Publication

See attachment for suggested modification to policy 6 to include the Ben Burgess site at Swainsthorpe.

4.3 On the basis of the above Ben Burgess contend that land west of Ipswich Road, Swainsthorpe should be allocated within the GNLP as an employment site failure to do so would render the plan unsound.

See attachments for full submission and supporting information.

4 Conclusion

4.1 Ben Burgess contends that as currently drafted the GNLP would fail when considered against the legal requirements and the tests of soundness in accordance with paragraph 35 of the NPPF. Previous representations have been submitted demonstrating that the proposal for a new Ben Burgess headquarters on land west of Ipswich Road, Swainsthorpe is deliverable and would constitute sustainable economic development. In the absence of an allocation in respect of land west of Ipswich Road, Swainsthorpe the GNLP does not explain how, in accordance with paragraph 82 of the NPPF, how the locational requirements of the particular sector within which Ben Burgess operates has been address. Ben Burgess wishes to engage with officers of the GNLP team ahead of the regulation 19 stage of the GNLP to identify reasonable alternatives.

4.2 These representations contend that an examination of the GNLP (Part 1: The Strategy and Part 2: The Sites) and supporting evidence base demonstrate that the GNLP does not fulfil the necessary requirements. The evidence base fails to consider the specific requirements associated with the industry in order to justify the claim “evidence suggests that currently committed land is more than sufficient in quantity and quality to meet the employment growth needs in Greater Norwich”. The decision to designate to development management contradicts the very foundation of a policy led planning system.

4.3 On the basis of the above Ben Burgess contend that land west of Ipswich Road, Swainsthorpe should be allocated within the GNLP as an employment site failure to do so would render the plan unsound.