Outline planning application for up to 375 dwellings and associated infrastructure, new cemetery and 1.2 ha of land for neighbourhood centre comprising A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, and/or B1 and/or D1 uses. Situated on land between London Road and Suton Lane, London Road. Reference 2014/2495.
The proposal was passed as three councillors of the 5 who took the view that this was acceptable which was what happened last time.
The development in definitely outside the the remit of the still being prepared Wymondham area action plan, as it is in Suton but unlike some recent development proposals has at least attempted to address the lack of infrastructure support and improvements needed. It is a sad indictment that nowadays nothing extra gets built or provided unless part of an application which you could argue is effectively a bribe.
Recent Planning plans have been widely ignored by developers which has completely undermined the Localism Act although recently the Planners and the Planning committee at South Norfolk have thrown out this kind of application and it is my view that this might very well happen again given the lack of secondary school places, but as you will have seen from today's EDP this is being addressed, so might succeed.
This application as amended was thrown out last time for this reason, however it is not the role of the Town Council to second guess what SNDC will do. They must think more in terms of how it benefit or otherwise the Town and the argument that this is part of the sprawl is a very good one but so is the view that we, as a Town need a new cemetery.
As Suton , Wattlefield and Spooner row remain within the Parish of Wymondham, it is always the Town view that will take precedence. I have argued for sometime now that the three sub parishes are really not part of Wymondham so get marginalised, but until such time as we have our own Parish/Comminity Council, such Wymondham centric arguments will always hold sway.
The Town Council were in favour at the last application as a cemetery has been included. It is quite possible that a cemetery could be re-sited elsewhere.
This site has a particularly good rural aspect, not least as it encircles the Grade II listed Gonville Hall. It is outside the Wymondham Area Action Plan and as the gateway to Wymondham from the south will not "create a more appropriate entrance to the town".
We need to constantly think about the broader picture of development otherwise we will indeed be "engulfed". The previous person in this thread is absolutely right - objection now is absolutely vital.
If having a cemetery is so crucial to the town, why was this not considered when preparing the Wymondham Area Action Plan? This is a lack of foresite with those responsible for preparing the local plan. Surely Wymondham can have an additional cemetery without having many more additional houses in the process. Why doesn't Wymondham Town Council approach some of its landowner friends to see if they can accommodate a piece of land for this?
To object go onto the South Norfolk planning portal and use the application number 2014/2495. You will need to register and can make your comment anon , although there have been recent examples where despite this being specified it simply has not happened. South Norfolk issue !
An alternative way is to contact one of the senior planners ( Chris Raine ) via e mail and he will arrange for it to be posted for you but we are getting very close to the end of the comment period so do not hang about.
As regard the cemetery it is simply a matter of money as opposed to lack of foresight and if you can get a developer to pay for it ..............
If you want the developers to pay for a cemetery, then get the developers involved in Silfield's big expansion to pay for it. As part of the Wymondham area Action Plan, land should have been provided here for a cemetery and been part of the forward planning for a growing town and not a proposed late add-on for Suton to have, as part of yet more development.
I think the concept of Planning gain to get your proposal passed is abhorent, but in this time where no one has any cash to spend on projects from central Govt or anywhere else this kind of thing is being positively encouraged.
This application has now been revised and scaled down to 335 dwellings and with the relocation of the cemetery. This was previously accessed via London Road but is now to be accessed through the proposed estate.
Any comments to be received to South Norfolk Council - Chris Raine - by 4th May 2015. It looks as though the triangle of land near to the Suton roundabout is also proposed for residential development.
I am very pleased for the residents of Suton that this has happened but it just serves to illustrate the idiocy which is Planning, when a development for over a 1000 houses gets passed in Right up lane the wrong side of the railway bridge. The school problem noted for this site is just as pertinent as it is there.
Thank God that Julian Halls is not in charge of planning. All we would get under his stance is more houses and no infrastucture and he know this very well. As for the Long Stratton by pass the developers would like to build the houses only and not the by pass. SNC insisted that a by pass is included in the overall scheme. Otherwise we could get the houses but not by pass. It is not a question of saying yes to houses only SNC also insists that we get the infrastucture that goes with permissions.
As far as I am aware, Cllr Julian Halls has never been in charge of planning at SNC so I don't know who put you in charge to speak on his behalf.
If SNC insist on increased infrastructure to go with new housing, as you say, then why hasn't this happened in Spooner Row? A bus service, and a train timetable that is viable, would be a good start.
If we have to succumb to bribery of modern day Planning, we should get something material in return in the form of a viable and proper infrastructure. I hate this but as I have clearly stated this above, if you bother to read it ANON ( number 2) , this is what we are stuck with.
I have also recently learned that Planners can now IGNORE any Parish /Town Council objections and delegate this to a single Planning Officer , to decide, who may then get the decision rubber stamped.
Is this democracy ?? I will let you decide on that one !
The District Councillor can call it in for the full Planning committee to consider but even it it gets rejected , the applicant can re apply and once again the option to delegate arises.
When I challlenged this recently with SNDC over a 'ping pong development of this kind', the answer given was the District Councillor had not called it in. The fact that he hardly ever turned up was not mentioned. We have moved on, I hope.
Perhaps it is good that I am not in charge of Planning. We would have very few Officers left but to be kind ( I know very unlike me), it is any wonder they get things wrong given the mish mash that is modern planning guidance and Policy .
I have raised the matter of Single Planning Officer decisions with the National Association of Parish and Town Councils
Perhaps ANON (2) you will do me the courtesy of reading the whole string of comments above before you launch into a tirade of inaccurate statements, BUT thank you for the opportunity to comment.
