view - Breckland Council

number of development constraints associated with the site such as a proposed educational use, where
render the site unavailable for retail development. Other constraints identified include the impact on the
river setting, the need to replace lost car parking spaces, archaeology and flood risk issues. It is neither
a genuinely suitable nor available alternative site.
6.16 Site 4 Riverside Walk, Thetford: The site is too small (only 0.9ha) to accommodate the proposed
development. The majority of the site also remains in active retail and commercial use and therefore is
not currently available. It is unlikely to become available until the medium or long-term. The site is
neither genuinely available or suitable for the application proposals or a flexible format of them.
6.17 Site 5 Tanner Street Car Park. At approximately 0.2ha this site is too small to accommodate the
proposed development or a flexible format of it. The Breckland Retail and Town Centre Study 2010
acknowledges that comprehensive redevelopment would only deliver about 500m² of floorspace (in a
single unit). The redevelopment of the site would also result in the loss of a number of car parking
spaces which in themselves are seen to form an important function in terms of the Town Centre’s overall
attractiveness to shoppers. The site is not, therefore, a suitable alternative to the application site.
6.18 Site 6 Thetford Retail Park. Although there is one vacant unit (of only 428m²) on the site, the
remainder of floorspace is already in quasi-retail use and is not available for redevelopment. Even if the
site were available, it is too small to accommodate the proposed retail floorspace with car parking even
allowing for a reasonable level of flexibility. The site is therefore both unsuitable and unavailable for the
development. Furthermore, the site is in an out of centre location and, as such, is no more sequentially
preferable than the application site.
iii. Sequential Assessment Conclusions
6.19 In accordance with PPS4, we have undertaken a thorough assessment of all vacant and potential
development sites within Thetford Town Centre that are capable of accommodating the application
proposals or a flexible interpretation of them. This assessment has clearly demonstrated that there are
no suitable, available or viable sites to which the application proposals could otherwise locate.
6.20 The absence of any sequentially preferable sites has been confirmed by virtue of the Lidl consent of
June 2011; here Officer’s concluded that ‘there were also overriding constraints with regard to the six
sites identified in Appendix 6 of the NLP report. These constraints included inadequate size of the site,
availability, existence of Listed Buildings and current occupation.’ There has been no change in
circumstance since that time. Further, the work undertaken by RPS in respect of the sequential
assessment was submitted to Nick Moys, Principal Planner (Major Projects) at the pre-application stage.
In an email, dated 19 th October 2011, Mr Moys states that ‘as requested, I have considered the
submitted assessments of alternative sequential sites and can confirm that I would not wish to take
issue with your conclusions on their suitability/availability. I am not aware of any other sequentially
preferable sites that should be considered at the present time.’ The first ‘gateway test’ of PPS4 is,
therefore, satisfied.
Former Tulip Factory Site, London Road/Caxton Way, Thetford Page 28
Retail & Planning Statement, February 2012