Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Search representations
Results for Hopkins Homes search
New searchObject
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 13: Do you agree with the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and the proposed distribution of housing within the hierarchy?
Representation ID: 21449
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Further detail is provided on the attached.
Hopkins Homes supports the settlement hierarchy including the identification of Wroxham as a key service centre. This is in recognition of the good level of services and its sustainable location. However, Hopkins Homes objects to the spatial distribution of new homes contained in Policy 1 and specifically, the lack of allocations in Wroxham. This will not provide a positively prepared or justified plan for the following reasons:
1. The spatial strategy perpetuates the development strategy in the current Joint Core Strategy and will not address the persistent patterns of under delivery which have been recorded over a long period.
2. The spatial strategy will not address development needs in sustainable rural locations such as Wroxham.
3. The proposed spatial strategy will not address identified needs in the Wroxham Neighbourhood Plan, including housing for older people.
4. The distribution of growth is not justified. There is no technical case to preclude development at Wroxham.
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 16: Do you support, object or wish to comment on the approach to Review and Five-Year Land Supply?
Representation ID: 21453
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Hopkins Homes does not agree with the Council’s five-year land supply position. It is considered that the calculations have not been undertaken correctly in line with the Planning Practice Guidance and make the following comments to ensure the Plan’s soundness. Further detail is provided on the attached.
Hopkins Homes does not agree with the Council’s five-year land supply position. It is considered that the calculations have not been undertaken correctly in line with the Planning Practice Guidance and make the following comments to ensure the Plan’s soundness. Further detail is provided on the attached.
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 44. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific key service centres: (Acle, Blofield, Brundall, Hethersett, Hingham, Loddon / Chedgrave, Poringland / Framingham Earl, Reepham, Wroxham)? Please identify particular issu
Representation ID: 21955
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
The attached document addresses technical points in the Council’s evidence base on landscape and traffic and sets out why land submitted by Hopkins Homes at South Wroxham is deliverable and should be allocated.
Hopkins Homes objects to the Draft GNLP because it does not allocate any new homes at Wroxham. It is considered that land at south Wroxham has potential to deliver new homes in a highly sustainable manner. There is no technical justification for the omission of new allocations at Wroxham. The current approach will not meet the identified needs in the recently adopted Wroxham Neighbourhood Plan, including needs for older people. Hopkins Homes’ land at south Wroxham presents a logical and sustainable location for new housing provision and meets the tests of soundness set out in the NPPF. The Wroxham Site assessment published as part of the GNLP consultation conclude that these sites are not suitable for development citing landscape and traffic impacts as being reasons for restricting growth in Wroxham. The conclusion is not consistent with the Council’s evidence base. The Council’s Housing Employment Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) do not identify issues which would preclude development on the sites and conclude that the development is suitable.
Comment
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 13: Do you agree with the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and the proposed distribution of housing within the hierarchy?
Representation ID: 22323
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Whilst Hopkins Homes agrees with the broad strategy outlined, we do consider that a number of the existing villages within the wider Greater Norwich Area, both within and beyond the defined ‘Norwich Policy Area’ benefit from sufficient sustainability credentials so as to be able to accommodate greater levels of housing growth than are currently proposed.
Notably, Hopkins Homes have proposed sites on the periphery of the villages of Mulbarton and Scole within South Norfolk, both of which settlements benefit from facilities and good connections with nearby higher-order market towns which enable them to accommodate higher levels of growth than are currently envisaged through the proposed Strategy.
In respect of Mulbarton, the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, which therefore further confirms the appropriateness of higher levels of proportionate housing growth than currently proposed within the Draft Plan.
Hopkins Homes are providing this consultation response in reply to the Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan Consultation by the requested submission deadline of 16th March 2020.
Hopkins Homes Ltd is the largest independent house building company in East Anglia with a reputation for delivering well designed, high quality residential and mixed-use development harmonising with its local context. In the past decade the company has succeeded in delivering sustainable developments which improve neighbourhoods, improve local infrastructure and add to local distinctiveness throughout the Greater Norwich area.
In respect of the content of the Draft Plan, Hopkins Homes wish to make the following comments:-
SECTION 5 – THE STRATEGY POLICY 1 THE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH STRATEGY
Consultation Questions for Policy 1 – The Sustainable Growth Strategy
13. Do you agree with the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and the proposed distribution of housing within the hierarchy?
Whilst Hopkins Homes agrees with the broad strategy outlined, we do consider that a number of the existing villages within the wider Greater Norwich Area, both within and beyond the defined ‘Norwich Policy Area’ benefit from sufficient sustainability credentials so as to be able to accommodate greater levels of housing growth than are currently proposed.
Notably, Hopkins Homes have proposed sites on the periphery of the villages of Mulbarton and Scole within South Norfolk, both of which settlements benefit from facilities and good connections with nearby higher-order market towns which enable them to accommodate higher levels of growth than are currently envisaged through the proposed Strategy.
In respect of Mulbarton, the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, which therefore further confirms the appropriateness of higher levels of proportionate housing growth than currently proposed within the Draft Plan.
POLICY 5 – HOMES
Consultation Questions for Policy 5 – Homes
32. Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to Self/Custom-Build ?
Whilst Hopkins Homes understands the Government’s desire to promote the development of housing via Self and Custom-Build, it is common knowledge that the vast majority of demand for such housing is upon smaller and individual development sites in predominantly rural locations, rather than as a small portion of a larger development site.
To this end, it is suggested that specific smaller sites in rural locations should be allocated for such uses, rather than seeking to require such provision as a portion of larger sites.
POLICY 7.3 – THE KEY SERVICE CENTRES
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.3 – The Key Service Centres
43. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for the key service centres overall? Please identify particular issues.
44. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific key service centres: (Acle, Blofield, Brundall, Hethersett, Hingham, Loddon / Chedgrave, Poringland / Framingham Earl, Reepham, Wroxham)? Please identify particular issues.
As previously outlined under Question 13, Hopkins Homes considers that the village of Mulbarton should be formally identified as a Key Service Centre, Mulbarton, given the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, whilst the village also benefits from a proportionately good range of services and facilities.
POLICY 7.4 - VILLAGE CLUSTERS
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.4 – The Village Clusters
45. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the overall approach for the village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
46. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
Whilst Hopkins Homes support the identification of village clusters to accommodate additional residential development to support the sustainable growth of rural areas, there should be no defined numerical restraint upon the size of site area or the number of dwellings proposed for allocation in this way. Instead, any such allocations should be made so as to be proportionate to the size of settlement cluster within which they are located and the range of facilities available, in order that they successfully meet local housing needs.
Comment
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 32: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to Self/Custom-Build?
Representation ID: 22324
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Whilst Hopkins Homes understands the Government’s desire to promote the development of housing via Self and Custom-Build, it is common knowledge that the vast majority of demand for such housing is upon smaller and individual development sites in predominantly rural locations, rather than as a small portion of a larger development site.
To this end, it is suggested that specific smaller sites in rural locations should be allocated for such uses, rather than seeking to require such provision as a portion of larger sites.
Hopkins Homes are providing this consultation response in reply to the Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan Consultation by the requested submission deadline of 16th March 2020.
Hopkins Homes Ltd is the largest independent house building company in East Anglia with a reputation for delivering well designed, high quality residential and mixed-use development harmonising with its local context. In the past decade the company has succeeded in delivering sustainable developments which improve neighbourhoods, improve local infrastructure and add to local distinctiveness throughout the Greater Norwich area.
In respect of the content of the Draft Plan, Hopkins Homes wish to make the following comments:-
SECTION 5 – THE STRATEGY POLICY 1 THE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH STRATEGY
Consultation Questions for Policy 1 – The Sustainable Growth Strategy
13. Do you agree with the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and the proposed distribution of housing within the hierarchy?
Whilst Hopkins Homes agrees with the broad strategy outlined, we do consider that a number of the existing villages within the wider Greater Norwich Area, both within and beyond the defined ‘Norwich Policy Area’ benefit from sufficient sustainability credentials so as to be able to accommodate greater levels of housing growth than are currently proposed.
Notably, Hopkins Homes have proposed sites on the periphery of the villages of Mulbarton and Scole within South Norfolk, both of which settlements benefit from facilities and good connections with nearby higher-order market towns which enable them to accommodate higher levels of growth than are currently envisaged through the proposed Strategy.
In respect of Mulbarton, the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, which therefore further confirms the appropriateness of higher levels of proportionate housing growth than currently proposed within the Draft Plan.
POLICY 5 – HOMES
Consultation Questions for Policy 5 – Homes
32. Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to Self/Custom-Build ?
Whilst Hopkins Homes understands the Government’s desire to promote the development of housing via Self and Custom-Build, it is common knowledge that the vast majority of demand for such housing is upon smaller and individual development sites in predominantly rural locations, rather than as a small portion of a larger development site.
To this end, it is suggested that specific smaller sites in rural locations should be allocated for such uses, rather than seeking to require such provision as a portion of larger sites.
POLICY 7.3 – THE KEY SERVICE CENTRES
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.3 – The Key Service Centres
43. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for the key service centres overall? Please identify particular issues.
44. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific key service centres: (Acle, Blofield, Brundall, Hethersett, Hingham, Loddon / Chedgrave, Poringland / Framingham Earl, Reepham, Wroxham)? Please identify particular issues.
As previously outlined under Question 13, Hopkins Homes considers that the village of Mulbarton should be formally identified as a Key Service Centre, Mulbarton, given the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, whilst the village also benefits from a proportionately good range of services and facilities.
POLICY 7.4 - VILLAGE CLUSTERS
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.4 – The Village Clusters
45. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the overall approach for the village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
46. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
Whilst Hopkins Homes support the identification of village clusters to accommodate additional residential development to support the sustainable growth of rural areas, there should be no defined numerical restraint upon the size of site area or the number of dwellings proposed for allocation in this way. Instead, any such allocations should be made so as to be proportionate to the size of settlement cluster within which they are located and the range of facilities available, in order that they successfully meet local housing needs.
Comment
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 44. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific key service centres: (Acle, Blofield, Brundall, Hethersett, Hingham, Loddon / Chedgrave, Poringland / Framingham Earl, Reepham, Wroxham)? Please identify particular issu
Representation ID: 22327
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
As previously outlined under Question 13, Hopkins Homes considers that the village of Mulbarton should be formally identified as a Key Service Centre, Mulbarton, given the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, whilst the village also benefits from a proportionately good range of services and facilities.
Hopkins Homes are providing this consultation response in reply to the Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan Consultation by the requested submission deadline of 16th March 2020.
Hopkins Homes Ltd is the largest independent house building company in East Anglia with a reputation for delivering well designed, high quality residential and mixed-use development harmonising with its local context. In the past decade the company has succeeded in delivering sustainable developments which improve neighbourhoods, improve local infrastructure and add to local distinctiveness throughout the Greater Norwich area.
In respect of the content of the Draft Plan, Hopkins Homes wish to make the following comments:-
SECTION 5 – THE STRATEGY POLICY 1 THE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH STRATEGY
Consultation Questions for Policy 1 – The Sustainable Growth Strategy
13. Do you agree with the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and the proposed distribution of housing within the hierarchy?
Whilst Hopkins Homes agrees with the broad strategy outlined, we do consider that a number of the existing villages within the wider Greater Norwich Area, both within and beyond the defined ‘Norwich Policy Area’ benefit from sufficient sustainability credentials so as to be able to accommodate greater levels of housing growth than are currently proposed.
Notably, Hopkins Homes have proposed sites on the periphery of the villages of Mulbarton and Scole within South Norfolk, both of which settlements benefit from facilities and good connections with nearby higher-order market towns which enable them to accommodate higher levels of growth than are currently envisaged through the proposed Strategy.
In respect of Mulbarton, the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, which therefore further confirms the appropriateness of higher levels of proportionate housing growth than currently proposed within the Draft Plan.
POLICY 5 – HOMES
Consultation Questions for Policy 5 – Homes
32. Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to Self/Custom-Build ?
Whilst Hopkins Homes understands the Government’s desire to promote the development of housing via Self and Custom-Build, it is common knowledge that the vast majority of demand for such housing is upon smaller and individual development sites in predominantly rural locations, rather than as a small portion of a larger development site.
To this end, it is suggested that specific smaller sites in rural locations should be allocated for such uses, rather than seeking to require such provision as a portion of larger sites.
POLICY 7.3 – THE KEY SERVICE CENTRES
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.3 – The Key Service Centres
43. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for the key service centres overall? Please identify particular issues.
44. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific key service centres: (Acle, Blofield, Brundall, Hethersett, Hingham, Loddon / Chedgrave, Poringland / Framingham Earl, Reepham, Wroxham)? Please identify particular issues.
As previously outlined under Question 13, Hopkins Homes considers that the village of Mulbarton should be formally identified as a Key Service Centre, Mulbarton, given the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, whilst the village also benefits from a proportionately good range of services and facilities.
POLICY 7.4 - VILLAGE CLUSTERS
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.4 – The Village Clusters
45. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the overall approach for the village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
46. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
Whilst Hopkins Homes support the identification of village clusters to accommodate additional residential development to support the sustainable growth of rural areas, there should be no defined numerical restraint upon the size of site area or the number of dwellings proposed for allocation in this way. Instead, any such allocations should be made so as to be proportionate to the size of settlement cluster within which they are located and the range of facilities available, in order that they successfully meet local housing needs.
Comment
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 46. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific village clusters?
Representation ID: 22329
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Whilst Hopkins Homes support the identification of village clusters to accommodate additional residential development to support the sustainable growth of rural areas, there should be no defined numerical restraint upon the size of site area or the number of dwellings proposed for allocation in this way. Instead, any such allocations should be made so as to be proportionate to the size of settlement cluster within which they are located and the range of facilities available, in order that they successfully meet local housing needs.
Hopkins Homes are providing this consultation response in reply to the Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan Consultation by the requested submission deadline of 16th March 2020.
Hopkins Homes Ltd is the largest independent house building company in East Anglia with a reputation for delivering well designed, high quality residential and mixed-use development harmonising with its local context. In the past decade the company has succeeded in delivering sustainable developments which improve neighbourhoods, improve local infrastructure and add to local distinctiveness throughout the Greater Norwich area.
In respect of the content of the Draft Plan, Hopkins Homes wish to make the following comments:-
SECTION 5 – THE STRATEGY POLICY 1 THE SUSTAINABLE GROWTH STRATEGY
Consultation Questions for Policy 1 – The Sustainable Growth Strategy
13. Do you agree with the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and the proposed distribution of housing within the hierarchy?
Whilst Hopkins Homes agrees with the broad strategy outlined, we do consider that a number of the existing villages within the wider Greater Norwich Area, both within and beyond the defined ‘Norwich Policy Area’ benefit from sufficient sustainability credentials so as to be able to accommodate greater levels of housing growth than are currently proposed.
Notably, Hopkins Homes have proposed sites on the periphery of the villages of Mulbarton and Scole within South Norfolk, both of which settlements benefit from facilities and good connections with nearby higher-order market towns which enable them to accommodate higher levels of growth than are currently envisaged through the proposed Strategy.
In respect of Mulbarton, the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, which therefore further confirms the appropriateness of higher levels of proportionate housing growth than currently proposed within the Draft Plan.
POLICY 5 – HOMES
Consultation Questions for Policy 5 – Homes
32. Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to Self/Custom-Build ?
Whilst Hopkins Homes understands the Government’s desire to promote the development of housing via Self and Custom-Build, it is common knowledge that the vast majority of demand for such housing is upon smaller and individual development sites in predominantly rural locations, rather than as a small portion of a larger development site.
To this end, it is suggested that specific smaller sites in rural locations should be allocated for such uses, rather than seeking to require such provision as a portion of larger sites.
POLICY 7.3 – THE KEY SERVICE CENTRES
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.3 – The Key Service Centres
43. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for the key service centres overall? Please identify particular issues.
44. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific key service centres: (Acle, Blofield, Brundall, Hethersett, Hingham, Loddon / Chedgrave, Poringland / Framingham Earl, Reepham, Wroxham)? Please identify particular issues.
As previously outlined under Question 13, Hopkins Homes considers that the village of Mulbarton should be formally identified as a Key Service Centre, Mulbarton, given the existing population in excess of 3,500 is higher than that of over half of the designated Key Service Centres, as confirmed by the data contained in Table 1 on Page 11 of the Draft Plan, whilst the village also benefits from a proportionately good range of services and facilities.
POLICY 7.4 - VILLAGE CLUSTERS
Consultation Questions for Policy 7.4 – The Village Clusters
45. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the overall approach for the village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
46. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for specific village clusters? Please identify particular issues.
Whilst Hopkins Homes support the identification of village clusters to accommodate additional residential development to support the sustainable growth of rural areas, there should be no defined numerical restraint upon the size of site area or the number of dwellings proposed for allocation in this way. Instead, any such allocations should be made so as to be proportionate to the size of settlement cluster within which they are located and the range of facilities available, in order that they successfully meet local housing needs.
Support
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 6: Do you support or object to the vision and objectives for Greater Norwich?
Representation ID: 23129
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Agent: Bidwells
The objective of delivering high quality homes that contribute to the delivery of mixed, inclusive, resilient
and sustainable communities that are supported by appropriate economic and social infrastructure is
fully supported. The approach is fully consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework
Please see attached for full submission and supporting documents.
As outlined in the attached submission, the site is suitable, available, achievable and viable, and is therefore deliverable within the plan period.
Development in this location would represent sustainable development, as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework. Aylsham, as a Main Town, with the fourth highest level of shops and services outside Norwich, is already acknowledged as a highly sustainable location for residential growth, as evidenced through the significant quantum of development that has been approved in the last decade, and the attached text demonstrates that this specific site is a suitable location for further development in all respects.
Economically, residential development here in the plan period would help sustain and enhance local
services and facilities, and would also provide employment opportunities during the construction period.
Socially, the scale of development envisaged is such that it will enable the creation of a strong, vibrant and
healthy community, with easy access to existing and planned local services and facilities, as well as onsite
open space. A wide mix of dwelling types, sizes and tenures will be provided to meet local needs, and
CIL payments will ensure the provision of the necessary health and cultural facilities. The site is located
in close proximity to established communities in Aylsham, which should assist in achieving social
integration between the existing and new residents.
Environmentally, the site is located close to a range of services and facilities, and enjoys good access to
sustainable transport options providing access to the extensive array of facilities and services available
within Norwich and further afield. Residents will be able to meet their day-to-day needs easily and without
the need to use their car, assisting in reducing pollution and minimising the contribution to climate change.
On this basis, the site should be taken forward as an allocation, and is capable of making an important
contribution to the planned growth of the Greater Norwich Area in the period to 2036.
Support
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 9: Do you support, object, or have any comments relating to the approach to Housing set out in the Delivery Statement?
Representation ID: 23130
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Agent: Bidwells
The requirement that sites should only be allocated for housing where, having regard to policy requirements, there is a reasonable prospect that housing can be delivered, fully accords with paragraph 67 of the NPPF.
Whilst the submission of Delivery Plans as part of a planning application is supported the documents
need to recognise that there may be unforeseen material changes in circumstances, which could impact
the delivery of an allocation.
The identified buffer in relation to housing numbers will help maintain the supply and delivery of housing,
in accordance with the NPPF and specifically the Government’s objective of encouraging authorities to consider more growth than required to meet local housing need, particularly in locations where there is
potential for significant economic growth, such as the Cambridge Norwich Tech Corridor.
However, to guard against non-delivery, particularly in relation to the potential failure of larger strategic
sites in the Norwich urban area to come forward, a minimum buffer of 10% should be identified. Indeed,
the draft GNLP states on page 45 that the Regulation 19 version of the Plan will aim to provide a minimum
buffer of 10% (at least 250 further homes).
Please see attached for full submission and supporting documents.
As outlined in the attached submission, the site is suitable, available, achievable and viable, and is therefore deliverable within the plan period.
Development in this location would represent sustainable development, as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework. Aylsham, as a Main Town, with the fourth highest level of shops and services outside Norwich, is already acknowledged as a highly sustainable location for residential growth, as evidenced through the significant quantum of development that has been approved in the last decade, and the attached text demonstrates that this specific site is a suitable location for further development in all respects.
Economically, residential development here in the plan period would help sustain and enhance local
services and facilities, and would also provide employment opportunities during the construction period.
Socially, the scale of development envisaged is such that it will enable the creation of a strong, vibrant and
healthy community, with easy access to existing and planned local services and facilities, as well as onsite
open space. A wide mix of dwelling types, sizes and tenures will be provided to meet local needs, and
CIL payments will ensure the provision of the necessary health and cultural facilities. The site is located
in close proximity to established communities in Aylsham, which should assist in achieving social
integration between the existing and new residents.
Environmentally, the site is located close to a range of services and facilities, and enjoys good access to
sustainable transport options providing access to the extensive array of facilities and services available
within Norwich and further afield. Residents will be able to meet their day-to-day needs easily and without
the need to use their car, assisting in reducing pollution and minimising the contribution to climate change.
On this basis, the site should be taken forward as an allocation, and is capable of making an important
contribution to the planned growth of the Greater Norwich Area in the period to 2036.
Support
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 11: Do you support, object, or have any comments relating to the approach to Infrastructure set out in the Delivery Statement?
Representation ID: 23131
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hopkins Homes
Agent: Bidwells
Whilst there is support, in principle, for the proposed approach to infrastructure, particularly the need
for key stakeholders to work collaboratively, the Delivery Statement should make it clear that infrastructure requirements will be proportionate to each development and based on clear assessments of need. Failure to do this will result in certain developments being rendered unviable and, therefore, undeliverable.
Please see attached for full submission and supporting documents.
As outlined in the attached submission, the site is suitable, available, achievable and viable, and is therefore deliverable within the plan period.
Development in this location would represent sustainable development, as defined within the National Planning Policy Framework. Aylsham, as a Main Town, with the fourth highest level of shops and services outside Norwich, is already acknowledged as a highly sustainable location for residential growth, as evidenced through the significant quantum of development that has been approved in the last decade, and the attached text demonstrates that this specific site is a suitable location for further development in all respects.
Economically, residential development here in the plan period would help sustain and enhance local
services and facilities, and would also provide employment opportunities during the construction period.
Socially, the scale of development envisaged is such that it will enable the creation of a strong, vibrant and
healthy community, with easy access to existing and planned local services and facilities, as well as onsite
open space. A wide mix of dwelling types, sizes and tenures will be provided to meet local needs, and
CIL payments will ensure the provision of the necessary health and cultural facilities. The site is located
in close proximity to established communities in Aylsham, which should assist in achieving social
integration between the existing and new residents.
Environmentally, the site is located close to a range of services and facilities, and enjoys good access to
sustainable transport options providing access to the extensive array of facilities and services available
within Norwich and further afield. Residents will be able to meet their day-to-day needs easily and without
the need to use their car, assisting in reducing pollution and minimising the contribution to climate change.
On this basis, the site should be taken forward as an allocation, and is capable of making an important
contribution to the planned growth of the Greater Norwich Area in the period to 2036.