Publication

Glavenhill’s previously submitted comments on the Regulation 18C plan still stand.

Glavenhill consider that a new Garden Village at Hethel should be allocated now and the choice to not allocate the Stanfield Garden Village site at Hethel within this plan period is a missed opportunity. Identification of a first phase of development on this site within the plan period would provide a clear commitment to delivering the plan’s stated Vision and a clear means to meeting that Vision in a sustainable manner.

Glavenhill and its developer partner Human Nature have undertaken a considerable amount of site assessment and technical work to date and are confident that a first phase of development could be delivered within the plan period. In order to supplement the Vision and Delivery Documents and Technical Reports submitted with previous representations, we attach a Delivery Statement prepared by Human Nature which sets out how the site will be brought forward using innovations for the accelerated delivery of affordable homes, the potential for public/private partnership and IMPACT investment.

If an allocation for a new Garden Village at Hethel is not made within this plan period, then policy 7.6 Preparing for New Settlements is supported. It is a sensible approach to start preparing for delivery of a new Garden Village as soon as possible and we are ready to work with the GNDP to assist with the site options assessment and technical consultation immediately, having undertaken a significant amount of work to assess constraints and delivery already.

We are confident that there are no over-riding constraints to development and that a new Garden Village can be delivered in a sustainable manner at Hethel. In addition to the lack of technical constraints, the site has little requirement of upfront major road infrastructure, which had hampered many other projects nationally.

We are also confident that the site at Hethel represents the best location for a new Garden Village, in terms of its geographical location within the Cambridge-Norwich Tech corridor, its alignment with strategic policies, the focus that it can bring to investment and economic growth within this key area and the lack of technical constraints to development or impact upon the amenity of local residents. The site has been selected on its technical, environmental and market suitability coupled with the ambition to deliver an exemplar scheme on all levels.

Glavenhill support the aim to concentrate the building of new homes in and around Norwich and in the Cambridge Norwich Tech Corridor. However, we do not consider that the policies which follow will provide for this in the most effective way.

Too great an emphasis is placed upon dispersal of growth to as yet unidentified sites in rural cluster villages in South Norfolk and to towns like Diss and Harleston, outside of the Cambridge-Norwich Tech Corridor and the Strategic Growth Area. Although it is recognised that these more rural locations should accommodate some additional housing growth, this should not take precedence over redirecting the policies in the new plan beyond those in the JCS to ensure that there is a real new focus and commitment on meeting the stated vision for the Strategic Growth Area and Cambridge -Norwich Tech corridor.

Housing numbers should be redirected from Diss, Harleston and the South Norfolk rural cluster villages to a new settlement at Hethel. This approach would clearly support the ambition to provide most new homes in and around Norwich and within the Tech corridor and would provide land and homes to expand and support the opportunity for hi-tech engineering jobs within the Tech corridor. Such an approach would help provide a ‘Sustainable Growth Strategy’ and a development hierarchy that focusses growth on the most sustainable locations within the Strategic Growth Area. The current over emphasis on potential rural allocations in the bottom tier of the settlement hierarchy and overly large allocations in Diss and Harleston makes the strategy unsound in its current form.

Our previously submitted Vision and Delivery Document has provided detailed information regarding the availability and deliverability of the Stanfield Garden Village site together with the opportunities and benefits that would arise through its allocation.

Housing numbers should be redirected from Diss, Harleston and the South Norfolk rural cluster villages to a new settlement at Hethel. The policy should include the identification of a new settlement at Hethel. This approach would clearly support the ambition to provide most new homes in and around Norwich and within the Tech corridor and would provide land and homes to expand and support the opportunity for hi-tech engineering jobs within the Tech corridor.

Our previously submitted comments in relation to the proposed growth strategy still stand. Too great an emphasis is placed upon dispersal of growth to as yet unidentified sites in rural cluster villages in South Norfolk and to towns like Diss and Harleston, outside of the Cambridge-Norwich Tech Corridor and the Strategic Growth Area.

Although it is recognised that these more rural locations should accommodate some additional housing growth, this should not take precedence over redirecting the policies in the new plan beyond those in the JCS to ensure that there is a real new focus and commitment on meeting the stated vision for the Strategic Growth Area and Cambridge -Norwich Tech corridor.

Housing numbers should be redirected from Diss, Harleston and the South Norfolk rural cluster villages to a new settlement at Hethel. This approach would clearly support the ambition to provide most new homes in and around Norwich and within the Tech corridor and would provide land and homes to expand and support the opportunity for hi-tech engineering jobs within the Tech corridor. Such an approach would help provide a ‘Sustainable Growth Strategy’ and a development hierarchy that focusses growth on the most sustainable locations within the Strategic Growth Area. The current over emphasis on potential rural allocations in the bottom tier of the settlement hierarchy and overly large allocations in Diss and Harleston makes the strategy unsound in its current form.

Our previously submitted Vision and Delivery Document has provided detailed information regarding the availability and deliverability of the Stanfield Garden Village site together with the opportunities and benefits that would arise through its allocation.