Please bear in mind adopted Plan does nothing to stop speculative developers applying for new houses any where they like until we have a 5 year housing land supply, which will not happen until Broadland Planners get their plan approved and adopted NEXT year ( we hope first time around )
I am not very satisfied with the way the documents have been laid out on SNC's website. It is not user friendly with a link within a link within a link going round in circles trying to find the right document, and some ambiguous document headings. Breckland council, by comparison, has a concise and professionally presented local plan on their website.
It says there is currently a six week period ending on 7th December 2015 during which time anyone aggrieved by the adoption of the local plan document can make a formal legal challenge by application to the High Court under Section 113 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
This is not correct. The plan does give the planners more powers to stop unwanted development. Land supply is only one ground that applications are judged on. Other considerations are design, layout, location, access, highways and educations matters. For instance I understand that although SNC did not have a 5 year land supply at the time the Chapel Lane, Wymondham came before the council it was refused on other grounds.
I am sorry but if you read the Inspectors report re Cantley Villas the only thing that mattered was the Land supply. Poor Highways infrastructure , dangerous access , lack of school places , flooding and apparently it is okay to drive 3 miles or so to a shop because this is sustainable were all fudged around because it is Housing that we must have in accord with the Central Office mantra.
Having a 5 year Housing supply would have killed it dead , we hope !! The other matters are all NOW very obviously small fry.
As regard Chapel lane watch this space, but it had the advantage of major political interference who afterall, vote these things in or out. Spooner row does not enjoy this and of course Local Political interference breaks down when you go to appeal as Cantley villas prove. WTC voted against this and a fat lot of difference it made
The Inspector allowed this partly because SNC does not have a 5 year housing supply. SNC thought it did but had to admit that it got it wrong. See the Inspectors decision report https://info.south-norfolk.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=NBDWJFOQGRL00
Not so long ago SNC APPROVED 20 new houses on Bunwell Road which everyone was against because it was an unsuitable site.
Very recently SNC continued to include in its adopted Local Plan the proposed housing site for 5 more in School Lane even though village planning approvals had gone way over the 40 new houses limit, this limit was set by the Local Plan Inspector. Strangely the Inspector did not elaborate as to why he thought the number should be 40 as the Local Plan had required only 15 for Spooner Row. Even so SNC has ignored the Inspector's judgement and the number is now way over 50. What was the point of the Local Plan?
Of course you will praise the Inspector if you are to gain financially from this. You fool no one by pretending to be from the village, for who would support continual planning approvals that will inevitably result in a housing sprawl to destroy the character of their village.
The Inspector took the same view as the Secretary of State on the Chapel Lane, Wymondham application. Although SNC did not have a 5 year land supply the application was refused by SNC, the Inspector and the Sec of State.
What has Chapel Lane, Wymondham got to do with Spooner Row? Spooner Row is a completely separate entity from Wymondham for the purposes of the Local Plan and future development - a South Norfolk decision. It was assigned as a 'Norwich Policy Area Service Village' by the District Council without a consultation process asking what we thought of this (as many are now aware), we just happened to find out much later on. We pay a high town council parish precept but do not get the benefits in this rural village location.
Personally I think that now we have been included as part of Norwich as one of its Service Villages we would be treated a lot more fairly and justly by coming under the governance of Norwich City Council. Is it true that South Norfolk Council is going to be devolved? If this is based on the performance on how it governs then I am not surprised.
If you were under Norwich City Council you would have to take around 300 houses in Spooner Row due to their high demand for housing. The link with Spooner Row to Chapel Lane Wymondham was to do with the point made about the land supply issue.
At the risk of sounding cynical I suppose the red blot on the landscape which is south Norwich has nothing to do with this or why the Tories have brought forward the electoral boundary review by suddenly bringing forward the registration deadline under the new rules by a year.
Sorry I digress but gerrymandering here we come !!
I also have to eat humble pie if the Inspector from the Sec of State did not allow Chapel lane either, but it still does not prevent further planning applications happening. I don't profess to have a complete history in my head of Planning applications for the whole of Wymondham , but I do try for Cromwells Ward where I was elected as a Town Councillor not District.
To Anonymous, did the Secretary of State agree with the land supply theme at the Cantley Villas Appeal then when it was allowed? don't know where your 300 figure has come from, all these arbitrary housing figures appearing from nowhere. Devolution is the answer, we might then get treated with a bit of respect.
Spooner Row is situated on the far edge of South Norfolk, next to Breckland. It is absurd that it is classified as a Norwich Policy Service Village, as it is a long way from Norwich, about 15 miles or more to get there. Is public transport going to be provided as there is not a diddly squat here now. Is the council expecting the occupants in the new houses to drive their cars to get to work in Norwich and by doing so, generative lots of CO2? If so, it defeats the latest initiative to cut back on street lighting in order to reduce CO2 emissions.
Here we go twisting things again. As Spooner Row has been lumbered as a Service Village for Norwich, then surely you must realise that it is not just about building as many houses as you can without consideration to anyone, you need infrastructure like public transport, particularly if you want to cut CO2 emissions. Local councils have to include this as part of their Local Plan policies, which SNC seems to have forgotten about implementing.
so 300 has morphed into a 1000 houses............... Evidence please??
Scaremongering ?? I am sure John Fuller would have no problem with this as long as there are none being built in Brooke .
Local views quite obviously count for nothing and this part of the South Norfolk world is wide open to abuse, as it is a far as it can be from Long Stratton, which of course , no doubt as some will tell me very forcibly, is irrelevant.
Really? Look at the evidence ! We have been shafted and continue to be so and I say again , yes we need houses but before we need them we need the infrastructure to support it
Wrong again. Brooke has expanded and it has taken more houses than Spooner Row in the last few years. Long Stratton is also due to take a few hundred houses during the next few years. You pretend that you need houses and then go on to say that you must have the infrastructure first. In order to get the infrastructure that you say that you require in SR you would need to agree to take a few hundred houses. It appears that you are against providing more houses and this is regrettable. But then again you have a house and it appears that you want to deny other people the opportunity to have one. You just don't care about other peoples housing needs. It is a case of I am all right Jack with you.
So where are the extra children going to go, as the school is already bursting at the seams? Perhaps you think they should sit out in the playground all day with their books and computers in all weathers? And yes you do need infrastructure to cope with extra properties, to say otherwise shows just how out of touch you are.
Brooke is not designated as a Norwich Policy Area service village and therefore not destined for lots of houses, conveniently. So who is all right Jack, as you put it?
Go and have a look at Brooke and you will see it has grown during the past few years and they did not moan about it. How many children that go to SR school come from within the Village. They cant be all local. If you want a new school then you will have to take a lot of houses to pay for it.
You seem to be very opinionated on what we should do and think. You say, we should do this and we should do that, thanks for your patronising dogma but we are happy enough, or is that your problem?
Who cares about Brooke anyway, you seem very defensive of it. In any case, it is the location of where the houses are built.
When did anyone here ask for a new school? Twisting things as usual.
South Norfolk is trying to be the 'powerhouse' of Norfolk, but it will never get the funding required to improve the infrastructure in our generation. It will simply result in a lower quality of life for all its residents. By the way, these new developments on the edge of villages look ugly and plenty of people are not happy with what is happening.
Will Tory South Norfolk supporter please answer the questions given on this board
The reference to Long stratton is because it is where the Councillors sit. NIMBY ism rules okay for the other areas
Even so a few hundred are planned in Stratton....
May I remind you Wymondham is set to take over 2200 That is one fifth of the total proudly spoken about by John Fuller of the houses granted permission
How many houses in Brooke please?
Spooner row has PP for 50 more with not a single improvement in the infrastructure
I was responding to queries on here by other posters. The school and Brooke was mentioned on the posts. Perhaps you should read them. The point about the school was that the poster implied it was full. Do the children come from the Village or from outside the area. Brooke has taken its share of the housing and so has Long Stratton. In fact all areas of the District are doing their bit to cope with the housing demand. Just putting the facts straight.
The school is full. The letter from the headmistress to the Planning inspector re Cantley villas made this very clear. It was effectively ignored.
As to where they come from I am not sure but I am sure that people whose children literally live spitting distance from the School have to go elsewhere. So much for infrastructure and sustainability and inclusion in village life. Not their fault they desperately want to engage and send their children there.
They cannot due to lack of infrastructure and support mechanisms.
I know new people to the village who have to send their children to schools out of the area as there are no places available at the village school. Also, other potential new house buyers are put off from buying here because of the lack of school places. Where are all the new pupils going to go who will live in the new houses when they are built? No doubt they will need to travel to other areas by car generating lots of CO2, which is contrary to South Norfolk's Local Plan. Just shows they don't bother to implement the policies they generate.
They have also not followed the Inspector's decision in allowing 40 new dwellings to be included within the local plan. They continued to include the allocation for School Lane (which does not have planning permission) to be adopted, making the total for Spooner Row to over 50. Who needs policies?
The school cant get enough children to fill the current school so they have too take some children from outside the Village. Is the split 50.50. So if the school stopped taking children from outside the area they would have enough spaces to cope with the planned development.
Are you saying that only Spooner Row children should be allowed to attend Spooner Row school and when the new houses are built, those from outside the village will not be allowed to attend anymore? This sounds like prejudice to me. The school is open to all.
Well logically priority would be given to children needing places at the school depending on the distance they live from the school. If there are 20 spaces available, and there are 20 children in the village wanting to attend do you support giving 5 of those spaces to children from outside the village to promote diversity and stamp out prejudice whilst sending our children to Morley/Wymondham etc.?
I don't think they remove kids from school who already attend if more immediately local children suddenly arrive, but it means that their siblings are less likely to join them when they want to start if the school is already full.
oh please!! "stamp out prejudice"! Where is your evidence for prejudice at the primary school or anywhere in the village?
Are you able to read?
Let me spell this out for you as you obviously need help, because it is too difficult to read more than one post at a time.
Anon said "Are you saying that only Spooner Row children should be allowed to attend Spooner Row school and when the new houses are built, those from outside the village will not be allowed to attend anymore? This sounds like prejudice to me. The school is open to all."
This is a suggestion that it would prejudice AGAINST children who are NOT from Spooner Row by not allowing them to attend a school WHICH IS NOT LOCAL TO THEM if there are limited available spaces
Second anon then said "logically priority would be given to children needing places at the school depending on the distance they live from the school." This is logical, and i believe in line with general schools admission policy
Anon 2 continued: "If there are 20 spaces available, and there are 20 children in the village wanting to attend do you support giving 5 of those spaces to children from outside the village to promote diversity and stamp out prejudice whilst sending our children to Morley/Wymondham etc.?
This is IRONICALLY asking if Anon would be in favour of reserving spaces for children WHO DO NOT live in the village at the expense of children WHO DO live in the village because as you can CLEARLY SEE from THEIR POST they suggest that RESERVING SPACES FOR LOCAL CHILDREN IS PREJUDICE
It worries me that you automatically seize on a tiny proportion of a thread and react, which seems to happen a lot around here.
We like the school the way it is thanks. We don't want people and profiteers from outside the village forcing excess new houses on us, then leaving us with the associated problems. The current school is an early Victorian building and we like it. We don't want some modern monstrosity to replace it because there are not enough spaces in the school. The current school is doing well educationally and parents from outside the village are quite welcome to use it.
The issue here is lack of school spaces and infrastructure as a consequence of unfettered and uncontrollable development. Driving miles to get your child to an alternative school is APPARENTLY sustainable. Of course this is rubbish but come hell and high water ( there are probably flooding issues as well) you will get what housing you applied for with the current laughable 2/3rds complete Plan
It is a particularly irritating and oft used tactic to beam in on anything other than the issue at hand to distract from the real issue, by those who know they are wrong but never want to admit it.
You fool no one and a bit of humility is good for the soul. Try it sometime
Having had no response from ANON Planner supporter above I checked. Brooke as a Rural service village as opposed to Spooner row as a Norwich service village has indeed got more houses 20 , whilst we have 50
Brooke is 5 miles from Norwich and Spooner row is 15 so that makes perfect sence ??? , but of course it does, if it means you can bulid more houses in a Norwich Service village than you can a rural one, and that, is excatly what the Joint core document says on the front page of the bit on Service villages
We are all equal but some are more equal than others ??
