Campaigners plan protest ahead of Norwich Northern Distributor Road meeting

Members of the public study plans for the NDR. Picture: Denise Bradley. Members of the public study plans for the NDR. Picture: Denise Bradley.

Monday, June 2, 2014
6:30 AM

Campaigners against the proposed Norwich Northern Distributor Road will hold a protest today, as a planning inspector sets out how an inquiry into the £148.5m scheme will be conducted.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Norfolk County Council wants to build the 19.5km dual carriageway road from the A47 at Postwick in the east of the city to the A1067 Fakenham Road to the northwest.

The government has agreed to contribute £86.5m towards the cost and has said the scheme is of “national significance”, which has fast-tracked it through the planning system.

That means Planning Inspector Elizabeth Hill will weigh up evidence before making a recommendation on whether to grant a development consent order.

Today, at Blackfriars Hall in St Andrew’s Street in Norwich, Mrs Hill will hold a preliminary hearing ahead of her deliberations.

The purpose of the meeting is only to set out how the application will be examined and will not get into the arguments in favour or against the road.

But campaigners against the road are planning to protest outside the venue from 12.30pm. Representatives from Friends of the Earth, the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), Stop Norfolk Urbanisation (SNUB) and the Green Party are set to be among those demonstrating.

Katy Jones, CPRE Norfolk branch manager, said; “The NDR will inevitably lead to infill development to the north of the city, causing an increase in congestion and light pollution and a decrease in the quality of life for the people of Norwich and beyond.

“It is an ill-conceived road, which is neither needed or wanted, and the consultation process which has enabled it to get this far leaves a lot to be desired”.

Andrew Boswell, county council and leader of the Green Party on Norwich City Council said; “I will be challenging the planning inspector today as to why carbon dioxide emissions and climate change have been omitted from the principal issues for the hearing.

“Climate change is one of the most important issues facing mankind and we owe it to future generations to take it very seriously. This road will increase traffic and emissions and is very damaging to the environment.”

Norfolk County Council, however, says the road will bring a huge economic boost and connected improvements, such as a rapid bus transit in Norwich.

They say it can tackle the “infrastructure deficit” which has holding the county back when it comes to its potential to be an outstanding place to live, work and do business.

The county council says that is why it has such wide support from other authorities, including Norwich City Council, Broadland, North Norfolk and South Norfolk district councils and Great Yarmouth Borough Council.

The council also points to support from ainfluential organisations such as New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership, tourism groups, individual businesses, Norfolk Chamber of Commerce and Norwich Business Improvement District.

• What’s your view on the NDR? Write, giving full contact details, to Letters Editor, Prospect House, Rouen Road, Norwich NR1 1RE.

31 comments

  • Anybody who thinks that building this road wont necessarily lead to more cars being bought needs to go and sit down with a nice cup of tea and get over themselves. Since this is a road to nowhere and has nothing to do with the A47 its only reason for existence is the vast housing estates that will be built around it, turning North East Norwich into a dole ghetto of nasty little boxes. And if you think that thousands of people (with, incidentally, no jobs to go to) in those boxes wont have motorised boxes parked outside you need to put two teabags in that cup. I have heard absolutely zero about the jobs that will be in existence to provide these tens of thousands of people who will be moving in from heaven knows where with a way of earning a living. There are no jobs. Those houses will be largely filled with people who are not working. Unless something can prove otherwise. And I do mean prove. No claptrap about air fairy jobs that will suddenly appear from nowhere.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    alecto

    Thursday, June 5, 2014

  • I wish all those who think the NDR is good thing would support their views with facts on which to base their assertions. Making abusive remarks and unsubstantiated claims does nothing to advance their cause. Here are some facts, if you don't believe me contact the transport officer at NCC. Incidentally I live on one of the radial roads into Norwich and am only too well aware of horrendous traffic peak time traffic congestion. 1. NCC, Norwich City, Broadland and South Norfolk Councils years ago produced a plan called the Joined Core Strategy, the NDR is part of that plan. The JCS calls 37000 new houses to be built around Norwich these would generate about 260,000 new traffic movements a day. It is difficult to see how the JCS could fail NOT to increase traffic congestion almost everywhere, in and around the city. . 2. The NDR is essentially a service road for new developments North and East of Norwich forming part of the JCS with a minimum of about 14000 new houses and generating nearly new additional 100,000 traffic movements a day in that area. 3. Why are so many houses needed? NCC say the driving force for so many houses is inward migration mainly from Europe. 4. Hundreds of acres of farmland will be concreted over and lost to production. 5. If the number of houses could be substantially reduced, future traffic congestion would be reduced and there would be no need for a road the size of the NDR . 6. Studies made of recent Government population projections made by CPRE indicate that the housing target in JCS could be reduced by more than 11,000. These figures were agreed by the Greater Norwich Development Partnership and weakens further the argument for the NDR. The opponents of the NDR want a sustainable economy and are not trying to stop all development but stop the virtually untrammeled development plans that are a gravy-train for big developers. What the opponents of the NDR are trying to do is stop the building of the NDR because it is linked to massive housing traffic-congestion creating developments and are calling for plans for such developments to be substantially reduced and cheaper alternatives put in place. People currently supporting the NDR should join with opponents to campaign against the NDR if they really want to stop traffic levels reaching the heights that building it will inevitably cause.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    GMARTIN

    Tuesday, June 3, 2014

  • How can the Planning Inspector 'weigh up evidence before making a recommendation on whether to grant a development consent order' when according to her on look East last night, only the merits will be examined? Sounds to me like a rather financially wasteful rubber stamping exercise.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Honest John

    Tuesday, June 3, 2014

  • Perhaps we should return to the days of the horse and cart, I can remember my grandfather traveling to Dereham market in his, alright if you have all day to do your shopping!. Where is the evidence that people will go out and buy more cars just because there is a new piece of road. If the road does fill up it will be because people need it to travel to work or to get to somewhere for a purpose. The days of just driving for the sake of it are long gone.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    mortfish

    Tuesday, June 3, 2014

  • "the people who do want it" - who are they? How do you count them? If NCC admit tht 80% of the survey respondents are against or unsure, are you saying that everyone who didn't respond is for it? Or could it be that the majority of the population are so indolent that they can't be bothered to do anything except moan about something they COULD have done, if they'd gotten up to be counted? Where's the evidence that most of the vehicles on the radial routes will switch to the NDR once it's built? Is it more likely that they're people trying to get in or out of Norwich rather than around, so the NDR will make very little difference to the congestion in the city? Being incomplete, it'll never fulfill it's supposed aim and will be an extremely expensive white elephant which, on top of the incinerator fiasco, will cause massive cutbacks in the council budget when it overruns on cost (look at any major road development in the last 20 years and show me which ones DIDN'T cost far more than the original estimates).

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, June 3, 2014

  • So there are 3640 signatures on a piece of paper from people who do not want it. That is a very small minority if you consider the population of Norfolk is getting close to 1 million and the people who do want this road. it is called progress and development. This road is needed, but it needs to be a complete road. Road network in Norfolk is abysmal and this will certainly help with transport links and business developments.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Mr T

    Tuesday, June 3, 2014

  • Well I was not able to make the meeting today as I was out of the county on business. However I was heartened by the turnout that I saw on TV as rarely both local ITV and BBC covered the event. I wonder if this was due to the Private Eye piece last week? Anyway it was an excellent show of solidarity from those parishes impacted by the proposed road. By the way KeithS I live in Salhouse where do you live? By the way Parked8 where is the evidence that people want it? I have 3,640 signatures on a petition that says people don't want this and the local Parish Councils democratically represent thousands of local people who don't want this road. We have asked and asked for evidence that people want this but NCC have never been able to provide the evidence. By the way Bruce87 the roads around Norwich will be even worse as the traffic studies conducted by NCC have shown an increase in the impacted arterial roads. We are not a minority as demonstrated on several occasions. Elected Parish Councils representing thousands of local residents are against this road to nowhere. By the way Footyboy16 I also, as well as working full time, voluntary chair a national charity combating isolation among older people and run SNUB. I'm perfectly happy with my life so I don't need to go and get one as you so elegantly put it. Oh I also raised thousands of pounds for Whizz Kids nationally and Nelsons Journey locally. What have you done with your life? Funny how all of the people for the NDR hide behind made up funny names yet those against it are quite happy to stand up and be counted with their names. I'm happy to debate this with anyone who wants to call me on 07796050108 or email me on sp.heard@btinternet.co.uk. Put up or shut up seems appropriate here.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    SNUB

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • All these protesters have got nothing else better to do, They are all treehugging troublemakers. who just protest for the sake of it. you only had to watch the local ITV News to see protesters from Colney and the NDR is going no where Colney. GET A LIFE you sad people. do something useful...

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Footyboy16

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Many opponents of the NDR are neither treehuggers nor hippies but local residents who have the taken the trouble to examine the NCC's proposals for an NDR . In 2013 NCC consulted residents and business, at the cost to taxpayers of nearly £170,000 , on their proposals for the NDR and stated that the response rate was good. The results showed nearly 80% opposed or had serious reservations. All the details are on the NCC's NDR website. NCC propose some 13,000,new houses North and East of Norwich and have stated the driving force for the number of houses will be inward migration and from EU. The government has stated that is trying to reduce the number such economic migrants in which case the number of houses proposed around the area could greatly reduced and this argument for a hugely expensive NDR made largely invalid. If the the number of houses envisaged by NCC are build and NDR goes ahead traffic on all radial roads in and out of Norwich will greatly increase. NCC is wasting our money; as an example, NCC is supporting the Postwick Hub scheme costing £21 million which even developers supported an alternative scheme costing only £2 million. The need for an NDR needs to be reexamined costs reduced to save the savage cuts being made to social services!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    GMARTIN

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Can we stop using climate change and global warming as the poster child for the environment! It's wrong! It's devisive and just creating arguments that are slowing progress down. Instead we need to just simplify and go back to basics....dealing with POLLUTION! We can all see a poisoned lake, we can see smog and toxic waste, plastics floating in the sea. No one can argue that doesn't exist. So if we concentrate on cleaning all that up, chances are we'll also tackle the possible causes of global warming or climate change, if such a thing exists. Either way we are currently just wasting time arguing.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Resident Smith

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Norwich needs the NDR and also the people, you only have to look at the conjestion on all the main routes leading into the City from around 07.30am onwards, the traffic is at a standstill and the traffic lights change to quickly. build the NDR and you will see the conjestion decrease, I bet these tree huggers sit in the queues every morning moaning about how late they are for work, but when it comes to building the NDR they moan again. it takes longer to drive from Norwich North to Norwich South than it does to drive from Trowse to Lowestoft.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Footyboy16

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Surely the Long Stratton bypass has more national significance and the loss of a green corridor also has national significance. The NDR is simply a road built to get the migrant workers from their new tacky boxes in the North-East Growth Triangle into Postwick Hub. This is far more profitable to the county council than diversifying what the county is good at and allowing the people of the east-midlands to go to work in their own cities and towns. How can building a road which does not take traffic out of the city relieve congestion in the city, other than by using back handers from the developers to pay for red tape to drive the economy into the Postwick Hub?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    George Ezekial

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • The roads system in and around Norwich is currently not fit for purpose. Get on and build the NDR as soon as possible, together with any further road improvements, and stop pandering to the minorities who only shout the loudest.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Bruce87

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • I'd be interested to see the raw data that supports the idea that most of the traffic is transitional - i.e. it's only entering Norwich to get to the other side. For example, coming from the A11 and heading to Cromer. Given what I see in the mornings and evenings, most of the traffic appears to be commuting and shopping - destinations INSIDE Norwich. The NDR would not relieve this sort of traffic congestion, only shift it to another part of the city. We'd end up with THREE ring roads in successive circles (though none of them make complete circles). The road is an excuse for growth and it's about time that the council admitted so.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Norfolk John, I post under my real name whilst you are just that, any ol' Norfolk John. But try it for yourself mate go down the crypt at about 11.30 this morning and see whether you will get in without an invitation. fact is that NCC is pre empting the meeting by givin g their reaction to it before it has happened. News management at its worst and on behalf of large landowners in Norfolk, Thanks for that reminder,I.T stinks.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Archant are one of the backers of the NDR and Postwick Hub. Richard Jewson, former Archant chairman (1996 - 2014) was also chairman of Savills (1994 - 2004) which promoted in the 1990s an urban extension to north-east Norwich in conjunction with a northern relief road which has now become the North-East Growth Triangle of 10,000 dwellings alongside a NDR. Savills are the land agents for other major development close to line of the NDRPostwick Hub. Mr Jewson was also a leading founder member of Shaping Norfolk's Future which was formed in 1997 and ran until 2011. SNF promoted the NDR along with A11 dualling, GY Outer Habour, A47 dualling and Norwich Airport expansion. John Fry, former Archant chief executive (2002 - 2007) ,was chair of SNF from 2006 - 2008. Chris Starkie, Archant Business Editor (2003 - 2008) worked as chief executive of SNF from 2008 - 2011. He transferred to New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership in 2011. He is now managing director of New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership which is promoting the NDR. Archant managing director Johnny Hustler wrote on behalf of Archant supporting Postwick Hub at the public inquiry in summer 2013. It will be interesting to see if this is posted by Archant.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    I.T. Stinks

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Here we go again - Ingo Whateverhisnameis spouting all his make believe conspiracy theories. This road is vital for the free movement of traffic and to stop transiting traffic from having to go through the city. Yes – it would be preferable for it to connect to the A47 at both ends and yes, it would be better if it was roundabout free but anything is better than what we have at the moment.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Norfolk John

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • The gentleman without the hat looks very concerned and rightfully so! His expression alone says it all.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Whiley Boy

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • This road is just an excuse to build loads and loads of nasty little boxy houses so wealthy landlords from outside Norfolk can buy them and let them out to the people who will not be able to buy them because they wont have jobs. It will be a benefits ghetto but they don't care because everyone who had a hand in this will be making money and Norfolk will be the worse for it. As for the County Council. Have you seen the article in Private Eye. Words fail me. Bring on the police to investigate this behaviour. Canary Boy is right. Once you saw the way they behaved over the incinerator you would never trust one single member of NCC ever again.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    alecto

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • I would certainly believe that non of the Councillors pushing this through live near the proposed NDR. Where is our MP, Lord Lucan, who at the last election promised the electorate that he would object to a three quarter route! .....the silence is deafening.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Marigold

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • councillors plan secret media meeting by invitation only before the beginning of the first day of the inquiry. Why is it secret and why has private eye, a publiocation that has reported more truth about NCC than the EDP, not been invited. Are NCC trying to steer the media coverage before the first meeting has happened?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • IMHO it needs to be A47 to A47 there needs to be LESS slip roads on and off the NDR. Also the other Major issue would be Dueling the little bit of A47 that is left at North Burlingham junction. Then Maybe one day the Acle Straight can also be dueled.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    dpc

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • KeithS. You point out people who opposed the incinerator also oppose the road to nowhere as if they object to any development. The reason for this is simple once you become aware of mal..administration, incom.petence, cor.rupt planning consultation and a propensity to waste massive amounts of public money all of which NCC are gui.lty of, your eyes are opened and you scrutinize everything the authority do. This planning proposal is being manip.ulated just as the incinerator was it is not of national significance at all that is utter rot. The road goes nowhere it will just provide access to new housing development, if it had been a northern bypass it would have my backing but it is not and will only move congestion problems from a to b. This missing representations discovered so far, as with the incinerator inquiry more are likely to be discovered during the inspectors examination, is what ncc do if someone makes a representation which on planning grounds has content that could stop, delay or attract expensive planning conditions which would have to be complied with. Once a person becomes aware, inevitably when a development that will affect them, they watch everything ncc do. Not good for the dict.ators but unfortunately until ncc becomes an efficient, trusted, keeper of the public purse more and more people will oppose their pet projects.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Well said parked8, I could not agree more - JUST GET ON AND BUILD IT!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Norfolk John

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • "....tree hugging hippies...". Hurrah ! The first clapped out cliché of the day.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Im sick and tiered of these tree hugging hippies, they say the people dont want this they are lying i am one of these people and i want it.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    parked8

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Why does the A47 get mentioned in the same breath as the NDR? The Acle straight really is a road to nowhere! Build the road and don't allow more housing (the southern bypass has not been filled up with houses). The only thing the protests have right is that it should connect to the A47 both ends. I'd like to know where the main protesters live, no where near the NDR is my guess, they protested against Tesco in Sherringham (or anywhere else) and the incinerator.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    KeithS

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • Build the Roads and they will come !!...More Roads = More Cars !

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Albert Cooper

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • And our money is already being spent on the 'Postwick Hub' with accompanying delays, when the Distributor road -going nowhere - is not yet approved. Neither is needed. Use the money on something sensible - like the A47

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Patrick

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • @mjc - spot on. Without a connection to the A47 west, this is a road to nowhere and a complete waste of money.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Norfolk and Good

    Monday, June 2, 2014

  • What is NEEDED is a northern BYPASS......NOT this development road........connect the A1067 to the A47 to complete the circle...then it might make sense. But as for "national significance" status?!!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    mjc

    Monday, June 2, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Homes24
Jobs24
Drive24
LocalSearch24
MyDate24
MyPhotos24
FamilyNotices24
Weddingsite

loading...

Classifieds, browse or search them online now

The Canary magazine
Order your copy of The Canary magazine

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT