South Norfolk council leader John Fuller.
Planning inspector gives green light for new homes in Tud river valley in Costessey, overturning decision by South Norfolk Council
Tom Bristow
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
12:48 PM
A housing estate is set to be built in a river valley, after a planning inspector overturned a council’s decision to reject the development.
The 62 homes will be built off Townhouse Road in Costessey, signalling a blow for hundreds of people who campaigned against the development and South Norfolk Council, which rejected the initial application.
Following a hearing in July, planning inspector Christina Downes ruled on Friday that a lack of a five-year land supply for housing in the area covered by the Greater Norwich Development Partnership (GNDP) – Norwich, Broadland and South Norfolk – meant the application should not have been dismissed.
Applicants Martin Green and Norwich Consolidated Charities are now expected to find a developer for the land.
Councillor Tim East, who opposed the plans, said: “So much for localism and the community involvement in local plan making – is this just empty government rhetoric?”
But he described the decision as a “pyrrhic victory” for campaigners, as the inspector agreed that the development would have an impact on the landscape of the Tud river valley.
Mrs Downes stated in the report: “The Tud valley landscape is highly valued by the local community and the landscape and visual impacts would be significant and harmful.”
But she ruled: “It seems inevitable that in order to address housing shortfalls greenfield land outside of existing settlement boundaries will need to used.
“I have come to the conclusion that the proposal does, on balance, represent sustainable development.
“The adverse impacts of granting planning permission in this case would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits that would be gained.”
Mr East added: “It is quite a perverse report which agrees with much of our contention that the refusal should be upheld, but in the end we were always going to be up against fighting off the five-year land supply argument.”
The leader of South Norfolk Council, John Fuller, described the decision as “frustrating”. He said: “Under-deliverance in neighbouring authorities has aggravated the situation in South Norfolk.
“We have been keeping up our housing supply locally.”
Mr Fuller added that the decision was against the “spirit of localism”.
“The five-year land supply has become a racket that has prevented houses being built,” he said. “Developers are getting planning permission and then claiming they cannot build them.
“How, when there are 10,000 homes waiting to be built, can there not be a five-year land supply?”
As reported in January, the GNDP area has planning permission for 9,870 homes. Yesterday, the council launched its final round of consultation on its local plan, which earmarks land for development, and the Townhouse Road site was not included.
Other News Articles
- Norfolk is... wonderful beaches which have a special place in our hearts
- Hethersett Old Hall School celebrates 75th anniversary
- Council to draw up a Plan B in case Norfolk incinerator contract is axed
- Councillors to make decision on 900 new homes for Thorpe St Andrew
- A feline star is born after the purrfect cat takes her close-up
- Family’s tribute to Sprowston motorcyclist killed in A47 crash
- Community editors of the EDP describe what Norfolk is... to their area
- Plight of Beccles soldier raised in parliament
- Heartbreak after £7,000 worth of plants are stolen
- Cash, jewellery, three phones and laptop stolen in New Costessey burglary
ADVERTISEMENT
9 comments
Well, if he didn't study Latin at school, he is following in the footsteps of Mucius Scaevola. Look that one up !!
Report this comment
crunchy dick
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Tim East was a PE teacher at my old "alma mata".
Report this comment
bookworm
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
i agree with first poster.--there are at least 2 stories every day about excessive and unwanted building of tiny,ugly houses. i think all politicians and councils are in favour of it. what about a reality check and stop it before Norfolk is ruined for ever.the average person has no say in the matter.sheer greed from developers.been going on for last decade.
Report this comment
bookworm
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Why should he have had to have studied Latin at school? Many people continue learning long after leaving school and, in any case, the term 'pyrrhic victory' is commonly used. It is the type of expression that I would take the trouble to look up if I had not heard it before.
Report this comment
galjanie overseas
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Hands up those who know what a "pyrrhic victory" is ? Mr East must be an educated man who did Latin at school.
Report this comment
crunchy dick
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Developers, aided and abetted by this Government, and that previously, will be coining it. There is no shortage of land in their "land banks" and, as we all know, land will not decrease in value-quite the opposite. So the developers, builders and speculators can sit there (sobbing crocodile tears over laying off workmen) until they can make a killing with the building. They are safe in the knowledge that, with pliable Planning Inspectors and a Government that is about as far from "Localism" as can be, they will always get permission for pretty much whatever they want. Goodbye, England.
Report this comment
T Doff
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
That's wierd...first go at comment disappears into the ether, so I write it again and then they both appear...
Report this comment
beeston bump
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Welcome to the new world of 'reformed' planning and so called 'sustainable development' under this current government. Does anyone still think localism really does give power to local communities? It's just a smokescreen. The pereived need for ever more development and the requirement for a rolling 5 year land supply (until when? when all the land has been built on?) trumps all other considerations. To call it sustainable is an abuse of the definition. Even the inspector conceded the proposal is environmentally damaging but the the system is now weighted in favour of the development and the mantra of 'growth at all costs' outweighs everything else. Short termism at it's worst.
Report this comment
beeston bump
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Welcome to the new world of planning and so called 'sustainable development' under this current government. You think local communities have any power at all? It's just a smokescreen. The perceived need for development, growth at all costs and the requirement to provide a continuous 5 year land supply (until when? when all the land has been built on?) trumps all other considerations. Once that countryside is gone, it's gone. Even the inspector conceded the proposal is environmentally damaging but still the 'needs' of the developer outweighed that. Short termism at it's worst.
Report this comment
beeston bump
Tuesday, September 4, 2012