0337R Policy

Support

Representation ID: 23470

Received: 10/03/2021

Respondent: Taverham Parish Council

Greater Norwich Local Plan Regulation 19 Publication - Taverham Parish Council supports the conclusions of the Stage 7 Settlement-based Appraisal of Reasonable Alternative Sites and Identification of Preferred Sites.

In particular, Taverham Parish Council agrees GNLP 0337is the preferred option for new residential development as it is line with Policy TAV 1 in the Taverham Neighbourhood Plan, which states that larger scale residential development should be focused in the north-east of the Plan area close to the Broadland Northway.

Taverham Parish Council agrees that GNLP 0062 is an unreasonable site as it borders the River Wensum Green Corridor and Policy TAV 8 states that this area will be protected from development that may adversely affect it. In addition, Policy TAV 10 – Protection of important public local views, identifies this area of land, and development proposals, which would adversely affect an important public view, will not be supported.

Taverham Parish Council supports the dismissal of GNLP 2051 and GNLP 2106 on highway and landscape grounds. In addition, both sites are sufficiently close to the River Wensum Green Corridor as to have an adverse impact from an environmental perspective and would be detrimental to the character and semi-rural landscape of this part of Taverham.

Object

Representation ID: 23928

Received: 16/03/2021

Respondent: NPS Property Consultants Ltd

Number of people: 2

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Policy GNLP0337 will provide a very large urban extension at the edge of north west Norwich. The allocation extends to 78.36 ha for residential development (to accommodate at least 1,400 homes) associated public open space, new primary school and local medical centre. To ensure that there is the necessary police infra-structure to cater for the existing community and proposed growth, a new police facility is required and should be embedded in this allocation to replace the current facility on Drayton Road. Within allocation GNLP0337, in addition to the need to safeguard land for a new primary school and local medical centre, the policy should also include a new police station. On a site of this size, such provision for a site would not prejudice the delivery of the other elements of the policy.

Object

Representation ID: 24056

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: RG Carter & Drayton Farms Limited

Number of people: 2

Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Not legally compliant
The approach taken in the assessment of sites and referred to in various site assessment booklets does not represent a transparent, objective or evidence based approach. The GNDP has failed to properly comply with its legal obligation to assess the Reasonable Alternatives on a comparative basis, having regard to a transparent and objective evidence, as is required by The Strategic Environmental Appraisal Directive 2001. (reference Legal Opinion at Appendix 1 of seperate attached representation document).

cc Representation report document

Object

Representation ID: 24061

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: RG Carter & Drayton Farms Limited

Number of people: 2

Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Not effective
A plan preparation uninformed by the anticipated rate of developemnt for specific sites and instead based on an average of past delivery rates on different sites with entirely different issues at a different time with different economic and social circumstances is likely to be unsound and is certainly not transparent and tested for its ability to deliver sufficient houses within the plan period. In our view, this is particularly important where a plan such the GNLP seeks to supply a large number of homes on large scale development formats. As stated in paragraph 72 of the Framework, in identifying large scale development, authorities should "make a realistic assessment of likely rates of delivery, given the lead-in times for large scale sites...."

cc See seperate attached representation document (Reg19)

Object

Representation ID: 24066

Received: 18/03/2021

Respondent: RG Carter & Drayton Farms Limited

Number of people: 2

Agent: CODE Development Planners Ltd

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Unsound - Not justified
The plan has failed to justify through proportionate and consistent evidence the selection of allocated site GNLP0337, identified contingency site GNLP2043/0581 and the rejection of Reasonable Alternative sites GNLP0332R and GNLP0334R.

See seperate attached representation document (Reg19) and evidence from Reg 18 stage.

Object

Representation ID: 24080

Received: 19/03/2021

Respondent: M Scott Properties Ltd

Number of people: 2

Agent: Bidwells

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

On behalf of M Scott Properties Ltd (Scott Properties) we strongly support the allocation of GNLP0337R, Land between Fir Covert Road & Reepham Road, Taverham.

However, whilst the principle of the policy is considered sound, in accordance with the tests set out in paragraph 35 of the NPPF, the detailed wording is not sound, as elements are neither effective or justified. Minor alterations are therefore sought to ensure its soundness.

See attached document for full representation.

Object

Representation ID: 24424

Received: 17/03/2021

Respondent: Lindy Platten-Jarvis

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Legal compliancy: as a pensioner living on a blind corner on a C road with only 2 or 3 seconds visibility on either side, where 6 feet of my garden, angle of repose (to a 4ft bank) has been stolen without any consultation with me, and my calls for help for the past 3 decades, I feel I should have been notified by mail about this great adverse impact on my personal safety; I have been calling for help for 30 years.

Unsound: This is highly unsound because the problems of high volumes of traffic speeding through the C roads of Felthorpe have been causing the residents, in particular in The Street, Church Lane and NR10 4DR Taverham Road, on inadequate for purpose roads, have been the subject of complaints from residents for the past 3 decades.
In order to become sound, these long-term serious problems must be finally addressed in the GNLP.
The B1149 Holt Road in Horsford is a major cause of problems for residents. Since the Northern Broadway was built, this B road (B1149) has had some major housing developments. Queueing to access the NDR has meant more vehicles elect to go through the C roads of Felthorpe, causing headaches for the residents of Felthorpe, as the rat-running to the NDR and to the north of the Southern Bypass runs through Felthorpe Street and the Taverham Road. When our inadequate bus service route went via Horsford, there were many roadworks & volume of traffic and traffic lights problems the back-up queues to the NDR lengthened the Qs for the NDR and many reverted to the Felthorpe route again. The B1149 and the C262,3 etc roads are even less capable of handling the volume of traffic and all these roads have needed regular patching and mending potholes. An indication of the dangers of the sharp bends on Taverham Road – The Yew Tree Bends – are that Highways would only repaint the badly faded ‘slow’ road signs when they had traffic control in place.
Pedestrians using the amenities of the woods must be similarly endangered when they take their children &/or dogs for a walk round the beautiful network of walks that join up with miles of different routes & also Marriotts Way. It is appalling that pre-the tarmacking exercise, one could walk off road with relative safety.
All of these roads need to be made more durable before vast numbers of new households begin to use them (1400 vs 300 approx in Felthorpe).
And the former grassy verges between the bends of Taverham Road should be restored – it can be done cheaply by demarking them by dotted lines – and/or creating a one-way system using the Felthorpe Street continuation to the Reepham Rd (class C). A walkable footpath should be made on the verges to the Reepham Road to allow pedestrians acces to the wonderful resources of GNLP0337R, without the dangers of speeding traffic.
I thought it was part of the charter for Highways to preserve footpaths not obliterate them, causing me to be apparently walking on tarmac when I am stepping above my former hedge, 4ft high bank & angle of repose on ¼ mile of formerly single track road that was suddenly made into a double track road. The road-steal was done quickly and with no notice or consultation. This may have been because the owners of Yew Tree Farm owned all the former footpaths along this stretch apart from mine. In fact they shaved off all the hedge side branches that protected most of the angle of repose. Increase in amount, size of vehicles, and the various stages of the Southern Bypass & NDR have speeded up and exacerbated the dangers immensely.
In a letter from the Highways Engineer, Mr K Townley wrote that the bend around my garden was a pinch-point. Solicitors looked at road maps and advised me the road track was only 12ft wide formerly.
After tarmacing had been accomplished Mr Townly said it must be easier for me to walk on tarmac than the eroded grass and sand (which tyre tracks had made uneven). Physically easier perhaps but not safe – in fact lethal and worrying and depressing. It seems the ideal conditions to satisfy a Wieldon Boroughs argument. I put myself in harm’s way to live life. Covid 19 has made great changes for the entire world but I continue to have massively frightening conditions re access/egress to my own property. This has not eased during lockdown with multiple near-misses. When I cross the road to get my medication & mail, I almost never manage to complete each single crossing without an unseen-at-the-start vehicle following me along a now vergeless road for the end of my walk. I walk with hi-viz jacket and a walking stick. Highways covered the walking verges on both sides of the then single width lane with tarmac making a double width 2-vehicle road from a single lane road – thereby destroying safe walking from the barn to beyond the southern-most bend.
Loss of angle of repose
Erosion of 4ft high garden bank
Erosion killed off my elm hedge
Erosion continues as vehicles go on-bank/off road to pass.
A photo from 1972 (aerial) shows the double hedge (about 6ft thick). Loss of these former footpaths endangers locals accessing the amenity of the wood – walking network. I have been hit by a car while walking on the kerb in the hedge row. (I.e. not on the tarmac).
There is no longer anywhere to park a car to deliver essential goods or services (I have carers). During a 1990s site visit by the engineer, even numbered (30-40) dwellings were ordered to move their boundaries to the west in order to make room for a footpath. This footpath is not fit for purpose; to use it (W side of rd) involves crossing on a blind corner once (twice for me). Accessing the footpath involves using road without any off road verges at ll – they are no longer there. These unsafe sections have to be negotiated by all pedestrians.
No safe place to park for visitors, taxis, carers and deliveries. All residents along Taverham Road have difficulty driving into the traffic stream. The New path has too many posts – which are constantly being damaged or replaced – to walk easily with a buggy or shopping trolley. It is too dangerous for me to cross the road twice on blind corners to use it. I have to get all my essential household requirements, shopping by walking along the road. It is safer not to use the footpath at all. However the footpath has puddles the entire length and one gets wet crossing to the path and soaked by spray from the traffic. Flooding.
Cyclists can’t be heard approaching. In the 1990s Post Office Health and Safety said the road was too dangerous for staff to deliver my mail. I must put a post box across the road (from east to west) and further north around the bend.
1994 or 1996 the village shop sent me a letter (I can get a copy after lockdown & shielding) to say they had to stop delivering my newspaper as it as too dangerous for their staff to cross the road & deliver. There is always a large puddle (grills are not at the nadir), grills often blocked. This makes a further hazard to getting my mail & medication. I get medication but it is delivered to the mail box and not to my door (risk too high).
At least 2 friends have written to the authorities saying it is too dangerous to visit me. One is convinced I saved her life by pulling her off the road into my pedestrian gateway.
Leaving my gate there are only 2 seconds on sight of a car before it crosses by my gate (1 ½ car lengths). Putting up mirrors opposite only gives 3 seconds of safety. In inclement weather the mirrors are of no use, as obscured by rain &/or snow &/or splashings from vehicles going through the puddle. Sound gets deflected by the bends, and of course pushbikes don’t make a sound and collisions are more likely.
There are huge puddles all the way along the Taverham Road and no lasting solution has been made. There is such a high volume of traffic that the ½ mile walk to the bus stop makes it difficult to make progress. Other residents have complained about this, pedestrians trying to get to the play ground with their children and conscientious drivers who have to wait for oncoming cars to avoid splashing pedestrians.
There are frequently potholes around the far side of the bend near me. I know of a cyclist who fell from his bike after hitting one. At the moment, as I write there are 3 potholes (reported) some hidden beneath the puddle. One was made in the middle of the night by the NCC team ‘repairing’ a blocked drain. It is now twice the original size.
Around ‘my’ bend, pedestrians walking on a vergeless road, have to walk into the road to avoid the puddles. The surface of the tarmac is rutted and so the puddles in the tyre track ruts are also hazardous and make an additional obstacle to avoid when crossing/walking along the road.
When my wheelie bins were delivered it was decided by them that it would be too dangerous to stop on the corner & empty them. I was issued with bags, which the team pick up as they walk from one stop (nos 40, 38) to another (no 41). The bags are left in a corral at hand height so the men (or women) don’t have to bend. However they are a potential health hazard as they encourage vermin and can get nibbled. Cats love to spray them.
Often the bins get missed on the Friday pick up and phone call reports rarely result on the bins being collected until after the weekend. No 41 have blamed me for their infestations of mice & rats in their loft. During all the time they have lived next door I have not had any bait taken from my loft. I also keep the household waste bag indoors to keep the risk of rodent-ripping down, but it is not always possible to keep rotten food in my fridge. During the snowy weather in February 2021, I had to take a broom to remove icy, water slush from the road; an additional hazard to get my medication.
Household necessities for living all have to be brought in my wheeled shopper twice a week. Inter-Covid-19-lockdowns I used paid services to get my shopping – sometimes as many as 6 double-trips across the road. Deliveries being impossible and the loss of the internet means I cannot order essential shopping. It was desperately awful to cope with this. I had to transport shopping bags myself, using the helper to keep an eye on the road. During lockdown 3 a friend from Horsford has been bringing a weekly shop. I am desperately worried for her safety as she makes the journey from her car.
As I write today (10th March) it is my birthday I am 73 & have been unfit for work since 15/2/92 so my carer took me to the post office – first visit in 2021 – and we went through Horsford. I was appalled at the state of the road, the traffic levels, traffic lights. I cannot understand why there is application GNLP264 [sic] for 45 new households since 2 new major developments recently finished/started have resulted in a new roundabout, increased traffic and a poor quality B road, although there are pavements on each side of the road more houses are unsound for the environment.
Felthorpe Street is being traffic calmed by introducing pinch points. I understood Taverham Road doesn’t qualify, although the no (38.40.39) shows the road narrows and an early letter from the Area Engineer calls it a pinch point (38/40/39) letter in 1990s why can’t this pinch point be reinstated?
Felthorpe Street pavements are not contiguous and to walk through the street involves much crossing of a busy C road.
In case I forget to mention it in section 6, it would be a good idea to put zebra crossings for pedestrians at each artificial pinch point along the street. Horsford has zebra crossings including lights.
Since I last wrote, I observed within 2 hours 3 HGVs (metal trucks) going the unlawful way around the HGV one way system, which was inaugurated many years ago, subsequent to the many suggestions I made. This morning (15th March) an HGV with a crane on sped around the corner. At best (see photos taken August 2019) two cars can barely pass. My neighbours & I often remove wing mirrors & pieces of car body from the road. Two Bedford vans cause a snarl up, which is generally noisy. Can’t enjoy quite peaceful enjoyment of my garden. Apart from a roomsize courtyard at the back, all my garden borders the road. Traffic noise prevents me from listening to the radio in my garden & in my conservatory. And the exhaust fumes are dangerous to me an malodourous.
The bus home in the winter means getting from the bus stop to home, in the dark there is an additional hazard: as well as enforced walking on the road, you can get dazzled by headlights and the no43 floodlight is blinding. The pavement is not level and is dangerous when icy. Evasive action has to be taken up the driveways to miss vehicle spray – it goes right over the pathway. It is in all a half mile journey.
I had a fall in my garden hitting my head, formed a large swelling, and my carer called an ambulance using 999. The ambulance requested 2 police cars to supply traffic control when they arrived hours later. The police only sent one car again hours later and so the police car & ambulance blocked the road to get me safely into the ambulance for tests & a night’s observation in the NNUH. I am worried about the delay should I fall again or be hit again by a cycle or car or HGV.
One day, trying to leave to catch the bus, I could not leave my gate as an HGV (going wrong way) was wedged against my hedge across the gate with a pair of double tyres to the left and 3 double tyres to the right. Crawling underneath with my wheeled shopper was not an option. After this I made another entrance – with steps to climb the bank to the N of the property. This allows me to escape any future snarl-up, although there is even less visibility than at the former gate. No 43 has put a gate in their fence to use this means of access/egress to their land. Since getting to my door from this gate is hazardous (I fell doing this) due to the need to negotiate steps, there is no advantage to using the emergency exit.
Recently I requested a Health & Safety survey from the NCC. I have not had a reply after 2 weeks.
There is no nearby parking – my last visitors parked in the Church Lane layby.
The spin-off from this is that I have not been able to use the Government Insulation schemes on my home. When I apply for a quote it is refused because re cavity insulation, external insulation as the surveyors instantly say – nowhere to park to get their equipment into the property. Too dangerous. Likewise I am unable to get mature trees trimmed or cut.
Ever since the Highways tarmacked our verges I have been writing letters about the danger & how I must put myself in harm’s way on a daily basis just to get what is needed for quiet enjoyment of my home & of my life.
Traffic noise also includes the loud horns which seem preferable to be used in lieu of the brake pedal, which legally should be in working order.
Asthma, bronchitis, ME all prevent me from crossing the road at a faster pace. Proximity & speed of the 2 way traffic induce dizziness: more likely to fall over.
Last week on 12th March 2021 a second vehicle this year left the road and damaged the fence in front of my unused wheelie bins. The debris made a hazard. Reported to Highways, had to mend it myself. Abuse & swerves by traffic not good for mental health.
After the 6ft/2metres was taken from my hedge & bank, I installed a fence & wire netting shelter/privacy. The bank continues to self erode & Highways promised never to mechanically cut back my hedge. This cut back gives no improved visibility at all and when I try & trim the ivy back it is impossible to do much without being hit, brakes squealing and abuse. Highways sent a mechanical cutter and pulled wires from the fence left them poking nto the road – a danger to cyclists & pedestrians. I had to fix this myself, alone.
In addition, in 2 years the value of my home fell £30,000 from £80,000 to £50,000. No-one would want to buy it with all these created dangers.
Highways negated all promises to protect my bank or that it was not their policy to take electors’ land but I found myself protecting the remains of my bank from a JCB by laying in front of it.
Cutting back my hedge by hand is not only dangerous to try and do but merely results in traffic driving closer and faster and putting me & all in harm’s way to a greater extent.
During the 1990s I sent a questionnaire around Taverham Rd & Church Lane. Replies complained about traffic levels, difficulty of access from home to road, flooding, noise levels, traffic speed & smell from exhaust fumes. Results were totalled and forwarded to the then District Councillor.
[name withheld] who lived then at No 38 was a lorry driver and did a series of trials comparing the route through the woods (street to Reepham Rd) [illegible word] vs using Taverham Road. It was never quicker using Taverham Raod, the woods route always won because it had right of way at the junctions at the end of the rat run route – and avoided the poor Taverham Road visibility at the junctions.
After our verges got lost and the rat-running built up, I was walking home from the Reepham Road when a speeding, too close car, knocked me over, falling onto the grass, by the wind generated. These remaining verges are too uneven to walk on safely.
There have been many RTAs around the bend. Many drivers drive away too fast to take numbers. Natural erosion continues along the bankside and there is usually mud on the road. Many residents complain about the poor visibility either end of TR junctions.
The primary school will cater for children – many already in Felthorpe and future ones in the 1400 new households. These children will want to be children and walk & play & cycle. Boris Johnson wants to encourage cyclists. It is currently too unsafe for them to cycle – and/or walk between the old village of Felthorpe and development GNLP0337R. A one-way system could allow single file one-lane traffic and cycling & walking lanes edged by dotted white lines and the road edge.
A bus stop on Taverham Road existed many years ago by the no-man’s land near the Horse Yard Yew Tree Farm corner. A late neighbour said she used it in the 1950s 1960s and 1970s. I used the bus stop at the same place to get to church in Thorpe Marriott. Complaints were made and the country land bus stop was lost. School buses do not stop there exposing children to dangerous walks home.
There used to be verges around No 28 and a local resident has complained about the dangers of getting to the ‘new’ pathway involving traffic problems of speed & blind corner when walking his dogs in the woods.
My plight has been in the EDP local newspaper 3 times over the last 3 decades and Mr A Adams Norfolk County Councillor is quoted as saying nothing effectively can be done. He has not taken up repeated requests to see for himself. The situation looks quite different from my side of the road, please see the EDP & EEN article of September 22 2020. Why has he ignored our plight for so long. Mr Adams raised the suggestion for installing traffic lights.

Duty to Co-operate: Bearing in mind I cannot have deliveries and my 30 years of appeals for help, I did not hear about these plans until recently. No papers to read about the 2 sites. Thanks to the Horsford District Councillors [sic] I got the news in a leaflet in my post box. I phoned immediately to get a response form which took a week to arrive and hence not leaving me sufficient time to make a considered reply.
I do not have a television.
Covid-19: I am a supershielder due to age, Covid-cover (obesity), ME, diabetes, asthma (etc). It is my opinion that all households in Felthorpe should have been leafletted by the authorities. There is a notice board at the junction of Taverham Road & Church Lane but notices are placed there tardily and the journey there is too hazardous a risk for the ad hoc possibility of finding something not out of date.
It has taken too long to write this response and no photo copying facilities are available to me. The physical process of writing is very difficult.
There have been many RTAs around the bend. There is a high road-kill toll around the bends. Beloved pets are left injured or killed, hedgehogs flattened, also squirrel & birds injured. I have had 3 cats killed on the road and know of others who have lost their pets or worry about them. Young adders are killed.
I live alone and having decided it is too unsafe to keep a cat, I miss a pet dreadfully. Local cat-rescue charities will not allow their charges to live near such a dangerous road.
Councillor Adam’s claim that traffic (from the NDR) through Felthorpe has fallen by 10% was because of a count in 2018 taken on Felthorpe Street. This was before 2 new housing developments in Horsford were built. Also a significant proportion of traffic accesses Taverham Road and this was not counted (Mill Lane from Cawston, Eastgate etc)