commensurate with the limited facilities available.

Full text:

This comment submitted on behalf of Forncett Parish Council
There seems to be no opportunity to make a general comment on all sites within the Parish of Forncett (St Peter, including Forncett End, and St Mary) so this comment is applicable to all sites - those originally submitted and 'new' sites Autumn 2018.
Forncett Parish Council has decided not to make comments on individual sites, but would wish to make the following points:
We feel our settlements are 'borderline' Service Villages with no doctor, post office, general store etc. and mediocre transport links. We do not rule out modest future development but this should be in keeping with our village situation and surroundings and on a scale which is commensurate with the limited facilities available. Of major concern is that many of our roads are single track with few passing places - which struggle to cope with the level of traffic at the moment. Further extensive (or even moderate) development requiring access on these roads would be problematic.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17763

Received: 04/12/2018

Respondent: A STEVENS

Representation:

Objection to this plan on the following grounds :- lack of facilities, lack of transport links. Narrow local roads which would not be suitable for extra traffic, especially with a sizeable development already in place across the road.
More development on this site would be top heavy in this small rural community.

Full text:

Objection to this plan on the following grounds :- lack of facilities, lack of transport links. Narrow local roads which would not be suitable for extra traffic, especially with a sizeable development already in place across the road.
More development on this site would be top heavy in this small rural community.

Comment

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17765

Received: 04/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Geoffrey NORMAN Stevens

Representation:

This site is on a bend on a busy road with an adjoining lane on the bend. Access is poor and road safety should be a major consideration. Development may have a detrimental effect on the residential amenity of neighbours.

Full text:

This site is on a bend on a busy road with an adjoining lane on the bend. Access is poor and road safety should be a major consideration. Development may have a detrimental effect on the residential amenity of neighbours.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18348

Received: 10/12/2018

Respondent: mr David Avery

Representation:

We don't think this application is deliverable and have sent a letter to the GNLP giving full details of our concerns.

Full text:

The plan submitted for Tawny Farm does not show a large property which boarders The Old Safety Valve. The land for this property was part of Tawny Farm and planning permission from SNDC had a condition (Section 106 of the 1990 Act) stating that proceeds from the sale of the land were to be used to complete 3 buildings on Tawny Farm, (one, 4 bedroom property, one two bedroom and a games room)
These buildings were built to a very high spec as specified by the SNDC. They would now have to be demolished after only being completed in 2016 if
plans for re-development were allowed.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18418

Received: 07/12/2018

Respondent: mr David Avery

Representation:

This community have already had it's fair share of development, with the 17 home Abbotts Grange development opposite and Summer Cottage next door which was built on Tawny Farm land and encroaches on our privacy.

We have never opposed any planning issues from Mr Bowers or any of the previous owners but feel that enough is enough.
Our family have been on this corner for 47 years and we are now gravely concerned that our peaceful existence is in danger of being destroyed.

We therefore continue to oppose any further development on Tawny Farm and hope that the Holiday Let business will continue and would think that with the Long Stratton housing and road project approaching there could be a great need for local short to long term accommodation.

We do not want to lose our beautiful Norfolk village identity.

See full submission for further details.

Full text:

We strongly object to the proposed GNLP2058 development on Tawny Farm.
Our main objection is based on a moral issue to do with assurances from Mr Bowers that if we supported a previous planning application there would be no further development and that privacy our family have enjoyed since 1971 would be retained. Also, holiday let properties on Tawny Farm would have to be demolished to free up the land for the (2018/1944) 5 dwellings or the (GNLP2058)15 dwellings ..
Funding to complete the holiday lets was raised from the sale of a plot of land with planning approval for a large 4 bedroomed house. The SNDC gave planning approval with a Deed made in pursuant to the 1990 Act section 106
Paragraph 6 states the owners obligations as: The owner shall contribute funds resulting from the sale of the land for which planning permission ref: 2013/0916 relates to and shall put this to the completion of application ref:201111797 for holiday let and tourism accommodation.
We supported Mr Bowers application for the 4 bedroomed house even though it compromised some of our privacy, but a large grassed area for recreational use for visitors would be between us and the holiday let properties, leaving the rest of our boundary private.
The second 4 bedroomed holiday let property wasn't completed until 2016 and we strongly feel that due to the SNDC's 1990 Act section 106 condition, it is morally wrong to now demolish 3 buildings after such a short time of the condition.

Our objections to the application (2018/1944) are the same as that of the (GNLP2058) except that obviously the possible scenario of 15 dwellings is far more seriously concerning.

Please read this covering letter in conjunction with our response to a letter from Mr Bowers agent (Jon Venning).
Our response answers comments made by Jon Venning and our reply details our concerns, and we think shows practically and morally, the plans for Tawny Farm are not deliverable.

Regarding our reference to the Greater Norwich Plan

We have always understood that land submitted under reg 18 is for consideration and not a planning application. However anyone who has submitted land under reg 18 must surly hope their application is successful and therefore from our point of view, whether it's a direct planning application with SNDC for 5 houses or an application for consideration under reg 18 for 15 houses the threat of development is the same.

With the prospect of the holiday lets being demolished to make way for the 5
proposed dwellings we, on October 28th expressed our concerns on possible future developments to Mr Bowers, who assured us he would only be applying for the 5
dwellings and no more.

We, later on November 4th saw in the EDP that Mr Bowers had applied for 15
dwellings under the reg 18. We again contacted Mr Bowers who told us this was a mistake and that it should only have been the 5 dwellings.

It was then, on the GNLP web site, we saw Mr Bowers application made in January 2018 clearly showing his intention that if his application was successful he would
apply for permission for 15 dwellings which would include having to demolish the
recently built holiday let properties.

Holiday Let Business

Despite losing some of our privacy we supported Mr Bowers on his application to build the property next to us know as Summer Cottage. We knew that the proceeds from the sale of the land was to finish the holiday let properties and were happy for him to do so knowing that the large grassed area between us and the holiday units would be retained.
We were surprised in March 2016 to see that Tawny Farm plus holiday lets was on
the property market with only one of the holiday units completed.
However there was no sale and the second holiday unit was completed followed by
the games room and then an area for the hot tub.

Regarding the viability of the holiday lets we would like to comment:

The estate agents in March 2016 advertise Tawny Farm as a "large family home with the benefit of a successful holiday let business.
Information given as: Holiday let 1 achieving £600 per week in high season and
averaging out at £450 per annum.
Holiday let 2 with 2 months to completion: Estimated rental between £1000 to £1200.

The two lets still advertised on Cottages.com now show an increase for 2019 with:

The Stables at up to £1484 for 7 nights high season and down to £752 low season. Owl Lodge at up to £762 for 7 nights high season and down to £462 low season.

We feel that with holiday let 2 not completed until half way through 2016 the first full year in business would have been 2017.
Any new business especially in hospitality needs time to grow with repeat custom and recommendations therefore, we are confused by the comment describing the
business as unsuccessful as from what we could see and hear, the lets were regularly occupied.
We were politely requested to not burn garden waste on Saturdays as it was their
changeover day when the laundry would be done, we were happy to comply with this request. We also noticed their facebook page in December thanking all their 2017 visitors and stating that the support had been amazing.

Attractions

Websites advertising both holiday lets list attractions as: The beautiful surrounding countryside, ideal for walking and biking. It then lists all the main attractions in Norfolk with no mention of the local Tank or Steam Museum as mentioned in your letter.

Amenities

With Forncett Primary school oversubscribed and suffering an unprecedented
parking problem Long Stratton is the only other nearest option.
There is a school bus for senior children going to Long Stratton but Primary and
middle School aged children, would have rely on parents for transport to and from school.

As far as the limited bus service is concerned, from our experience, even though my wife and I both have bus passes, and the bus stop is only 20 yards from our front
door, we find the service completely inadequate.
Will the service increase in the future, who knows, it hasn't increased since the 17 homes at Abbots Grange have been built, and can important decision be made on maybes.

Drainage

Despite the many soakaways on our plot we still experience areas of the garden that get waterlogged in the winter. During extreme conditions our septic tank also struggles to cope and on occasions we suffer poor drainage from our sinks and toilets.

Our concern is that further development on Tawny Farm with more water being put
into the ground or ditches could worsen the problem.

Summery

Is Tawny Farm a Brown Field Site

Our family have lived at xxxxxxxxxxx since 1971. I was a friend of the original owner, XXXXXXXX, who indeed divided the land and sold the XXXX to us.
At that point, until Mr XXXX built his house, the whole plot now known as Tawny Farm was just a field.

I witnessed Mr XXXX many projects which revolved mainly around dog breeding and boarding, and later a pet shop.
His other activities amounted to little more than a one man cottage industry (more
details of this can be given if required)

The second owners, XXX and XXX were retired. XXX had the lease on a pub in Long Stratton which his daughter managed and he had the small hauls business selling
small loads of aggregates. There was never a lot of demand for this service as local builders could collect their own from one of the local quarries.

Before any permission is considered for Tawny Farm and considering the knowledge we have on the past activities on this corner I would like to see an official document stating the classification of the land offered for planning consideration.

Is there a need for homes in Forncett

Forncett St Peter logistically is a spread out community and has always been a Green Break between Tharston and the more developed Forncett End.

We think and hope this Green Break remains, so that Forncett can keep it's rural
identity. The Abbotts Grange development with its 17 homes was accepted as a good alternative to other industrial uses after CPS Fuels closed down, but if there are any further housing developments on this corner we are in danger of becoming an estate.

If more housing is needed in the area surly the large development at Tharston, less
than a mile away and the planned 1500 plus homes in Long Stratton less than two
miles away will fulfil this need.

We also feel looking at all the other applications, there are areas of land that would be far more deliverable.

If the holiday lets are allowed to be demolished we will feel gravely let down by the
planning system.
We, in good faith compromised our privacy allowing funds to be raised from the sale of adjoining land for the completion of the holiday let business. This in turn made us feel secure that the rest of our boundary would remain unaffected by any further
development.

Section 106 of the 1990 act was a condition of the sale without which, permission may not have been given at all. With this in mind we strongly feel that ethically, the Holiday let properties should be retained, if not by Mr Bowers then by someone else. Other options are long term letting as suggested by Forncett Parish Council.

In late December 2017 on Facebook, the positive message from Tawny Farm read, what an amazing year it had been and looking forward to 2018.
We do consider the possibility that when the reg 18 (GNLP2058) was announced in January 2018 the enthusiasm for running the holiday lets became less attractive.
Also, with web sites still advertising the holiday lets it seems that plans are to continue with the business should planning applications be unsuccessful.

Closing Statement

This community have already had it's fair share of development, with the 17 home
Abbotts Grange development opposite and Summer Cottage next door which was
built on Tawny Farm land and encroaches on our privacy.

We have never opposed any planning issues from Mr Bowers or any of the previous owners but feel that enough is enough.
Our family have been on this corner for 47 years and we are now gravely concerned that our peaceful existence is in danger of being destroyed.

We therefore continue to oppose any further development on Tawny Farm and hope that the Holiday Let business will continue and would think that with the Long Stratton housing and road project approaching there could be a great need for local short to long term accommodation.

We do not want to lose our beautiful Norfolk village identity.