NOT TO BE PRINTED_Draft Final TAAP comments duly

Bob King
Bob King
Croxton Parish
Council Croxton 11 Map 11.1 Disagree
Croxton Parish
Council Croxton 11 Map 11.1 Disagree
Chisman Gary Highways Agency Bedford
11 Map 11.1 Comment
Daniel Routledge Thetford 11 Map 11.1 Comment
David Wright
TY Hanner, Green
Lane 11 Map 11.1 Disagree
Diana Goucher Croxton Hall Farm Croxton 11 Map 11.1 Disagree
The development of all housing and employment areas along the
south side of the A11 bypass will inevitably create a ‘dormitory’ area
with direct access onto the A11 and encourage movements outward Disagree. The whole document is pulling towards achieving a
to Norwich, Cambridge, and London etc. for employment, and inward high level of self containment as possible - employment land
movement from these areas by people seeking new more attractively provision, services, town centre regeneration, transport links,
priced housing.
education. No further action.
Although it is appreciated that the stone curlews need to be
protected we feel the application in this case is flawed. We
understand in order to facilitate the A11 dualling project some
nesting stone curlews are to be ‘sensitively relocated’. If this is the
case then why can this solution not be employed to the TAAP to
release land which will allow better distribution of some development
to the east and southeast of Thetford around the Town Centre
promoting it as the hub of Thetford rather than creating a distorted
and separated development of the town.
The approach taken as part of the A11 dualling is because the
dualling cannot go anywhere else and is of over riding public
interest. The housing can go somewhere else and is not of over
riding public interest. No further action.
Whilst it is recognised that detailed development layouts may not yet
be fully determined, Map 11.1 (p.37) indicates that proposed
employment land will be divided into five individual parcels, two of
which are clustered around the A11 Croxton Road junction and two
around the A11 Norwich Road junction (the remaining one adjoining
the existing Fison Way Industrial Estate). The approach of dividing
the total SUE employment land provision into several parcels spread
across the SUE is considered reasonable, as this could potentially
maximise accessibility by future residents on foot/cycle. Further
clarification is required regarding how these employment clusters will
be connected to the local road network. The type of employment
eventually provided may generate traffic that is not compatible with
the nearby residential areas and it may be necessary to separate
incompatible traffic, for example, HGVs and private cars.
If, to avoid this, direct linkages were to be provided onto Croxton
Road and Norwich Road, consideration will need to be given to the
distance between any new development access and the A11 and the
interaction of traffic movements and junctions. The Highways Agency
will need reassurance that additional vehicle accesses do not cause
an adverse knock-on effect on the A11. The employment areas
indicated adjacent to the A11 Croxton Road Interchange suggests Connection to the local road network is a matter of detailed
that employment land use is within the interchange. It should be planning and can be discussed through the Planning application
noted that direct access to the A11 slip roads will not be permitted. It process including the PPA. Please note however that for the
is recognised that Map 11.1 is not a detailed masterplan and may be employment allocation adjoining the Fison Way Industrial Estate, Raise at Transport PPA meeting.
subject to revision.
it is specified that traffic will access this site through Wyatt Way. No further action for the TAAP.
My young daughter's bed is about 6ft from the farm track next to our
house so it should not be used for cars. Also suggest some kind of
deterrent for motorbikes. Heathlands Drive is mainly bungalows. We
do not want to be overlooked by tall houses so suggest new
bungalows with similar density are built in the next field. This would
allow us to keep our privacy and make the area look balanced. Also,
employment area to be built to the rear of my house should be low
rise offices to keep noise pollution to a minimum. Industrial units
keep near main road. Core Strategy has Policy DC1 that seeks to protect amenity.
Taking of agricultural land for housing is unsustainable and should be
avoided at all cost.
Far too many houses on north side of town at Thetford. There
seems to be discontent among residents in Thetford, Attleborough
and Wymondham. Many people are not bothering to reply because
they feel whatever they say to anyone makes no difference. The
decisions have already been made by well meaning local politicians.
Pass on comments to Landowners
as part of PPA process. No further
action for the TAAP.
We recognise that growth in Thetford will result in loss of
agricultural land, however we have got to balance the delivery of
homes and jobs. The land is also towards the lower end of
grades for agricultural land. No further action.
Noted. Growth strategy already determined through Core
Strategy. The TAAP is more about the detail of how and when.
Specific decisions on locations of growth taken which are a
reflection of environmental and technical evidence.
Emphasise link between TAAP and
Core Strategy.