Inspector Roy Foster has invited the Great Norwich Development Partnership to consider an alternative plan if the NDR does not go ahead (see text below) - indeed the Inspector queried the lack of a Plan B back in May at the pre-examination. However GNDP, with their usual arrogance, do not seem to think there is a problem - Phil Kirby is quoted in the EDP today as saying ""We will be formulating a response. We are working on it and we need to answer the points that he has raised and how to deal with the strategy uncertainties. I think that everything is there in the framework, it's just a need to explain what our strategy is."
Here is the text of the Inspector's note to the GNDP:
"With regard to the NDR, the GNDP view continues to be that there is a reasonable prospect of its delivery within the timespan necessary, to begin construction at the growth triangle from 2014/15 as per page 111
of the JCS.
That may or may not be so. However, the point remains that one could not be certain of NDR delivery at the programmed adoption date of the JCS.
Consequently in order to secure soundness in relation to the “flexibility” element of the “effectiveness” determinant, we invite you to consider to what extent there could be potential for a Plan B partial alternative to the NDR.
We realise that the GNDP position is that the NDR is necessary to deliver the full growth triangle but this may be an unnecessarily high-risk approach. Development of a contingency option which enabled programmed development to commence, even if completion of the NDR was not assured, could provide a sound alternative Plan B.
It would be necessary for GNDP to consider carefully what changes would need to be made to the JCS, having discussed the matter with the Highways Agency and any other relevant parties, including local
landowners. Ideally any Plan B would provide a justified explanation of the amount of development which it could release and when. The JCS would also need to explain that once Plan B had been completed, if there
were still no prospect of the NDR being constructed, then the whole of the JCS would need to be reviewed.
It is possible that much of the detail of Plan B could be devolved to the AAP, but it would be essential to have given Plan B sufficient consideration at this stage, to know that the AAP was not being faced with an impossible brief."
An who will decide whether the GNDP continues along the same path or whether they will elect to produce a Plan B? Apparently it will rest with the four leaders of the councils involved without the matter going to Full Council and without any debate being carried out in public. Don't they ever learn?