New, Revised and Small Sites
Search representations
Results for Salhouse Parish Council search
New search
New search
New, Revised and Small Sites
Respondent: Salhouse Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Considering the proposed sites for Wroxham, site number GNLP 2135 lies between the Salhouse/Wroxham road and the railway line, and is only 'a field away' from the Salhouse parish boundary. This would be a massive expansion (more than 100%) of the existing recent Wherry Gardens development, and it would have a huge visual impact on the character of the rolling landscape in this area as it would be visible from a considerable distance from both the road and rail. It would also leave Salhouse hemmed in by development on the Wroxham side, especially if site no. GNLP 2131 on the east side of the road also goes ahead. Development of site 2135 in particular would conflict with Policy 2 of the JCS as it would fail to maintain the strategic gap between the communities of Wroxham and Salhouse and damage the landscape settings of the two villages and their approaches. This development would also conflict with Broadland Policy EN 2Landscape which refers to the local Landscape Character Assessment and the protection of gaps between settlements, particularly in this case the valley forms of the river Bure and unique geological/geomorphological landforms in this area, which need appropriate protection.
Full text:
Salhouse PC previously submitted comments on the sites put forward in the 2016 'Call for Sites' consultation. These comments submitted in January 2017 still stand and are attached for reference.
Two changes have occurred since early 2017. First, our previous comments included references to the Draft Salhouse Neighbourhood Plan, which was subsequently adopted in July 2017. Second, since March 2018, the land supply in Broadland District has been calculated at more than 5 years.
Salhouse PC believes that the 'Call for Sites' process is fundamentally flawed, in that it encourages opportunistic offers of sites instead of being plan-led. A further local concern is that the services infrastructure (particularly mains water and electricity and sewerage) in Salhouse is in a very poor state. No additional housing development should be considered without these services being completely upgraded to meet the extra demand.
Although there are no new sites listed for the Parish of Salhouse in the latest 2018 submissions, there are sites in adjacent parishes which approach very closely to Salhouse's boundaries, raising the prospect of continuous housing from Norwich to Salhouse is all the options were taken up.
See attachment for full details of submission.
New, Revised and Small Sites
Respondent: Salhouse Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Considering the proposed sites for Wroxham, site number GNLP 2135 lies between the Salhouse/Wroxham road and the railway line, and is only 'a field away' from the Salhouse parish boundary. This would be a massive expansion (more than 100%) of the existing recent Wherry Gardens development, and it would have a huge visual impact on the character of the rolling landscape in this area as it would be visible from a considerable distance from both the road and rail. It would also leave Salhouse hemmed in by development on the Wroxham side, especially if site no. GNLP 2131 on the east side of the road also goes ahead. Development of site 2135 in particular would conflict with Policy 2 of the JCS as it would fail to maintain the strategic gap between the communities of Wroxham and Salhouse and damage the landscape settings of the two villages and their approaches. This development would also conflict with Broadland Policy EN 2Landscape which refers to the local Landscape Character Assessment and the protection of gaps between settlements, particularly in this case the valley forms of the river Bure and unique geological/geomorphological landforms in this area, which need appropriate protection.
Full text:
Salhouse PC previously submitted comments on the sites put forward in the 2016 'Call for Sites' consultation. These comments submitted in January 2017 still stand and are attached for reference.
Two changes have occurred since early 2017. First, our previous comments included references to the Draft Salhouse Neighbourhood Plan, which was subsequently adopted in July 2017. Second, since March 2018, the land supply in Broadland District has been calculated at more than 5 years.
Salhouse PC believes that the 'Call for Sites' process is fundamentally flawed, in that it encourages opportunistic offers of sites instead of being plan-led. A further local concern is that the services infrastructure (particularly mains water and electricity and sewerage) in Salhouse is in a very poor state. No additional housing development should be considered without these services being completely upgraded to meet the extra demand.
Although there are no new sites listed for the Parish of Salhouse in the latest 2018 submissions, there are sites in adjacent parishes which approach very closely to Salhouse's boundaries, raising the prospect of continuous housing from Norwich to Salhouse is all the options were taken up.
See attachment for full details of submission.
New, Revised and Small Sites
Respondent: Salhouse Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Considering the proposed sites for Rackheath, site numbers GNLP 0095, 2166, 2092 and 2040 will all contribute to the effect of continuous development from the Norwich city boundary to Salhouse, especially if the earlier sites nos. GNLP 0487 (now Planning Application 20170243), 0493, 0164 and 0163 were all allowed to go ahead within the Salhouse parish boundary. Development of these sites would conflict with Policy 2 of the JCS and Broadland Policy EN 2 as it would fail to maintain the strategic gap between the communities of Sprowston and Rackheath and Rackheath and Salhouse respectively, and would damage the landscape settings of the two villages and their approaches. It would
also conflict with Policy GT 2 Green Infrastructure of the Broadland North East Growth Triangle AAP which seeks to protect an area either side of the NDR from inappropriate development. Various other proposed sites in Rackheath also conflict with this policy.
Full text:
Salhouse PC previously submitted comments on the sites put forward in the 2016 'Call for Sites' consultation. These comments submitted in January 2017 still stand and are attached for reference.
Two changes have occurred since early 2017. First, our previous comments included references to the Draft Salhouse Neighbourhood Plan, which was subsequently adopted in July 2017. Second, since March 2018, the land supply in Broadland District has been calculated at more than 5 years.
Salhouse PC believes that the 'Call for Sites' process is fundamentally flawed, in that it encourages opportunistic offers of sites instead of being plan-led. A further local concern is that the services infrastructure (particularly mains water and electricity and sewerage) in Salhouse is in a very poor state. No additional housing development should be considered without these services being completely upgraded to meet the extra demand.
Although there are no new sites listed for the Parish of Salhouse in the latest 2018 submissions, there are sites in adjacent parishes which approach very closely to Salhouse's boundaries, raising the prospect of continuous housing from Norwich to Salhouse is all the options were taken up.
See attachment for full details of submission.
New, Revised and Small Sites
Respondent: Salhouse Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Considering the proposed sites for Rackheath, site numbers GNLP 0095, 2166, 2092 and 2040 will all contribute to the effect of continuous development from the Norwich city boundary to Salhouse, especially if the earlier sites nos. GNLP 0487 (now Planning Application 20170243), 0493, 0164 and 0163 were all allowed to go ahead within the Salhouse parish boundary. Development of these sites would conflict with Policy 2 of the JCS and Broadland Policy EN 2 as it would fail to maintain the strategic gap between the communities of Sprowston and Rackheath and Rackheath and Salhouse respectively, and would damage the landscape settings of the two villages and their approaches. It would
also conflict with Policy GT 2 Green Infrastructure of the Broadland North East Growth Triangle AAP which seeks to protect an area either side of the NDR from inappropriate development. Various other proposed sites in Rackheath also conflict with this policy.
Full text:
Salhouse PC previously submitted comments on the sites put forward in the 2016 'Call for Sites' consultation. These comments submitted in January 2017 still stand and are attached for reference.
Two changes have occurred since early 2017. First, our previous comments included references to the Draft Salhouse Neighbourhood Plan, which was subsequently adopted in July 2017. Second, since March 2018, the land supply in Broadland District has been calculated at more than 5 years.
Salhouse PC believes that the 'Call for Sites' process is fundamentally flawed, in that it encourages opportunistic offers of sites instead of being plan-led. A further local concern is that the services infrastructure (particularly mains water and electricity and sewerage) in Salhouse is in a very poor state. No additional housing development should be considered without these services being completely upgraded to meet the extra demand.
Although there are no new sites listed for the Parish of Salhouse in the latest 2018 submissions, there are sites in adjacent parishes which approach very closely to Salhouse's boundaries, raising the prospect of continuous housing from Norwich to Salhouse is all the options were taken up.
See attachment for full details of submission.
New, Revised and Small Sites
Respondent: Salhouse Parish Council
Representation Summary:
Considering the proposed sites for Rackheath, site numbers GNLP 0095, 2166, 2092 and 2040 will all contribute to the effect of continuous development from the Norwich city boundary to Salhouse, especially if the earlier sites nos. GNLP 0487 (now Planning Application 20170243), 0493, 0164 and 0163 were all allowed to go ahead within the Salhouse parish boundary. Development of these sites would conflict with Policy 2 of the JCS and Broadland Policy EN 2 as it would fail to maintain the strategic gap between the communities of Sprowston and Rackheath and Rackheath and Salhouse respectively, and would damage the landscape settings of the two villages and their approaches. It would
also conflict with Policy GT 2 Green Infrastructure of the Broadland North East Growth Triangle AAP which seeks to protect an area either side of the NDR from inappropriate development. Various other proposed sites in Rackheath also conflict with this policy.
Full text:
Salhouse PC previously submitted comments on the sites put forward in the 2016 'Call for Sites' consultation. These comments submitted in January 2017 still stand and are attached for reference.
Two changes have occurred since early 2017. First, our previous comments included references to the Draft Salhouse Neighbourhood Plan, which was subsequently adopted in July 2017. Second, since March 2018, the land supply in Broadland District has been calculated at more than 5 years.
Salhouse PC believes that the 'Call for Sites' process is fundamentally flawed, in that it encourages opportunistic offers of sites instead of being plan-led. A further local concern is that the services infrastructure (particularly mains water and electricity and sewerage) in Salhouse is in a very poor state. No additional housing development should be considered without these services being completely upgraded to meet the extra demand.
Although there are no new sites listed for the Parish of Salhouse in the latest 2018 submissions, there are sites in adjacent parishes which approach very closely to Salhouse's boundaries, raising the prospect of continuous housing from Norwich to Salhouse is all the options were taken up.
See attachment for full details of submission.
For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our
help guide.
