To receive questions and statements from the public, if any.
Minutes:
Cllr Jo Copplestone, Broadland District Council, was in attendance and made the following statement:
‘Broadland District Council made representations in response to North Norfolk’s Local Plan back in 2021, and within that response the Council identified that significant additional growth in North Walsham would significantly increase traffic volume on the arterial routes to Norwich particularly the B1150 in Coltishall.
Following this, North Norfolk DC undertook a transport assessment in Summer 2021 which would address any potential impact on the road, despite repeated requests to share the findings of the assessment, no information was forthcoming. Eventually a ‘Technical Note’, which was of limited scope was provided the day before North Norfolk began the Regulation 19 publication of their Local Plan.
Although there was an opportunity to discuss and potentially resolve local concerns about the transport impacts of planned growth of North Walsham, on residents of Coltishall, the opportunity to resolve this important cross border matter was missed, and local people did not get their say.
At a second meeting with NNDC last Summer, following objections to the local plan on the adequacy of the transport evidence prepared, the County Council told NNDC additional transport work was required. The promoter of the proposed housing sites at North Walsham engaged Consultants ‘Aecom’ to undertake a subsequent Transport Assessment, and our newly formed Coltishall & Horstead B1150 Group submitted our ‘local points of concern’ which need to be addressed by Aecom, before the traffic counts began last Autumn.
Extracts from the Transport Assessment for Coltishall by Consultants ‘Aecom’ were finally published in North Norfolk District Councils papers for the ‘Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party’ meeting on 7th August, and on the same day as County Council organised a virtual meeting at short notice with Myself and Cllr. Fran Whymark to discuss the recommendations from Aecom.
Notwithstanding our many ‘points of concern’, Aecom have only concentrated on increasing traffic flow through the villages as development in North Walsham starts. Their two recommendations for traffic ‘Mitigation in Coltishall’ are firstly, to remove ‘obstructive parking’ in the high street adjacent the War Memorial to allow a ‘bus stop cage in place of parking’. Secondly, to improve the junction of Norwich Road and Wroxham Road to create a right turn lane onto the B1354, when heading north from Horstead direction. There are no mitigation measures to protect pedestrians and cyclists, nor have they addressed our main concern, the width constraint over the River Bure Bridge.
When further planned development in North Walsham of 1800 new homes comes forward, without any meaningful solutions & funding to improve the road infrastructure and River Bridge in Coltishall, traffic chaos will be exacerbated.
NNDC Officer said a Public Consultation on the Development Brief would take place at the end of August for six weeks, and despite many requests for details of the consultation, nothing is forthcoming nor is a copy of the Transport Assessment, despite an FOI request.
Fundamental problems with cross border communication have occurred throughout the NNDC Local Plan process, and I question the validity of the Transport Assessment to properly inform and justify a public consultation, which if allowed to proceed should include a Face-to-Face Public Meeting in Coltishall, so local people can have their say’.
The Leader thanked her for her comments and invited the Chairman of Development Committee and Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Development, Cllr P Heinrich, to respond. Cllr Heinrich said that he shared Cllr Copplestone’s concerns and informed her that the Council was about to commence a consultation on the development brief for North Walsham and it had been agreed that officers would meet with representatives of the Coltishall & Horstead B1150 Special Interest Group. For clarity, the proposed consultation was on the North Walsham Development Brief and would not include the highway mitigation proposals that had been referenced. These mitigation measures were not sufficiently advanced to be consulted upon yet. That said, the Highways Authority had indicated that they did not anticipate any ‘show stoppers’ regarding the mitigation measures and this might be something that Cllr Copplestone may wish to consult Highways on. Once the highway works had been subject to a final safety audit, officers had suggested that a public consultation meeting was held in Coltishall, as requested. He added that there would be no decisions taken until the Local Plan examination was complete. In conclusion, Cllr Heinrich said that officers proposed that the highways proposals at Coltishall should be subject to a specific public consultation and once that is sufficiently advanced be published and shared with Broadland District Council.
The Leader said that he welcomed further dialogue on the matter.
Cllr Copplestone replied that Broadland District Council had been provided with extracts from reports presented to NNDCs Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party and a meeting had been organised at very short notice, together with the County Councillor to discuss the recommendations. She said that every time they approached the District Council, they did not get anywhere. It was imperative that they saw the transport assessment as soon as possible. The B1150 Group were extremely concerned and had submitted a Freedom of Information as it had been so difficult to obtain information.
The Leader said that he would notify the Portfolio Holder, Cllr Brown, of the situation and ensure that Broadland District Council was kept updated.