RF 75

Having already drawn your attention to this document in a previous post we would now like to invite you to read what the Inspector wrote in his note to the Greater Norwich Development Partnership.

"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."

GNDP did indeed hold a meeting with the Highways Agency on the 30th November in response to the Inspector's suggestion - the attendees were the following:

Eric Cooper, Highways Agency
Mike Derbyshire, Savills
Neil Murphy and Bruce McVean, Beyond Green (formerly Blue Living)
Paul Clarke, Ray Houghton and John Long, Bidwells
Graham Tuddenham, United Business and Leisure
Jonathan Cage, Create Consulting (Barton Willmore)
Paul Knowles, Building Partnerships
Peter Wilkinson, Landmark Planning for Lothbury Property Trust

Sandra Eastaugh
Phil Morris
Roger Burroughs
Richard Doleman
Mike Burrell
Tim Horsepole
David Allfrey
Amy Baxter
Helen Lambert
Where was NNTAG, where were other relevant parties such as the Green Party, CPRE, SNUB? Uninvited but subsequently asked to meet GNDP so that GNDP could go through their response to the Inspector. Why? The paper had already been submitted so there was no opportunity to comment or add anything. 

After there were raised eyebrows about the way GNDP preferred to conduct its meetings behind closed doors one might have thought that here was an opportunity for them to appear open and responsive.... sadly no, they responded in typical GNDP cavalier manner.


  1. Thorpe End Resident8 December 2010 at 20:45

    Same old GNDP with their bogus consultations. Am hoping tomorrow at the Eip is damning for them. They do not deserve to be given the chances to make good their terrible strategy. Amateurs at best, a disgrace at worst.

  2. This stinks. Savills represent Thorpe and Felthorpe Trust, also known as the Broadland Land Group, also known as Broadland Land Trust, which has links with Blue Living (also known as Beyond Green)and Paul Knowles (Building Partnerships) seems to have links with the first three names on the list as he was at most of the Charrette sessions and public meetings, speaking up for the Thorpe woods development concept.

    SNUB, CPRE and the greens should have had a selection of alternative names too - this may have increased their chances of being included in the meetings!

  3. So here we are; the extra day has come and gone, we have more questions and now the prospect of another round of consultations.
    The idea was that there might be a way to produce an alternative which would justify the building of some element of housing under a Plan B. However Mike Burrell of the GNDP following discussion announced that they could not accept a proposal from Barton Willmore because that would be a different Strategy. They believe that the present JCS is sound and they do not want to change it.
    So no Plan B after all - only a reworked Plan A.

  4. I think this final twist is crazy. It just shows the disjointed thinking about this concentrated development in the Growth Triangle.
    The GNDP now say that half the houses can be built without any infrastructure. That is 1800 already committed and a further 1600 yet to be given planning permission. What happened to no infrastructure - no development

  5. So much for Democracy. This Quango will never change as they have too much to hide.

  6. As a membner of the public who attended the JCS Inspectors hearing recently can I congratulate SNUB and the CPRE as well as Councillors Boswell and Townley for representing the views of our Parish Councils and the local residents so well. The arrogance of the GNDP delegation was frightening and who is paying for their expensive Barrister ? I bet we are.....

  7. Thank goodness that Mr Lanyon reminded the Inspector at the enquiry that 3,200 local residents had signed a petition against the GNDP plans to destroy our countryside. If only SNUB had the financial resources and staff to match the GNDP Quango I am sure they would have over 6,000 signatures.

  8. Is it true that a staff member at BRoadland District Council has just had a jolly to the USA?

  9. I trust that the inspectors have had a copy of this posting,if they haven't may I suggest one should be sent asap. It might just show them how"up against it" we have been with regard to lack of transparency etc. Worth a shot, anyway.!!

  10. How many councillors have bothered to turn up at this hearing to see what has been done in their name? They must bear responsibility for this waste of money.
    The latest idea by the government - a Localism Bill, which will give huge power to these people who can't even be bothered to read the papers.