Our proposals are for some limited residential development on land in my clients ownership, together with a potential car parking solution for the village in light of the limited car parking available for the pub and other facilities. A Public Consultation event has been arranged for 6th June in the Village Hall (we are not wanting to cancel this despite the recent changes to the Parish Council that have come to light), from 3.00 pm until 7.00 pm.
With kind regards
Matthew
Matthew Bagley
Director
Titchmarsh & Bagley
__________________
Matt
Date:
RE: Public Consultation - 6th June at the Village Hall - Residential Development Proposal
I think in the field opposite the pub towards Pilgrims Farm BUT you have almost in its entrireity the email I recieved ( it is missing a sentence which says the parish council should attend )
So no details although I think Mr Bagley is approachable but might just say attend the display where it will all become clear I hope
Robert Foster may know more but just do not know
Thank you to admin for posting this as my puter and or crap broadband connection were conspiring to prevent me from doing so myself
When Alston's Company did a public consultation like this they promised lots of things to improve the infrastructure such as they were in negotiations to increase the timetable with the train service provider, to have regular buses with a turning point where the new houses are in Bunwell Road etc. All a load of rubbish, but it makes them sound good. What happened to the allotments that were promised? The infrastructure of Spooner Row cannot cope with yet more housing developments.
There are several parts of spooner row which have been ear marked.
Its only going to get worse as the village can't cope with more development. What will happen about the new children living in the village and School, its only a small school.
It's probably worth asking questions at the evening mentioned however not if false promises will be made and not if opinions are not taken into account.
Why should we be negotiating a deal in the village to build more houses so the village pup can have a car park how doe that benefit the residents of spooner row. Our roads can not cope with the volume of traffic now another potentially 60 to 80 cars is not acceptable. Maybe trustee JM Greetham would sell the village pub a car park and not blackmail the village into ”if you let me build 40 houses the pub can have a car park “ car parking at the pub is not down to the residence of spooner row village
Building a new car park wil only alleviate part of the problem and the liklihood is that people will still park on the road because it is more convenient. Adding another 40 houses is just creating more issues. The congestion is not just related to the pub. It is often caused by the church, school and level crossing. This ‘solution’ will create more congestion rather than less. It will affect the identity of the village and the school has not got sufficient capacity to provide spaces for these children. It will result in those residents who live on Bunwell Road or Chapel Road not getting the school spaces because allocation of places is based on proximity to the school rather than length of time resident.
The pub has never had a very big car park, it's a shame the land at the back of the pub was sold away - oh for a building plot! Otherwise that space may have been utilised for car parking.
It's difficult because the parking at the moment is all along the road and paths which is very hazardous - sometimes people park opposite one another. So it will be good to have more parking available.. then I expect in a few years the car park will be built on?!
Seems like they are just filling all spaces with houses and this is just the beginning..
The South Norfolk Local Plan official identifies the character of Spooner Row as four separate housing settlements, this developmental sprawl will change the whole character of the village. No one other than the landowner wants this, but it is likely to be approved like all the others. Landowners in South Norfolk seem to have a lot of control over the District Council who are the decision makers.
So what size is this new pub car park going to be? It doesn't look very big. What beneficial impact will it make on existing parking/highway problems in the village? It would need to be an enormous car park to be of any significance. Who is going to be responsible for its upkeep and liabilities? Once planning permission has been approved, I suspect a revised application will be submitted to either reduce the car park or remove it all together for more housing (remember what happened on Bunwell Rd). But then, the pub wouldn't get its new car park to benefit the pub. The village cannot sustainably accommodate another 40+ dwellings. This village is being ruined.
Why should we be negotiating a deal in the village to build more houses so the village pup can have a car park how doe that benefit the residents of spooner row. Our roads can not cope with the volume of traffic now another potentially 60 to 80 cars is not acceptable. Maybe trustee JM Greetham would sell the village pub a car park and not blackmail the village into ”if you let me build 40 houses the pub can have a car park “ car parking at the pub is not down to the residence of spooner row village
Absolutely!! It is a very good point that a pub car park can be negotiated without the housing sprawl.
Why should we be negotiating a deal in the village to build more houses so the village pup can have a car park how doe that benefit the residents of spooner row. Our roads can not cope with the volume of traffic now another potentially 60 to 80 cars is not acceptable. Maybe trustee JM Greetham would sell the village pub a car park and not blackmail the village into ”if you let me build 40 houses the pub can have a car park “ car parking at the pub is not down to the residence of spooner row village
Absolutely!! It is a very good point that a pub car park can be negotiated without the housing sprawl.
I heard that they had already negotiated to lease the space to the Pub several months ago
If the lease has already been negotiated, then the pub needs to pay for the car park's construction itself. The question needs to be asked as to why the landowner has still included it as a sweetener for this development.
What is the rush for this development to be submitted by next month anyway? Why can't it wait until the site allocations are made for the emerging new local plan? The landowner may own land within Spooner Row but they certainly won't experience the detrimental impact it will have.
As I am sure you are all aware having read and commented upon the Greater Norwich Local Plan (GNLP) which I drew your attention to previously and the growth Options document ( 159 pages ) about one fifth of the crap produced you will no doubt be totally confused by this
The proposal and the GNLP refer to these two sites respectively as GNLP 0446 and GNLP 0445 . The consultation process is looking at site OPTIONS for development until 2036 so why all of a sudden do we have to hurry to get these through when they have not even been considered and approved by the GNLP team I do not understand
Furthermore the Guiler lane development submitted opposite the Pub was submitted 0446 was much larger and the Planning team, a combination of the erudite (? ) planners from Norwich, South Norfolk and Broadland noted that this was for some houses and or village shop with no mention of a car park and sensibly ( well done) raised concerns about biodiversity impact and the affect on the nearby farmhouse ( This is on page 284 of the site proposals document in case you missed it !) So confused
The 0445 site on Station road for 40 houses also attracted adverse commentary ( on page 283 ) stating is was affected by surface water and flooding so WHY has this been proposed and why now when we stiill have , by the way have a maximum development limit under the current plan of a TOTAL of 55 houses for the whole village which we have already exceeded.
So planning numbers limit being ignored, existing planning commentary being ignored , and reasons for not doing this being quietly swept under the carpet ( until now I guess)
I get that we need new houses but we also proper infrastructure, school size, safe junctions, BEFORE this happens and we need affordable housing.
I will be attending of course on the 6th and before I get hit by trolls saying what a p**t I am and that I need to be positive, I would like to point out I am an unpaid Parish Councillor unlike District and County whose imput to this is what exactly ? I am very unhappy that we are awash again with very expensive and long winded documents of waffle which is being ignored anyway.
I almostly certainly expect most of you are completely underwhelmed by this , but one suspects perhaps massive tombs of documents are deliberately produced so they just get simply ignored. No issues here by the way it is entirely understandable
Well done for Barton Willmore for organising this consultation and you might guess I will have some interesting questions to ask BUT my biggest concern yet again is that we have a very expensive Planning organisation locally, which is apparently being run rings around by developers their agents and the land owners.
I'm sick of this. What the **** is happening to our village? Greedy land owners cashing in on weak councils, no infrastructure being put in place, poor planning for services, terrible traffic and road conditions. It's just not good enough.
When are our elected officers going to stop this nonsense?
Although there may be a need for new houses, especially affordable housing for people just starting out, Spooner Row does not have the infrastructure to support more homes as we are already saturated with new housing and have had more than our fair share of development.
It would make sense for any necessary development to be in or on the outskirts of existing towns or a new settlement with adequate facilities and infrastructure being provided for the residents.
Spooner Row, as a small village, is not suitable for this.I agree with previous post that developers always seem to get what they want here and have to wonder what the planners are thinking. I am guessing that, like the potential developers, none of them live here.
I agree with other posts regarding the car park and the extra traffic which will be created by yet more homes and I am glad to see that the bribe of a “potential car parking solution for the village” which is apparently for the benefit of the pub (especially if the lease of the land has already been negotiated some months ago) has completely backfired and is being seen for what it is.
I for one will attend the consultation and will be interested to see exactly what type of homes are proposed here and how they think the new development’s access to Station Road will work.
The junction opposite the pub is already very dangerous. Is it really a sensible move to add another access point for a new car park where cars will be constantly turning in and out from?
I am getting really fed-up with the constant harassment this village is subject to with these dubious, unsustainable developments. The authorities need to start explaining themselves. They can't just say its Government policy for new housing as it is the Council's responsibility to ensure that they are built with adequate infrastructure and sustainability, which they are not - e.g. Bunwell Road with flooding issues and School Lane with flooding and highway safety issues.
It is a very good point about the former land behind The Boars - I have often thought this would have solved the problem of car parking at the pub.
I think I would have thought a little better of the "clients" if they had thrown over the traces and earmarked the land at School Lane for a Nature Reserve. Other landowners have done this, why can't they? The hedges would then be retained for the benefit of wildlife which is slowly being eased out of the area.
A car park on this corner will erode the rural nature of this site, with views of Pilgrim Farm etc.
What type of housing is proposed remains to be seen
It is a very good point about the former land behind The Boars - I have often thought this would have solved the problem of car parking at the pub.
I think I would have thought a little better of the "clients" if they had thrown over the traces and earmarked the land at School Lane for a Nature Reserve. Other landowners have done this, why can't they? The hedges would then be retained for the benefit of wildlife which is slowly being eased out of the area.
A car park on this corner will erode the rural nature of this site, with views of Pilgrim Farm etc.
What type of housing is proposed remains to be seen
They originally wanted 4 houses, then 2 but could only get permission for 1 house due to traffic movement restrictions In to and out of Guilers Lane. this is also why they weren’t allowed to use the land as a carpark.
If the car parking space has been leased out to the pub on that hazardous junction then I hope the Highways Authority have given their approval to the pub. That junction is not coping with the enormous HGVs that try and turn in such a tight space on Bunwell Road/Station Road. The car park will not stop people parking outside their property, near or on the junction. 80 or more extra cars from this new development would be disastrous for the village.
Is our current parish council and District Councillor going to attend the Consultation with their support for the residents of this village?
I will be attending as Parish Councillor and the Council as a whole have been invited which includes our district Councillor , who is also a parish councillor for our ward but to be fair to them, the whole council so do have days jobs and different areas to represent .
The rules do not allow councillors to express views support or otherwise PRIOR to any meeting or discussion when under formal consideration . This is called pre determnation and does not allow them to take part or vote if they have done so
Highways are from County Council of course and if a planning application is made they would be formally consulted
Thank you very much for posting this. You have only to see the recent Springwatch programmes to see how endangered our wildlife is. Rough grass like this is invaluable for hunting owls etc.
Does anyone know if our District Councillor attended this consultation?
I hope he did attend as he vowed if he was elected to be our Conservative Councillor, that he would put a stop to speculative development in this area, which is what this is.
I attended the evening and it is more house building without improvements to infra-structure to cope with the increase. I didn't see anything about sewage treatment for 40 houses. With no access to public transport from the village, there will be a substantial increase in private car use. The plans on display showed the one and only entrance to the new development site to be positioned right next to the level crossing where vehicles currently and continuously queue, and the footpath provision fell short at this point, so is the developer / landowner expecting pedestrians to cross the busy road to the path on the other side or walk within traffic?
No one wants more development. It needs to be located where the infra-structure is able to accommodate a development of this scale. The developer / landowner should be required to upgrade and improve the existing ailing systems, but then that would impact on their substantial profits.
I attended - didn't get there until 6.30 so quite late in the day but there were still plenty of people there.
The representatives from Barton Willmore were planners who could only really answer questions about the plans and no specifics about the proposed homes, the effect on traffic in the village or how the site would be managed.
I live on Queen's Street, my specific concerns were around how they propose to build on a flood plain, how the village is going to cope with around 80 extra vehicles going in and out every day without any new roads being built, who will be responsible for the management of the ditches and streams surrounding the proposed development and whether it really was a good idea to build a car park right on an already dangerous junction. I also raised whether drainage for the new site will add to the existing high risk of surface water flooding in the certain parts of the village.
There were some outline drawings available to view.
I didn't really get any answers that gave any comfort - no real answer to the traffic questions, the flooding aspect "will be OK" because there is going to be an attenuation pond built to take any run off from the new houses (but that's going to be directly behind my house and presumably flowing into already overworked drainage ditches) and they've done the usual flood assessment. The site will be the responsibility of the builders who actually put the houses up. The only thing they did say they would go away and look at was potentially re-siting the car park so it was further away from the Station Road junction.
Others living further along Station Road raised the very valid point about extra traffic queuing at the level crossing - and then using Top Common as a rat run when they don't want to wait, making an already very dangerous road/bridge even worse.
You can still put your points to the email address supplied in the flyer we received until tomorrow (13th June) - cambridge@bartonwillmore.co.uk. Would suggest everyone does if they haven't already done so.
Unfortunately I have no doubt that this development will go ahead. I have no problem with small developments in keeping with the character of the village, but there simply isn't the infrastructure for Spooner Row to take any more.
More rural habitat destined to go under concrete. Does anyone who lives in the village want this number of local developments on greenfields sites? The way things are going, the rural character of the village will change beyond recognition.
__________________
Anonymous
Date:
Public Consultation - 6th June at the Village Hall - Residential Development Proposal Station Road
As a planning application has been submitted, just to remind ourselves of the concerns made during the public consultation. The results, which are mainly negative are included in the Statement of Community Involvement https://info.south-norfolk.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=PEJ5GGOQN4800&activeTab=summary
