Planning

BRECKLAND PLANNING COMMITTEE- Decision on Hall Road/Two Fields Way Development (3PL/2017/0035/F) –31st July 2017 

In order to keep residents up to date with the above application, I have to report that despite all the objections voiced by the Parish Council and local people we were overruled by the Planning Committee who approved the application.  We will now have 40 new dwellings built on the Hall Road/Two Fields Way site. We have no right of appeal.

Having spent considerable time preparing a 3 minute speech (which is all objectors are allowed), it was all to no avail. I spoke on behalf of the PC, David Shannon on behalf of the village objectors and Gordon Bambridge (District Councillor) added a few words.

Having made our representations I was of the opinion that all was going well. However, it soon became clear that the Planning Committee were only going to treat this as an extension of only 4 dwellings in addition to the 36 which they had already approved.

Capita said that there were 5 good reasons for approving this application for 40 dwellings:

  1. An increase in affordable housing. (We could not argue with this but have no evidence of a local need.)
  2. Initial job creation during the construction phase. (Little compensation for the total disruption to occupiers of nearby properties – in our view this is not a legitimate          reason for supporting the application – we were not allowed to use disruption as an objection.)
  3. Increased expenditure in local economy. (The small economy that we have.)
  4. Would contribute substantially towards Council’s Land Supply. (Council’s problem – not Bawdeswell’s.)
  5. Would increase Council Rates revenue. (I told the Committee this was a disgraceful point to make when Capita were justifying their recommendation to approve the application).

Unfortunately, none of our objections or comments were listened to or considered.

Just to illustrate how unfair and biased the meeting was, George Freeman MP was allowed to speak for 4 minutes on behalf of another village.  We were only allowed 3 minutes to speak, at the conclusion of which, even if it was mid sentence, the Chairman would ring a bell.

When asked by a member of the audience why the MP was allowed 4 minutes the Chairman replied that it was his prerogative to change the rules……

Before you ask why George Freeman didn’t speak on our behalf, we had previously been informed that he didn’t wish to interfere in local planning matters…

I bitterly regret that this will mean upset not to mention disruption for the residents of Hall Road and Two Fields Way when the building work commences.  The blame lies fully with Breckland Council who yet again have taken no notice whatsoever of the views of those most affected – i.e the people of Bawdeswell.

I thank everyone who took the trouble to register their objections on the Breckland website and hope you know that we, the Parish Council, did everything we possibly could to prevent this application being approved.

Alas, I fear the battle was lost before it started.

Bill Cunliffe – Chairman – Bawdeswell Parish Council

 

Bawdeswell Parish Council resolved to object to the planning application for 36 houses on Two Fields Way and submitted the following response to Breckland

Further to this objection, the Parish Council resolved to object to the planning application for 44 houses on the same site. The following response was submitted to Breckland

The Parish Council remain concerned about how the Local Development Plan will affect Bawdeswell. They approved an approach to possible village development in any future Breckland Local Development Framework. A copy of the approved document is below

The Council also approved the following submission in response to the consultation on Local Development Plan Preferred directions and emerging site options

The Council submitted the following response to the Local Plan October 2016

 

Leave a Reply

Comments are moderated. This may take some time as there is no full time moderator for this site.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with a *