NOT TO BE PRINTED_Draft Final TAAP comments duly

Mr Tom Gilbert-
Wooldridge English Heritage Cambridge 25 Policy TH 37 Agree
We support Policy TH37, which aims to safeguard important
archaeology in the remainder of the TAAP boundary (including the
urban extension site). There appears to be a typographical error in
the policy wording, which refers to "the requirements of Policy TH37",
when it should read "Policy TH36". The same error appears to occur
in Paragraph 25.5. Noted. Amend policy as per rep.
Mrs Patricia Poel Thetford 25 Policy TH 37 Comment Recorded and published. Supporting text refers to this. No further action.
Mr Ed Chambers
Thetford Town
Council Norfolk 26 Policy TH 38 Agree Welcomed Support noted. No further action.
Mr Paul Leeming Carter Jonas Harrogate 26 Policy TH 38 Comment
We would suggest that Section 26 along with the associated Policy
TH38 Sustainable Construction Standards for Non-Residential
Development could be merged with Policy TH32 and TH16 around
sustainable construction techniques and standards. Presumably the
standards are applicable within the SUE.
Disagree. BREEAM standards are about more than just energy
and carbon. Policies that are TAAP wide equally apply to the
Urban Extension. No further action.
Mr Stuart Wilson Thetford Society Thetford 26 Policy TH 38 Agree Support noted. No further action.
Mr Stuart Wilson Thetford 26 Policy TH 38 Agree Support noted. No further action.
Mrs Patricia Poel Thetford 26 Policy TH 38 Agree Support noted. No further action.
Mr Anthony
Poulter
Brettenham and
Kilverstone Parish
Council
Thetford Town
Thetford 28 Policy TH 39 Comment
Which council? Surely we need a better plan for redevelopment of
existing residential areas, particularly as a lot of existing provision is
very dated.
Breckland Council are the Local Planning Authority. The policy
seeks to guide the subsequent detailed plans. No further action.
Mr Ed Chambers Council Norfolk 28 Policy TH 39 Agree Approved, especially point (c)
There appears to be a general lack of detail regarding the nature of
the proposals for the existing residential areas and presume that this
may be addressed by the next iteration of the document. Further w e
would suggest that the proposals to remodel the existing residential
areas should also consider the future role of some of the ancillary
uses for example the smaller/local centres and shopping parades
Support noted. No further action.
where these may contribute to, for example, reducing the need to The policy seeks to guide the subsequent detailed plans. Agree
Mr Paul Leeming Carter Jonas Harrogate 28 Policy TH 39 Comment travel.
with other comment. Refresh policy as per rep.
Mr Stuart Wilson Thetford Society Thetford 28 Policy TH 39 Comment
Mr Stuart Wilson Thetford 28 Policy TH 39 Comment
Mr Tim Lovejoy By email 28 Policy TH 39 Comment
Infilling is a contentious issue. Planning permission was granted for a
certain density of development which, hopefully, provides a pleasant
living environment - this should not be compromised. Development
of gardens and open space amenity land within residential
developments should be avoided. We would encourage more and
varied play equipment but question maintenance responsibilities in
years to come.
Infilling is a contentious issue. Planning permission was granted for
a certain density of development which, hopefully, provides a
pleasant living environment - this should not be compromised.
Development of gardens and open space amenity land within
residential developments should be avoided. I would hope that more
and varied play equipment be provided but question maintenance
responsibilities in years to come.
Comment noted. There is a scale of interventions from minor
aesthetics to schemes involving 10's of dwellings. The capacity
for further development within the built up area of Thetford is
relatively limited however the Council needs to be mindful that
small to medium scale sites do come forward from time to time.
Additionally, Flagship Housing have embarked on a programme
of investment in the existing estates and this has resulted in a
number of schemes ranging from sites of 3 houses on former
garage sites through to more comprehensive redevelopments of
60+ homes. The Policy does not seek to give specific detail of
schemes, rather guide such schemes in recognition that further
development is likely. Core Strategy DC1 on Amenity and DC16
on design would be of relevance to future plans. Pass on comments to Housing team.
Comment noted. There is a scale of interventions from minor
aesthetics to schemes involving 10's of dwellings. The capacity
for further development within the built up area of Thetford is
relatively limited however the Council needs to be mindful that
small to medium scale sites do come forward from time to time.
Additionally, Flagship Housing have embarked on a programme
of investment in the existing estates and this has resulted in a
number of schemes ranging from sites of 3 houses on former
garage sites through to more comprehensive redevelopments of
60+ homes. The Policy does not seek to give specific detail of
schemes, rather guide such schemes in recognition that further
development is likely. Core Strategy DC1 on Amenity and DC16
on design would be of relevance to future plans. Pass on comments to Housing team.
TH39 talks about a net increase in play equipment as we have done
a lot of work on this already in the Barnham Action Group, how do we
access the funds for such developments? No funds identified at present. Commitments paper issue.