I made a commitment to myself at the beginning of the year to write to my local MP, Keith Simpson, concerning issues that I feel strongly about. I figure you can’t complain if you’re not willing to do something about it, and also it’s going to help me keep sane in a world that increasingly makes less and less sense.
I may still write to him about being paid to cycle to work and how the Government could contribute to this, but I need to do some more work on that; they already indirectly contribute via things like cycle to work schemes, I’m just not sure they work very well. In the meantime I’ve sent the below, and am looking forward to seeing what he has to say.
Dear Rt Hon Keith Simpson MP,
I hope this email finds you well, and like me looking forward to it getting a little more spring-like soon. It was good to see you in the local press recently alongside the announcement that the last bit of the NDR will be opening soon.
I am writing to you concerning the increasing number of housing developments that are being planned around Norwich, which are starting to eat up more and more green field sites. I understand there is a housing demand, however I want to make sure this demand is being satisfied in a well conceived and sustainable fashion, without too much impact on the environment and our beautiful countryside, something I’m sure you can agree with.
To let you know a little about myself. I moved to Salhouse just over a year ago, and am loving living in the countryside after being in Norwich since I moved from the South East to go to UEA in 1993. I now work for Virgin Money as a Project Manager.
I recently read an article in the EDP (http://www.edp24.co.uk/edp-property/councillors-approve-380-homes-sprowston-1-5459687
) which claims that a housing development in Sprowston will only have 10% of affordable homes, despite the Joint Core Strategy policy having a target of 33%. I would like to know if this is true (the EDP isn’t always 100% accurate), and what the reason for this deviation is. Is it a case of the developer saying they won’t have a sufficient profit margin if the affordable housing ratio goes above 10%, and if so has this been independently verified? I understand this development falls within the Broadland district.
My concern is that whilst we have a housing shortage, and need to build more homes, what’s the point if people aren’t going to be able to afford them? People may also overstretch themselves on the borrowing front, leading to bad debt and repossessions should interest rates go up, which seems inevitable in the short to medium term. My suspicion from reading other articles on housing plans is that very few will meet the recommended percentage of affordable housing. Perhaps the strategy needs to be revisited on this, or pressure put on developers to change their plans?
I also recently wrote to the Broadland Planning department concerning a small housing development that is being planned for the field behind where I live (Application 20180360). I know they don’t reply to individual emails, however I’d like to make you aware of the points I raised, especially considering Salhouse again experienced issues with flooding this winter. I have copied in the relevant section of my email of 31 March 2018 below.
1) Access to the new development via Barn Piece Close. I’m not convinced the road is big enough to be used by vehicles accessing the additional site. It’s quite narrow, and access on to the main road could start to become an issue with the increased number of cars. There could be a risk this turns into an accident zone as cars don’t exactly travel down Salhouse Road to the mini roundabout slowly. Also the dead-end close has children who play in it at the moment, and safety issues might result from increased traffic. Is there an alternative route into the site that could be considered, perhaps directly from the main road?
2) Mains sewerage capacity. I read in the parish magazine about issues with the village sewerage system overflowing, and not really being fit for purpose for the current number of homes. Is there not a risk the increased number of dwellings could cause more overflow problems. Should the sewer system be improved and expanded prior to any new development being considered? The sewer system recently overflowed again, thus proving this is still an issue.
3) Other utilities. Aside from sewerage, are other utilities such as gas, water, broadband, electricity etc of a sufficient capacity to supply the new homes, with no loss of service to the existing homes in the vicinity?
4) Further expansion. Would this development pave the way for even more development in the immediate area, which would exacerbate the above points even further?
5) I assume the standard ecological surveys ref bats, newts etc will be completed? We have enough threats to the UK’s biodiversity as it is. I would really prefer to see more brown site development going on.
I realise development on brown field sites can be more expensive, and that affordable housing is not going to be as attractive to developers seeking to maximise their profits. However, with the challenges first time buyers and lower earners face with getting on the housing ladder, and the threats our countryside and environment are up against, would it be possible to initiate a review of the planning policy to ensure it is benefitting everybody, and doing what it can to protect our rapidly diminishing natural spaces and biodiversity.
A supporting argument for this may also be that the housing market is slowing down due to fears of interest rate rises and lack of affordability. Hopefully this means we have the time to review plans and make sure we get them right?
I look forward to hearing from you.
I’ll share any response I receive. I have a feeling this may be the first of many pieces of correspondence to Keith, however I’ll always try and make them constructive.
In my next post I’ll get back to plans for summer cycling trips; bike-packing in Scotland on the horizon.