Greater Norwich Local Plan Gypsy and Traveller Sites Focused Consultation
Search representations
Results for Themelthorpe Parish Group search
New searchObject
Greater Norwich Local Plan Gypsy and Traveller Sites Focused Consultation
Policy GNLP5022
Representation ID: 24970
Received: 07/03/2023
Respondent: Themelthorpe Parish Group
Reference: GNLP5022 The Oaks Foulsham
Comments have been submitted by the residents of Themelthorpe village to the Chairperson and the document below is a summary of these.
‘The residents of Themelthorpe wish to express their objection to the potential increase of pitches at The Oaks traveller site on Reepham Road, Foulsham as outlined in the recently published Greater Norwich Local Plan’
Introduction:
The Oaks is situated on the outskirts of the Parish of Foulsham and on the boundary of the village of Themelthorpe.
To increase the number of pitches on the site and thus the number of people accommodated therein, would make the scale of The Oaks and its impact on the local environment too large for such a small village with no amenities and out of keeping with this quiet, rural area.
An expansion of the site would have a detrimental impact on the local landscape.
Background Information:
The original planning permission granted, after appeal, for The Oaks was on the basis that the site was to house two families, comprising two log cabin style static caravans, a shared amenity block, parking for four vehicles and storage for two additional touring (not static) caravans.
The planning application also stated that the number of vehicle movements in and out of the site would not exceed six per day and that there would be no changes to vehicle or pedestrian access to or from the public highway.
Existing Occupancy:
It is clear to see from the road, and the google map image attached (Ref Image 1), that the number of buildings now on the site is greatly in excess of the number allowed under the granted planning permission.
This is also evident from the number of wheelie bins put out for collection each week. (Ref: Image 2)
There are now more families, with more vehicles, living on site than was granted in the original application. The number of daily vehicle movements in and out of the site is way in excess of the six stated in the planning application with vehicle movements throughout the day often late at night and in the early hours of the morning.
An unauthorised access road, from Reepham Road, has been added by bulldozing a gap through oak trees on the North side of the site. A very high fence, has also been erected either side of the track.
No evidence of planning application for these works can be found.
We understand from the Enforcement Officer, that he has an open case for the site. He confirmed that he has not visited the site since last summer but is intending to do so in the near future to assess the current situation.
We understand that at least 2 large static caravans/portacabin style buildings were delivered to the site last month.
Highways:
We have major concerns regarding transport suitability and accessibility into the site.
The road network serving this site is made up of small narrow lanes.
Any additional resident cars, towing vans and HGVs would cause severe detriment to these highways already pitted with potholes and uneven surfaces.
There is an ongoing problem with vehicles speeding into Themelthorpe from Foulsham.
Two cases of vehicles coming off the road and into residential properties have been reported to Highways this winter alone.
Themelthorpe has no street lighting and no pedestrian footpaths, increased vehicles and possible speeding issues would add to an already proven safety hazard to Themelthorpe residents and the wider public.
Referring to recent and relevant planning permission for land adjoining The Oaks (Source Planning Application 20210651 Mayfields Farm),
the Highways Development Management Officer states “Given the nature of the rural road network that serves this site, I have highway safety concerns about the acceptability of this proposal which involves both towing and large vehicles” …… “thus raising transport suitability or accessibility concerns at what is a remote and fairly isolated location”.
These statements made by NCC professionals must therefore also apply to The Oaks, being located next to Mayfields Farm.
Pollution:
We have major pollution concerns regarding the existing provisions for sewage on the site given the unauthorised current increase in occupants.
The site is located on heavy land with a high water table and any further development comes with a risk of increased flooding in an area already experiencing significant flooding and drainage problems.
We understand that any development on the site would also be required to meet the new ‘Nutrient Neutrality Regulations’ currently being implemented by NCC and Natural England.
What provision is being made for this in your plan?
Will the landowner be required to obtain a survey to assess their impact, as required by any other developers/individuals?
Environmental & Safety Concerns:
Due to the location of a gas pipe that runs across the site, you indicate in your ‘Selected Site report’ that ‘any development would need to be in the northern part of the site’.
Any building positioned on the northern side would be visible from the road, causing a detrimental impact on the rural landscape.
Although mitigation for landscape disruption would presumably be included in the permission, what guarantee would there be that this would be adhered to, given the track record of the landowner and the difficulties of any enforcement?
The risk of a potential hazard should any building works crossing or interfering with the gas pipe is extremely severe. Any development would have to be monitored and strictly adhered to with all safety rules/risk assessments clearly communicated to all interested parties.
Concern has been raised that a building has already taken place in the area of the gas pipeline.
Noise Pollution & Antisocial behaviour:
Some local residents have experienced excessive disturbances at unsocial hours, as well as aggressive and anti social behaviour from the existing occupants at The Oaks, as well as a disregard for the local environment.
Adverse impacts on Biodiversity and The Landscape:
The land on either side of the proposed site is owned by conservation charities. Mayfields Farm is a 40 acre grassland farm owned by the Countryside Regeneration Trust and managed for the benefit of wildlife and education.
The land on the other side is owned by the Hawk and Owl Trust and has been earmarked for the creation of a community woodland with the longer term objective of creating a nature reserve as part of a wildlife corridor along the old railway line.
We cannot find any evidence that the Local Authorities have taken the potential damage to these conservation projects into consideration.
The additional vehicular access mentioned previously, has already caused irreversible damage to the local flora and fauna.
Summary:
It would appear that the site already provides an increased number of pitches albeit without permission!
Are you proposing to retrospectively grant permission for the additional pitches erected without permission?
Would your proposed new allocation of 5 pitches be in addition to or including these, thereby making the total number of dwellings on the site closer to 10?
The continued breach of planning procedures and rules is of great concern in the context of any potential extension of the site. It is a reasonable assumption that further breaches would occur, without consequence, meaning the true impact of the expanded site would be far greater than the proposal permits.
The precedent of Highways response to ‘Mayfields’ recent planning application (referenced above) must be wholly applicable on the case of The Oaks expansion.
This concern is magnified by the evidence that Broadland Council have been unable to ensure that the original granted permission has not been exceeded and thus protect the interests and wellbeing of those living nearby.
Whilst acknowledging the need for travellers to be provided with sites on which to live this cannot be at the expense of the localities and environments in which they settle.
It is our collective view that The Oaks at its current scale already provides a fair contribution to the needs required.
Reference: GNLP5022 The Oaks Foulsham
Comments have been submitted by the residents of Themelthorpe village to the Chairperson and the document below is a summary of these.
‘The residents of Themelthorpe wish to express their objection to the potential increase of pitches at The Oaks traveller site on Reepham Road, Foulsham as outlined in the recently published Greater Norwich Local Plan’
Introduction:
The Oaks is situated on the outskirts of the Parish of Foulsham and on the boundary of the village of Themelthorpe.
To increase the number of pitches on the site and thus the number of people accommodated therein, would make the scale of The Oaks and its impact on the local environment too large for such a small village with no amenities and out of keeping with this quiet, rural area.
An expansion of the site would have a detrimental impact on the local landscape.
Background Information:
The original planning permission granted, after appeal, for The Oaks was on the basis that the site was to house two families, comprising two log cabin style static caravans, a shared amenity block, parking for four vehicles and storage for two additional touring (not static) caravans.
The planning application also stated that the number of vehicle movements in and out of the site would not exceed six per day and that there would be no changes to vehicle or pedestrian access to or from the public highway.
Existing Occupancy:
It is clear to see from the road, and the google map image attached (Ref Image 1), that the number of buildings now on the site is greatly in excess of the number allowed under the granted planning permission.
This is also evident from the number of wheelie bins put out for collection each week. (Ref: Image 2)
There are now more families, with more vehicles, living on site than was granted in the original application. The number of daily vehicle movements in and out of the site is way in excess of the six stated in the planning application with vehicle movements throughout the day often late at night and in the early hours of the morning.
An unauthorised access road, from Reepham Road, has been added by bulldozing a gap through oak trees on the North side of the site. A very high fence, has also been erected either side of the track.
No evidence of planning application for these works can be found.
We understand from the Enforcement Officer, that he has an open case for the site. He confirmed that he has not visited the site since last summer but is intending to do so in the near future to assess the current situation.
We understand that at least 2 large static caravans/portacabin style buildings were delivered to the site last month.
Highways:
We have major concerns regarding transport suitability and accessibility into the site.
The road network serving this site is made up of small narrow lanes.
Any additional resident cars, towing vans and HGVs would cause severe detriment to these highways already pitted with potholes and uneven surfaces.
There is an ongoing problem with vehicles speeding into Themelthorpe from Foulsham.
Two cases of vehicles coming off the road and into residential properties have been reported to Highways this winter alone.
Themelthorpe has no street lighting and no pedestrian footpaths, increased vehicles and possible speeding issues would add to an already proven safety hazard to Themelthorpe residents and the wider public.
Referring to recent and relevant planning permission for land adjoining The Oaks (Source Planning Application 20210651 Mayfields Farm),
the Highways Development Management Officer states “Given the nature of the rural road network that serves this site, I have highway safety concerns about the acceptability of this proposal which involves both towing and large vehicles” …… “thus raising transport suitability or accessibility concerns at what is a remote and fairly isolated location”.
These statements made by NCC professionals must therefore also apply to The Oaks, being located next to Mayfields Farm.
Pollution:
We have major pollution concerns regarding the existing provisions for sewage on the site given the unauthorised current increase in occupants.
The site is located on heavy land with a high water table and any further development comes with a risk of increased flooding in an area already experiencing significant flooding and drainage problems.
We understand that any development on the site would also be required to meet the new ‘Nutrient Neutrality Regulations’ currently being implemented by NCC and Natural England.
What provision is being made for this in your plan?
Will the landowner be required to obtain a survey to assess their impact, as required by any other developers/individuals?
Environmental & Safety Concerns:
Due to the location of a gas pipe that runs across the site, you indicate in your ‘Selected Site report’ that ‘any development would need to be in the northern part of the site’.
Any building positioned on the northern side would be visible from the road, causing a detrimental impact on the rural landscape.
Although mitigation for landscape disruption would presumably be included in the permission, what guarantee would there be that this would be adhered to, given the track record of the landowner and the difficulties of any enforcement?
The risk of a potential hazard should any building works crossing or interfering with the gas pipe is extremely severe. Any development would have to be monitored and strictly adhered to with all safety rules/risk assessments clearly communicated to all interested parties.
Concern has been raised that a building has already taken place in the area of the gas pipeline.
Noise Pollution & Antisocial behaviour:
Some local residents have experienced excessive disturbances at unsocial hours, as well as aggressive and anti social behaviour from the existing occupants at The Oaks, as well as a disregard for the local environment.
Adverse impacts on Biodiversity and The Landscape:
The land on either side of the proposed site is owned by conservation charities. Mayfields Farm is a 40 acre grassland farm owned by the Countryside Regeneration Trust and managed for the benefit of wildlife and education.
The land on the other side is owned by the Hawk and Owl Trust and has been earmarked for the creation of a community woodland with the longer term objective of creating a nature reserve as part of a wildlife corridor along the old railway line.
We cannot find any evidence that the Local Authorities have taken the potential damage to these conservation projects into consideration.
The additional vehicular access mentioned previously, has already caused irreversible damage to the local flora and fauna.
Summary:
It would appear that the site already provides an increased number of pitches albeit without permission!
Are you proposing to retrospectively grant permission for the additional pitches erected without permission?
Would your proposed new allocation of 5 pitches be in addition to or including these, thereby making the total number of dwellings on the site closer to 10?
The continued breach of planning procedures and rules is of great concern in the context of any potential extension of the site. It is a reasonable assumption that further breaches would occur, without consequence, meaning the true impact of the expanded site would be far greater than the proposal permits.
The precedent of Highways response to ‘Mayfields’ recent planning application (referenced above) must be wholly applicable on the case of The Oaks expansion.
This concern is magnified by the evidence that Broadland Council have been unable to ensure that the original granted permission has not been exceeded and thus protect the interests and wellbeing of those living nearby.
Whilst acknowledging the need for travellers to be provided with sites on which to live this cannot be at the expense of the localities and environments in which they settle.
It is our collective view that The Oaks at its current scale already provides a fair contribution to the needs required.
