142
Object
Publication
Representation ID: 23462
Received: 10/03/2021
Respondent: Ms Catherine Maclennan
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
I believe that this plan is not legally compliant because of the lack of consultation. I believe that the period of time for public consideration and reduced. discussion has been reduced. The fact that this decision was made in the absence of opposition councillors has resulted in the process appearing underhand and unreliable There is an unprecedented situation of a global pandemic that has resulted in obvious restrictions on social interaction and movement, it would appear that Broadland Council have exploited this situation to prevent transparency and the democratic process.
1.A appropriate period for public consutation and review, one the lockdown
situation has eased and a public meeting can be held and a working party formed.
2. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans in detail for increasing the number of both primary and secondary school places.
3. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans in detail to provide appropriate surgeries, general practitioners and heal1h care workers.
4. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans to provide information as to adequacy of the sewerage system for the town and environs.
5. That Broadland Council publishes information regarding the adequacy of the water table and it's suitability for such a significant growth of population.
6. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans for an increase in car parking and shops within Aylsham.
7. That Broadland Council publishes information regarding the creation of pavements and street lighting.
8. That Broadland Council publishes forcasts and proposals for the increase in traffic in and around the town and into Norwich.
I believe that this plan is not legally compliant because of the lack of consultation. I believe that the period of time for public consideration and reduced. discussion has been reduced. The fact that this decision was made in the absence of opposition councillors has resulted in the process appearing underhand and unreliable There is an unprecedented situation of a global pandemic that has resulted in obvious restrictions on social interaction and movement, it would appear that Broadland Council have exploited this situation to prevent transparency and the democratic process.
1.A appropriate period for public consutation and review, one the lockdown
situation has eased and a public meeting can be held and a working party formed.
2. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans in detail for increasing the number of both primary and secondary school places.
3. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans in detail to provide appropriate surgeries, general practitioners and heal1h care workers.
4. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans to provide information as to adequacy of the sewerage system for the town and environs.
5. That Broadland Council publishes information regarding the adequacy of the water table and it's suitability for such a significant growth of population.
6. That Broadland Council publishes it's plans for an increase in car parking and shops within Aylsham.
7. That Broadland Council publishes information regarding the creation of pavements and street lighting.
8. That Broadland Council publishes forcasts and proposals for the increase in traffic in and around the town and into Norwich.
Object
Publication
Representation ID: 23952
Received: 17/03/2021
Respondent: Ms Sue Catchpole
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Response to GNLP Regulation 19
The Local Planning Authority has failed to engage with Aylsham District Councillors, Aylsham Town Council and the local community except through the formal Regulation 18 BLP Consultation which considered only one site for development. There has been radio silence since then until the release of the Reg 19 plan, in spite of the Council recognising a need to alter the way they communicate with interested parties through the publication of the “Temporary update in response to Covid-19 guidance (July 2020)”. The Covid-19 pandemic can not be used as an excuse for lack of consultation. Aylsham Town Council continued to meet over Zoom and Councillors were still available. The LPA also uses the Facebook social media platform via the page ‘Aylsham and the Surrounding Villages’ to promote its services to the residents of Aylsham. This could have been one way of consulting the community.
Lack of consultation is contrary to the LPA’s own Statement of Community Involvement which says under “Standards for effective community involvement” at 1.15 that the Council will;
- Adopt an inclusive approach, ensuring that those who have an interest in the topic have the opportunity to contribute from an early stage and throughout the process.
And under “Planning and community involvement”
1.6 Paragraph 155 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), where it discusses plan making, states: 'Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses is essential. A wide section of the community should be proactively engaged, so that Local Plans, as far as possible, reflect a collective vision and a set of agreed priorities for the sustainable development of the area, including those contained in any neighbourhood plans that have been made.'
And
1.7 This sets out a firm, national directive that local planning authorities should be seeking the views of communities and other stakeholders from an early stage in the development of their local planning documents.
As the Council appears not to have followed its own procedures or met its own standards, the decision to pursue two large housing development sites instead of only one, is not sound. There will be no evidence of how the Council complied with this duty.
Any further development must be in keeping with the points laid out in the Aylsham Neighbourhood Plan.
Aylsham has recently expanded with the addition of at least 500 homes over a few years. Certainly, even one more development over the coming 15 years will add strain to the community, facilities, services and infrastructure. What is the hurry? As a rural Norfolk market town, Aylsham now needs time to adapt and integrate the residents of the two new housing developments at Willow Park and Bure Meadows. Whichever ONE further site is selected for development before 2038, more homes can be provided if a reasonable number of small, one bedroom properties are included. The type of homes built should reflect the actual need in our community.
The inclusion of a second site put forward in Reg 19 should be withdrawn.
The proposed second site was randomly deposited in Aylsham in Reg 19 to meet an arbitrary target. The impact of Covid and Brexit will almost certainly lead to an increase in the number of town centre sites becoming available for development.
Response to GNLP Regulation 19
The Local Planning Authority has failed to engage with Aylsham District Councillors, Aylsham Town Council and the local community except through the formal Regulation 18 BLP Consultation which considered only one site for development. There has been radio silence since then until the release of the Reg 19 plan, in spite of the Council recognising a need to alter the way they communicate with interested parties through the publication of the “Temporary update in response to Covid-19 guidance (July 2020)”. The Covid-19 pandemic can not be used as an excuse for lack of consultation. Aylsham Town Council continued to meet over Zoom and Councillors were still available. The LPA also uses the Facebook social media platform via the page ‘Aylsham and the Surrounding Villages’ to promote its services to the residents of Aylsham. This could have been one way of consulting the community.
Lack of consultation is contrary to the LPA’s own Statement of Community Involvement which says under “Standards for effective community involvement” at 1.15 that the Council will;
- Adopt an inclusive approach, ensuring that those who have an interest in the topic have the opportunity to contribute from an early stage and throughout the process.
And under “Planning and community involvement”
1.6 Paragraph 155 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), where it discusses plan making, states: 'Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses is essential. A wide section of the community should be proactively engaged, so that Local Plans, as far as possible, reflect a collective vision and a set of agreed priorities for the sustainable development of the area, including those contained in any neighbourhood plans that have been made.'
And
1.7 This sets out a firm, national directive that local planning authorities should be seeking the views of communities and other stakeholders from an early stage in the development of their local planning documents.
As the Council appears not to have followed its own procedures or met its own standards, the decision to pursue two large housing development sites instead of only one, is not sound. There will be no evidence of how the Council complied with this duty.
Any further development must be in keeping with the points laid out in the Aylsham Neighbourhood Plan.
Aylsham has recently expanded with the addition of at least 500 homes over a few years. Certainly, even one more development over the coming 15 years will add strain to the community, facilities, services and infrastructure. What is the hurry? As a rural Norfolk market town, Aylsham now needs time to adapt and integrate the residents of the two new housing developments at Willow Park and Bure Meadows. Whichever ONE further site is selected for development before 2038, more homes can be provided if a reasonable number of small, one bedroom properties are included. The type of homes built should reflect the actual need in our community.