Agenda item

Barry Hester made a statement to the Working Party (summarised):

The Town Council and Regenerate North Walsham CIC had tried to set up discussions with NNDC without success and the policy wording now presented is a fait accompli that did not reflect an adequate policy basis to meet the aspirations of North Walsham as the next major growth point within the District.  It did not:

• acknowledge the work done to bring national expertise and potential funding.
• answer questions around how the required infrastructure and the town’s economic ambitions would be delivered.
• convey the desire for the extension to be a modern garden suburb that would become a mixed-use, walkable neighbourhood instead of a vast estate generating more commuting to Norwich and seizing up the local road network.
• address key issues of viability and deliverability.

Mr Hester requested the withdrawal of the item to allow for dialogue between the District and Town Council and for the technical matters to be resolved.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the final suite of preferred allocations for North Walsham for inclusion in the Regulation 19 consultation.  He reported that work on the Development Brief was ongoing and it was hoped to continue constructive dialogue with the Town Council and key stakeholders in the New Year.  Local Members were being kept informed and it was hoped to undertake public consultation in the Spring.  Local Members and the Working Party would have the opportunity to consider the draft Brief prior to the public consultation.    He presented an amended policy recommendation for site NW62/A to include reference to the requirement for the Western Link Road to provide a connection from Cromer Road to the industrial estate (Cornish Way) and the requirement for the production of a Consultation and Engagement Statement.

Councillor E Seward stated that he was speaking as both as a District Councillor and County Councillor for North Walsham.  He agreed with the Officer assessments of the site allocations and considered that there was little option than to have a large development in the town if the Government’s housing targets were to be met.  He referred to the sites at Nursery Drive and Norwich Road, which had been allocated in the current plan but remained undeveloped, as a reminder that allocations did not necessarily lead to more housing.

With regard to the Western Extension, Councillor Seward stated that this was a major development for the town and it was important to get the supporting infrastructure correct.  He referred to highways study that had considered the viability of extending the link road into the industrial estate.  He considered that a new railway bridge was unnecessary as the existing bridge was adequate and all that was needed were traffic lights and a form of crossing for pedestrians, and more work was needed in that regard.  An element of public funding would be necessary in order to get the infrastructure right, but it had not been recognised in correspondence he had had with the Head of Service at Norfolk County Council.  He agreed with the revised definitions in the draft policy in terms of the link road, although he considered that there was a need to strengthen the policy to get the link road built at the beginning of the development and not piecemeal as the development was built.  He welcomed the consultation and engagement strategy.  He stated that the Town Council was a pivotal body and, as a Cabinet Member, he would be seeking firm assurances that it would be treated on a par with the District Council, Norfolk County Council and Council planning officers.   He stated that it was crucial that sustainable development was embraced in the policy statement and Development Brief to ensure that developers could not get round it.

The Senior Planning Officer stated that discussions would be held with the County Council and landowners regarding infrastructure, which would include funding issues.

Councillor P Heinrich supported the comments made by Councillor Seward.  He thanked the officers for their hard work in bringing together the site allocations and their very careful assessment, not only of the sites but the difficulties inherent in expanding the town within the constraints of the historic core and the complex highway difficulties.  He was grateful that the Town Council and associated bodies would be fully included in discussions regarding the Development Brief.  It was necessary to meet the aspirations the North Walsham residents and get the design, layout, landscape, environmental issues and infrastructure considerations right for everyone and not just the developers.  He considered that the new ENV9 policy would meet many of the concerns and set a good basis on which to move forward.

Councillor Heinrich referred to the specific sites.  He considered that the Norwich Road site had the potential to provide additional employment land for low impact activities that were likely to evolve in the future, and that a good quality development brief would resolve any outstanding issues.  The current traffic situation on Norwich Road emphasised the need for the western link road to get the bulk of the traffic away from it, and he requested the inclusion of traffic restrictions.  It was necessary to attract 21^st Century businesses in suitable premises on NW02 and on part of the mixed use land to avoid the western extension becoming a dormitory suburb of Norwich.  The western extension was clearly the only viable location for expanding North Walsham and meeting the Council’s land requirements.  He regretted the loss of high grade agricultural land and the impact on the landscape, but considered there were positive factors in that a holistic development brief could be achieved that would govern the form and quality of the development and reduce problems elsewhere in the town.  North Walsham could be enhanced by the proposals.  He stated that the Town Council’s Vision Statement was not significantly different from the Officers’ proposed vision and it was important to continue working together.  The extension of the western link road into the industrial estate was key to the development and it was important to ensure that funding was in place.  It was the only way to improve access for businesses and to get HGV traffic off unsuitable roads, and it was necessary to get a very high quality Development Brief before anything took place.

Councillor Ms V Gay expressed appreciation for the amended wording and supported Councillor Heinrich’s comments regarding the link road.  The road was not only vital to the proposal for the western extension, but to the whole of the Local Plan.  She considered that nobody wanted to see a vast, undistinguished housing estate and work had been done to eliminate that possibility.  She also supported Councillor Heinrich’s comments regarding employment land, which was needed in the right place to discourage people from working elsewhere.  She welcomed the mention of the Battlefield, which was of national significance and would form part of the future of the town.  She referred to suggestions by Historic England, which she hoped would be taken into account in the final wording.

Councillor Mrs P Grove-Jones supported the comments made by the North Walsham Members.  She considered that the scheme would eventually stimulate and enhance North Walsham provided the Design Guide was used effectively to achieve housing that was not the same as everywhere else.

Councillor N Pearce considered that the most important element in the scheme was the road, and that it should be built before the housing and employment land was developed.  He considered that the road would be the catalyst to encourage people to live and work locally, and housing types should reflect local need.  He considered that the overriding issue was the engagement with the Town Council and stakeholders to move the process forward.

Councillor N Dixon stated that he was comfortable with what had been presented, but was concerned about the process and the Town Council’s comments.  It was essential to involve the Town Council in the evolution of the plans and give them every opportunity to contribute. 

Councillor Mrs W Fredericks asked if the primary care services had put their views forward, as people had to wait increasingly longer to see GPs etc and the welfare of residents was of concern.

The Chairman expressed his gratitude to Officers for amending the policy to provide for early delivery, and he hoped that the Development Brief would be seen as a blueprint which would carry significant planning weight.  He agreed that stakeholders should be brought together and that it was important that the Town Council was treated equally as requested by Councillor Seward.  The scheme was pivotal to the delivery of the Local Plan in terms of housing delivery so it was necessary to make every effort to ensure that it was satisfactory for everyone involved, particularly the residents of North Walsham.

The Officers responded to Members’ comments.

The Planning Policy Manager explained that Historic England’s comments were standard in relation to all sites.  It had been agreed early on in the process that the comments of statutory consultees would be included verbatim and the default was to accept their modifications.  He was gratified to hear the positive comments towards the concept, and Members were being asked to agree to the principle of the allocations and rule out other sites, and to agree to the preparation of a Development Brief, which would be consulted upon prior to the Regulation 19 consultation.  He acknowledged that engagement had not been as good as it could have been, although there had been little to engage upon, and it was essential that the Town Council and other stakeholders were on board and supportive.

The Senior Planning Officer stated that a District-wide infrastructure delivery plan was being prepared which would involve detailed discussions with all providers, including the health sector, and a specific and bespoke infrastructure delivery plan would be prepared for North Walsham.  A health impact statement would be sought to highlight the health impacts of the proposals. 

There was a need to strengthen some of the policy wording.  It was hoped to have engagement with the Town Council early in the new year to provide an update and map out how to move forward.  The strengthened policies would be built on in the Development Brief, which would be a Supplementary Planning Document with its own adoption process to give it a high degree of planning strength alongside the Local Plan.

A Heritage Impact Statement had been prepared, which picked up on the heritage assets in the town, historic buildings and the battlefield site.  Discussions had been held with the Battlefields Trust and Officers were in contact with other projects in the town.

The Planning Policy Team Leader stated that as part of the developer contributions and viability, there was a requirement for a health impact assessment for developments over 50 dwellings and the Council was signed up to the Health Protocol, which mean that the Primary Care Commission and NHS England were consulted so that they could comment and request contributions as development proposals came forward.  Those health bodies had already been consulted as part of the Local Plan production process and he wanted to give assurance that the health issues had been addressed, and if a specific need was identified it would be included as a policy requirement.

It was proposed by Councillor J Toye, seconded by Councillor Mrs P Grove-Jones and

RECOMMENDED unanimously

That Cabinet:

1.           Endorses the identified sites for inclusion in the Local Plan.

2.           Delegates the final policy wording to the Planning Policy Manager.

3.           Discounts all other sites at this stage.

4.           Agrees the green open space designations shown on the site assessment maps.