Thetford Supermarket battle - Round 2

THETFORD SUPERMARKET BATTLE - ROUND 2!

It didn't take too long for the Thetford supermarket battle to go back into the ring and the matter was duly debated, and decided upon at Monday’s meeting of the Breckland Council Planning Committee (11th Feb 2013).

You may recall that I previously wrote at length about my concerns regarding both proposals and by the way in which the Planning Committee seemed so dysfunctional in their handling of the matter.

This time around, I did not need to attend as a Substitute member of the Planning Committee as Sylvia Armes was attending, but I did register to speak as a Ward Member as the Asda store would have been built in the ward that I represent. I therefore spent a lot of time consulting with people about their thoughts in relation to a further supermarket. This is not a clear cut issue, so I wanted to gauge as much public opinion as possible. Most, that is, greater than 80% (if not more) of everybody that I spoke to, including comments received through Facebook, were in favour of a further supermarket, and in particular, in favour of the Asda proposal for the London Road site (perhaps my Facebook 'friends' simply prefer Asda over Morrisons? so it is perhaps not scientific, or representative, but indicative?).

Now, I am no fan of Asda - like all major supermarkets I consider their treatment of suppliers to be unethical and indeed unsustainable (think recent horse-meat scandal?) and their anti-union approach and terms & conditions available to staff is of grave concern - (see this report by GMB and War on Want re: Walmart - Asda's parent company for info - http://walmart.3cdn.net/8a5a593b0364107c2e_orm6i7o55.pdf) but, it's a supermarket, so we know all this. I would just point out that I would not be so hypocritical not to acknowledge that I do on the odd occasion shop in Asda, and indeed Morrisons; there is an Asda store in Bury St Edmunds so sometimes myself and friends will stop off there and similarly there is a Morrisons in Diss and if we happen to be nearby we will stop there.

 

 

Morrisons proposal for Thetford Enterprise Park

 

Regarding the two applications; The Morrisons (i.e. Breckland Council / Pigeon / Crown Estate backed proposal) for the Thetford Enterprise Park just off the Mundford Road had changed little, if at all from the first time around. The fundamental flaw with the proposal was/is that it is going on land designated for the Thetford Enterprise Park (TEP), i.e. somewhere where as a town we can take advantage of our proximity to Cambridge, Norwich, Hethel, Snetterton and that particular sites closeness to the dual carriageway and encourage some high tech businesses to locate here, perhaps engineering jobs or the like. The supermarket would consume at least 22% of the entire site - also, consider this - once the supermarket goes on there, how much easier would it be for other retailers to be located there? How about a TK Maxx popping up, or a PC World next door? I am told that the vast majority of the Crown Estates portfolio across the UK is 'out of town retail'. This supermarket itself would also have a negative effect on the High Street. 'NLP' - consultants to Breckland Council on these matters, said that the supermarkets would result in 20% less expenditure in the High Street. Note: this also includes however a reduction in expenditure for Iceland & Aldi in terms of less money spent on food here as they are classed as 'Town Centre'. The site is completely out on a limb from anywhere else. It will not be easily accessible by foot - either by employees or customers, very difficult to access by bicycle, and currently no bus service accessing anywhere nearby. Linkages to the High Street would be limited - i.e. when people go to do their shopping at the supermarket, it would be great to encourage them to also pop into the High Street etc. but this would be unlikely at this site.

Strangely, I received no paperwork from Pigeon/Crown Estate encouraging me to support their application the second time around. And I cannot remember receiving anything the first time around although Pigeon and the Crown did attend a Town Council meeting to brief Councillors, which I attended.

The argument that the supermarket will service the new housing to the north is also deeply flawed. The growth to the North is to be spread over the next 15 – 20 years, perhaps even longer – it will depend on economic conditions and demand. Much may never happen – “it is a blueprint for growth” I am told repeatedly. The initial phases of development will be almost immediately next door to Tesco, so their needs would have been catered for adequately I would have thought? Interestingly, Tescos floor space currently would have equalled Sainsburys, Lidl and Asda combined if Asda had been approved and Lidl was developed.

On the positive side - the primary argument in support of the site being agreed to is that in theory at least, it has the potential to unlock the enterprise site for development, that is, the supermarket will lead the way in terms of putting in initial infrastructure to make the rest of the site more viable, and appealing to prospective developers. Infrastructure including a new roadway partly into the site and connecting electricity from the Wyatt Way sub-station to the Thetford Enterprise Park which is obviously a considerable cost.

 

Asda proposal for Tulip site, London Road

Regarding the Asda proposal (i.e. Location 3 Properties), they too wanted to build on land designated for industry / manufacturing - although the Tulip site is currently redundant, and a bit of an eyesore on the main road through town - so a brownfield site would have been regenerated by the plans. As the Planning Officers said on Monday, it’s a judgement call by Councillors, but arguably the Enterprise Park is of much greater strategic value to the town than the land at the Tulip site and there is a plentiful supply of land available for the type of manufacturing / industry at the Tulip site.

The Asda store would have been within walking distance for practically everybody living on the Barnham Cross Estate, and Redcastle Furze Estate i.e. 5,000 people and the London Road is already an established footway along the town from Sainsbury’s right through to the other side with people already walking up and down the road - easy access by foot for potential employees and shoppers. The London Road is already part of an existing bus route - and could have been developed further to include more frequent trips into the Town Centre, for example.

Whereas the Morrisons proposal would have contributed money to improve the Enterprise Park site as part of their Section 106 contributions, the Asda proposal would have set aside £200,000 to support high street businesses – that is, by helping to subsidise rents and rates, provide business start-up grants etc. and Breckland’s own Economic Development Team could have advised on this, as could the Town Council and Sort It. They would have also set aside £100,000 for other Town Centre improvements, e.g. improving the appearance of the Town Centre through enhancements - all welcomed expenditure to go someway towards mitigating the affects of the supermarket (the Asda proposal, like the Morrisons one, would have resulted in 20% less expenditure in the High Street).

Further to this, the backers of Asda had pledged to commit to a local recruitment plan - i.e. all 250+ jobs would have been guaranteed for local people, with many coming from the Saxon Ward (i.e. the area that I represent on the Council). Further, Asda had pledged to commit to selling no white goods at the site, which was a major plus, and good news for some high street retailers at least - e.g. Hughes Electrical I'm sure, and Cobra Domestic Appliances). The Morrisons site measured 3,436 sq feet as well, whereas Asda was a bit smaller at 3,149 sq feet. The Morrisons site wanted a 75% to 25% split between food and non-food sales and Asda wanted 65% to 35% so the TEP site proposal was better in this regard, although given it was larger, this would have been cancelled out.

Rather crucially for me at least, if Asda went ahead, they would not have been able to expand as the site is penned in all around so you know what you are getting in a way - the Morrisons site however, being greenfield, could of course expand in due course - and it is already going to be bigger than Asda would have been.

One of my concerns last time regarding this proposal was that the 2 Sisters Food group wanted to expand onto the proposed site and create further jobs - see my speech last time for info on this - http://www.jermysjournal.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/planning-meeting-report-re-supermarkets.html

However, Asda had amended their plans to accommodate the opportunity for 2 Sisters Food Group to expand and Asda would have paid for some of the infrastructure to enable this to occur. The exact details of this I am unsure about and don't fully understand, but it seemed like welcomed news to me.

I had previously raised concerns about traffic issues, particularly along the London Road and indeed several committee members referred to this and I am sure that it factored against Asda. However, they pledged to fund a new traffic light system at the Caxton Way / London Road junction that was welcomed by businesses based in this location.

So what happened? Naturally, the Committee voted overwhelmingly, something like 10 - 0 to support the Morrisons proposal and dismiss the Asda proposal. Two of those being from two members of the Planning Committee that also represent the Saxon Ward.

The Committees reasoning? Because the Morrisons proposal will unlock the Enterprise Park. The Town must dearly pray that it unlocks it for enterprise, not further retail, or this will really be the end of the High Street.

The Committee did themselves no favours, by appearing to be utterly dysfunctional - as I heard one person outside say "I have never seen such an appalling Planning Committee in my thirty years in the profession across the country". Something for the Breckland Conservative group to ponder giving 10 of the 12 members of the committee are Conservatives!

It was a complete turnaround from the last time the pro sales were considered when neither store was supported although members raised just a few points in opposition. This time a succession of Conservative Councillors raised criticism of Asda and spoke in favour of the site - it appeared to me as if they were justifying a decision that had already been made. I'm no expert, but aren't Planning Committee supposed to have an open mind? Judge what's in front of them - to scrutinise proposals, probe representatives. Representatives whom on Monday were barely allowed to speak, or even reply to misleading statements or answer questions that one must assume were merely rhetorical.

Addressing some of the direct points that have been raised with me:

"How can you support Asda, when Thetford Town Council voted to not support either location?" I attended the Breckland Planning meeting as a Breckland Councillor and as Ward rep for Saxon Ward. Susan Glossop attended as the Acting Town Clerk to give the collective view of Thetford Town Council. The primary Town Council objection being the loss of manufacturing / employment land with both proposals - a point I agree with. However, Councillors are not limited to merely reiterating the collective view of the Council they sit on, they have a duty to their individual ward and electorate - imagine if I had to trot out the Breckland line all the time? I'd rather think for myself. I do recognise that there is somewhat a difficulty for those people that sit on more than one Council, as I do (and 7 other Town Councillors who are also District Councillors - 2 of which not only supported the Morrisons proposal, but voted for it, knowing the Town Council objected to it).

 

"Why did you change from not supporting either application, to supporting Asda?" Primarily, as I hope the text above explains, the Asda proposal changed and improved - they had taken on board many of the concerns that I personally raised initially and it was a much better proposal than the Morrisons one, and there was a very real likelihood that one application would be successful, so I wanted to make clear that I preferred the Asda one over Morrisons as it would have been far better for the town. I'd much rather see people use the supermarkets that we have and see massive investment occur in the Town Centre. I'd much rather see the Enterprise Park used for its intended purpose and a manufacturing business take up the Tulip site, but that’s not the Utopia we live in and as Councillors we have to weigh things up and ultimately make a decision, knowing full well that we will never please everybody.

 

"How is it right that a Conservative controlled Breckland Planning Committee decide upon a Planning Application led by an organisation, i.e. Pigeon, that is run by somebody so immersed in the local Conservative Party, i.e. William Van Cutsem?" I have no idea but I am sure to many it looks very odd.

Particularly ironic of course given that a couple of people accused me of bias and not declaring a pecuniary interest in relation to "Asda giving Sort It £200k" - errrm no they are not, they were saying that they would ask Sort It, as a collective body, to advise on where a £200k fund could be best utilised to support the Town Centre, in the same way that they were asking the Town Council to do this, and Breckland. To insinuate, no actually, to say that my support for Asda was because of this is somewhat insulting - to say that I would sway my thoughts regarding what is best for Thetford in such a regard - I am guided by what I feel is best for the town in which I was born, and love dearly. Can all Councillors say the same?

It is also perhaps noteworthy to acknowledge the additional attendees at Mondays Planning meeting; in the audience, sat next to the people representing Crown/Pigeon/Morrisons was William Nunn, Leader of Breckland Council, Michael Wassell, Deputy Leader, Mark Kiddle-Morris – Cabinet Member for Assets – perhaps co-incidence, but worthy of note.

Morrisons approved - you couldnt make this stuff up!

EDP letters re: cuts to services / Eric Pickles

Radio Norfolk interview re: Asda - Monday 11th Feb 2013

Positives of the Asda supermarket proposal...

Recent press articles / letters of note...

Letter to Thetford and Brandon in relation to Thetford Area Action Plan

The recent legal efforts on behalf of Shadwell Estate against Breckland Council would have surely passed by many in our town. But for those that have been involved, or merely watching the process known as the Thetford Area Action Plan (TAAP) or ‘Growth Point’ generally, there is now fading hope that growth will materialise in the way that many people had initially anticipated.
Shadwell challenged Breckland in the courts over the Thetford Area Action Plan with the support of a majority of Thetford Town Councillors. Not surprisingly the Conservative members of the Council would not go against the District Council – putting the interests of Breckland ahead of the Town, not for the first time. The primary issue that was challenged was in relation to the Stone Curlew and the bizarre fact that house building is being prevented towards the south of the town due to the presence of the Stone Curlew – a protected bird. This was despite evidence of stone curlews nesting in other locations, on land set to be built on no less, and a belief that the whole process was so unfair. But so what? Why should the town of Thetford be so concerned about this? If the houses are built on one piece of land or another, they will still be built. Two reasons really; if the new houses that we are to receive as a town are so grouped together in one area they will surely be more prone to becoming their own isolated community, not an integrated and mutually beneficial part of Thetford. The greater the new housing is spread around the town, and the greater the focus is on regenerating areas for housing, the greater the benefits for Thetford. Personally, I would have loved to have challenged the plan on its complete failure to deliver the meaningful regeneration of the existing areas of Thetford that so badly need it, or the support for our High Street that is yet to materialise.

For all this talk about localism and giving power back to local communities, it is clear from this episode that, to a very large extent, communities can still be dictated to by authorities like Breckland where there is little opposition. With their massive majority of 47 Councillors out of a total of 54, it’s no wonder that Breckland feel so able to charge around doing whatever they like with little concern. I sincerely hope that one day people will realise that their opportunity to change the outlook for our town comes but once every 4 years – when all 54 District Council seats are up for election. This is no desperate plea to vote Labour, but majorities of whatever party are not healthy – vote Labour, or Green, or Lib Dem, or Independent, or Monster Raving Looney Party if you must, but the only way Breckland, and therefore Thetford will be governed in a more democratic and sympathetic way will be when those that have power, appreciate what they have been given to a greater extent and fear that they might one day lose it.

My thoughts on car parking charges & that 7.8% proposed Council Tax increase

I don't like paying tax. Who does? I argue constantly against increasing Council Tax at meetings of Thetford Town Councils Finance Committee - a significant number of people that I represent have little spare cash and Council Tax bills represent a big chunk of total monthly expenditure for many. You may be surprised therefore that I have discussed with my Labour colleagues on Breckland and agreed that we should support the proposed increase in Breckland's share of the Council Tax. As I explained to the EDP, it is a necessary measure to avoid a level of cuts across the District that would be very severe. Percentages can be a tad misleading, as a 7.8% increase whilst it sounds a lot - against a backdrop of "freezing Council tax" or rises "capped at 2%" - will still only equate to a yearly rise of £4.98 for a Band D property. Many Norfolk and Suffolk Districts already charge over £100 per property, so the Breckland level still represents good value, and I do not believe in cheap party political point scoring so I will not criticise the Councils Conservative administration for this. However, can you imagine if there was a Labour Government in charge at the moment? Every Council up and down the country, Breckland included, would be complaining constantly about the "Labour Government" and their cuts to essential Council services. We do not have a Labour Government currently, we have a Conservative led one, and their cuts to Councils have been absolutely extreme - a level unimaginable under a Labour Government. This has forced Councils to make cuts to services that many would have regarded as untouchable. Is there widespread criticism from Conservative Councils? of course not, although some have broken ranks and spoken out. Some still keep peddling the absolute nonsense that "this is all Labours fault" - a line that fades ever more as we move away from the 2010 election and the myth slowly unravels.

For all the noise about "Breckland listening" and "showing leadership"(George Freeman MP) in relation to car parking charges, it is clear that this decision is thanks to the people. Breckland Labour Group teamed up with hundreds of local residents, businesses and other organisations to co-ordinate a petition that attracted over 15,000 signatures. Watton Chamber of Trade collected over 5,000 in addition to this. That's over 20,000 opposing the introduction of car parking charges - that's more than voted Conservative in the May 2011 elections in Breckland. It would have been electoral suicide for Breckland to introduce car parking charges - and they know it, which is why it was abandoned.

Comments to EDP in full: "I am delighted with the news regarding car parking charges. This is something the Breckland labour group fought very strongly for as this would have a massive detrimental effect on our towns. It is disappointing that so much money and time was wasted on such an ill-conceived idea. The level of council tax increase proposed will be disappointing for many, but it was something that was consulted upon and it is a necessary measure to prevent even further cuts to essential services. The way in which this Conservative led government is starving local councils of vital funds whilst granting a tax cut to millionaires is frankly outrageous."

A critique of Norfolk Conservatives from somebody that knows them well....

Fascinating comments regarding Norfolk Tories on my Facebook page. This is from a lady that used to know them very well:

Margaret Eastham: "Came in at the end Mike, my spies having been there all day. Met Bert Bremner who looked shell shocked and asked whether I could have ever guessed it was that bad. Oh yes! You have to be in the thick of it to see how they work. I wouldn't spit on most Tory Councillors if they were on fire and I was Chloe Smith's agent in the General Election. Take that as you wish. I would vote for my Tory MP but the days of voting for these ghastly specimens are over. Not one of them (save for John Dobson) objected to Murphy's behaviour when he was riding roughshod over the whole of Norfolk. Now that he has been uncovered many of them are squeaking about how awful he is. Too little too late".

Mike Brindle: "The Tories are interested in power; most of the rest of us are interested in providing services, and that includes most Independents. I admire what you have done, Margaret: we need more people in politics with principles like you".
17 hours ago · Like

Margaret Eastham: "My father served the Crown abroad in a position far senior to that of an MP. Throughout my young life it was continually instilled in me that the higher up the ladder you climb the more of a servant you become. My father considered himself throughout his working life to be a servant of the people. The difference between his attitude and that of the Tory Councillors, not just at County level is marked and very worrying. Good luck to all those standing in May and my earnest hope is that the poison in County Hall will be lanced".

The 100 day countdown....

For those of you that follow me on Facebook you will no doubt be aware that I am counting down the 100 days to the Norfolk County Council elections by posting something relevant each day, it's a bit like an advert calendar for the election - but with no chocolate as your reward! I think most people have found it quite interesting so far. I will collate the Facebook posts in groups of 10 and post here on this blog for you to see, so here's days 99 - 90.

there's now just 99 days to go until the Norfolk County Council elections; I'm very much hoping that you will support myself and Brenda Canham in those elections to become your Norfolk County Councillors for Thetford - to make sure that you are able to use your vote, how about signing up to vote by post? you might be busy on polling day, away on holday, unwell or at work - anybody can now vote by post! Just visit www.aboutmyvote.co.uk - it's so simple! Let me know if you want further info

just 98 days to go until the Norfolk County Council elections..... there are two County Council seats for Thetford, do you know which one you live in???? Thetford-West is the whole of the Barnham Cross area South of the river, running up and including Redcastle Estate, over the river to include Abbey Estate, Monksgate area, Liberty Gardens and Ladies Estate - and everything in between all of those areas - it's a huge area, approximately 8-9,000 voters - can I count on your support?

Just 97 days to go until the Norfolk County Council elections - following on from yesterday's post - Thetford East Ward contains the whole of the Town Centre, Redgate etc and the whole of Cloverfields, Norwich Road Estate, Fairfields and Woodlands - make sure you are registered to vote and consider applying to vote by post for the election on 2nd May 2013

96 days until the Norfolk County Council elections; do you know where your polling station is in Thetford? There's 9 in total!

95 days to go until Norfolk County Council elections; today I've been with Labour colleagues from across Norfolk discussing everyone's priorities for the upcoming election- what do you think should be the priorities for Thetford that myself and Brenda Canham fight for should we be elected??? Let us know!!

94 days to go until the Norfolk County Council elections and I thought I would share with you the results from the last time these seats were up for election: May 2009, Lib Dem - 934 votes, Conservative - 882, Labour (Terry Jermy) - 706. Turnout just 27.49% of all registered voters. So as you can see I've got a fight ahead of me to get myself elected and I will really be counting on the support of each and every one of you x

93 days to go until the Norfolk County Council elections; Thought I would share with you the election results for Thetford-East from 2009. Conservative: 1036 votes, Lib Dem: 665 and Labour - Brenda Canham - 387 votes - turnout was just 29.84% for this ward last time - so you can see that Brenda has quite a challenge to win, both Brenda and myself will need all of your support come polling day on Thursday 2nd May 2013, and in the weeks leading up to it

Day 92 was a very busy day: went to Dereham in the morning to discuss the Council ward boundaries - which are being reviewed, anyone got any thoughts? And then last night was full meeting of Thetford Town Council - lots of issues discussed. Conservative candidate for Thetford-West was present again in the audience - nice of him to make the trip from his home in Attleborough to attend #justsaying hehe

Day 91; do you know the political composition of Norfolk County Council??? There's 84 Councillors in total representing the whole of Norfolk. 62 of them are currently Conservative, 9 are Lib Dem, 6 are Green, 5 are Labour and there is 1 Ukip. That's right - 62 out of 84 are Tories!!! Time for a bit more of a balance don't ya think??? Remember that come May 2nd! X

90 days to go until the Norfolk wide elections; do you know who your current Norfolk County Councillor is???

Just 100 days to go until the Norfolk County Council elections...!!!

With just 100 days to go until the election, I am pleased to announce that I have been selected to be the Labour Party candidate to contest the Thetford-West Division of Norfolk County Council. I am also pleased that Brenda Canham has been selected to contest Thetford-East. The election takes place on Thursday 2nd May 2013. I would like to get elected to Norfolk County Council to provide a strong voice for Thetford on a variety of really important issues including roads & transportation, children & youth services including education, adult social care and adult education to name but a few. Over the next 100 days I hope to give lots of updates about the campaign, and details about our pledges for Thetford. The important question is; Can you help?! This will be a hard task! There are approximately 16,000 voters in Thetford which is a lot of people to talk to and a lot of leaflets to deliver. If you can help with leaflet delivery, would like to display a poster, convince your neighbours and family to vote – let me know! Will you be supporting us? If so, please sign up to vote by post now! I am hoping to build a team of people to help get myself and Brenda elected - we can only do this with your support, let the campaign commence!! x

Views of Barnham Cross - 17th January 2013

Have been rather ill this week, but was glad to be feeling better by Thursday so that myself and Angus could take the dog for a walk around the Barnham Cross area to enjoy the snowy scenes and get some pictures. Christmas card photos for next year sorted already! haha

Fasinating views posted online re: Moving Thetford Forward

Views from a resident of Thetford posted online recently;

Just after Christmas, I posted several questions on here concerning Breckland Council, Moving Thetford Forward and its relation with Thetford Town Council. Several people have commented including present day Councillors ie Terry Jermy, Corinne Fulford, Mike Brindle and Robert Kybird. Only Robert can really answer the questions in fairness, as he was, as far as I can make out, the only Councillor involved with all the three Boards mentioned above.

I haven't really had any answers. Remember we are talking way back and,so therefore, have had to draw my own conclusions, which are these. And apologies if they are so obvious but it needs to be said.

1. The representatives hand-picked to form MTF were all yes men.
2. Robert cannot show any minutes as there are not any for public view. As one person involved at the time said to me 'Jane, if you wanted to know something, you had a private chat with them. If you did not agree - tough. There was nothing you could do'. Hence nothing was minuted in the TTC minutes.
3. Because it was a different era then, ie no Facebook involvement or Twitter for that matter and certainly not the transparency we have today, they must have had a field day. They decided how to spend, originally nine million pounds and then reduced to seven, all that money on Thetford; the majority of them not living anywhere near; and certainly not with their hearts in the right place.
4. I cannot find any breakdown of the costs of any of the developments that MTF have decided upon. King Street, Haling Path, The Bus Station et al. Are they ,locked behind closed doors too?
5. They had NO OPPOSITION.

Enough already. I am just about containing my anger. As I say, it was different then but we have not got to allow this to happen again. There is nothing we can do about the above, BUT we can do something now. We have another two years before TTC Councillors come up for election. I say to the present Councillors, with the greatest respect, if you are not there for the right reasons, if you are not willing to be transparent in your dealings, if you are quite happy just to sit and not use your voice, then maybe you should consider coming off. I do not wish to appear rude but times , they are a'changing.

If any other the above is wrong, then correct me. Share comments that you see on Facebook with your friends. I hate the word 'proactive' because it sounds like a margarine, but that is what we have to be, in my very humble opinion! We have to change as well.

2012 Christmas Newsletter (pages 6-10)

Christmas Newsletter 2012 (page 1 - 5)

Use the link below to view a copy of my 2012 Christmas Newsletter;

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-vSuqEZvPHmUjBYZHJLQy11Tmc/edit

My 2012 Christmas card

CHRISTMAS NEWSLETTER COMING SOON....

WATCH THIS SPACE!!!

Sale of Breckland land at MacKenzie Road - notes from Overview & Scrutiny Commission meeting; 29th November 2012

This item has been called-in at the request of the Ward Representative on the grounds that it is a controversial matter and it is important that the proposal to take the matter forward is carefully considered - further scrutiny of the options would hopefully confirm that this proposal from Council officers is the best solution for the problem and that the authority would be acting with the wider interests of the local community at the forefront of its considerations.



The following documents are attached for information:



Copy of the Executive Decision Notice as published and called-in
Copy of the report
Minutes:

The Chairman asked the Vice-Chairman to introduce this matter as he had ‘called in’ the decision. A note outlining the reasons for the call-in had been tabled. The Vice-Chairman advised that Councillor Armes had been dealing with the issue as Ward Member and he asked her to speak on behalf of residents.



Mrs Armes explained that the problem had commenced in 2010 and she had become involved following her election as one of the Ward Members for Saxon Ward in 2011.



As no Commission Members had visited the site she passed round photographs to give a sense of the area of dispute. This formed part of a piece of wooded land belonging to Breckland Council on which ‘Mr R’ had been parking his cars. At times access to two footpaths had been blocked.



Mrs Armes asked why enforcement action had not been taken at an early stage. She considered that the Authority had not been sufficiently strong in preventing misuse of its land. If that land was now sold at auction she believed it would set a dangerous precedent. There was little amenity space in the area and the woodland was much used by residents. If the land was sold she thought other residents might apply to purchase parts of the land to extend their gardens.



She reiterated that it would be wrong to auction the land and to continue to allow its use for parking. She suggested a site visit.



The Vice-Chairman said that it was clear that there were a number of issues in the area which were complicated by neighbour disputes. There were two principle issues:



had the misuse of the land been addressed robustly enough; and
was an auction the fair way to deal with disputed land?


He had called the matter in because he thought it would set a precedent and because he knew that residents did not feel that it had been enforced properly and that the sale was just to resolve the dispute. On the contrary, he thought that the sale would escalate the problem and be a tacit endorsement of the misuse if sold to the person flouting the law. It was also unfair as there was no regard to the ability to pay.



If it was the Council’s approach to dealing with members of the public who abused Council land not to protect that land, what was to stop abuse of further areas of land? Would future enforcement action be compromised? He thought it was important to debate the Council’s responsibility for protecting public land.



The Chairman noted that the Council did not get involved in neighbour disputes and that it was the issue of selling the land that was to be debated.



The Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development sought to put the matter into context. He said that the Council owned over 5000 pieces of land in Breckland. The unfortunate Land Management Officer had the onerous job of controlling those 5000 pieces of land.



The Active Land Management exercise had identified a lot of encroachment which had not always been known about before. The piece of land under discussion was designated open space. It could not be sold for any other purpose, so any applications for extensions to gardens would not receive planning permission for change of use.



The Land Management Officer gave some background information. The encroachment was on a small part of a relatively large area of land. When a complaint had been received the internal encroachment procedure had been initiated and external legal advice had been sought.



The recommendation by officers to Members had been to dispose of the small piece of encroached land as it had no strategic importance to the Council and was protected as open space. It had minimal value and its sale would relieve the Council of management and maintenance responsibilities. Under the Active Land Management scheme the Council was seeking to dispose of land identified as having no strategic value.



The Asset & Property Manager confirmed that the enforcement option had been considered but would have been a very costly route both in management time and cost resources. It was a small piece of land with nominal market value, designated as open space and with no strategic value but high management cost. He urged the Commission to consider carefully that if it was retained and enforcement action taken that would come at a price. The pragmatic and business like solution was to dispose of the liability giving equal opportunities to bidders to purchase it.



The Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development noted that in paragraph 1.3 of the report it referred to an easement by prescription which meant that even if enforcement action was taken Mr R might retain the right to park on the land.



Mr Bambridge sought confirmation that if the land was sold public access to footpaths could not be blocked and the land could not be fenced. It was confirmed that without planning permission for change of use fencing could not be erected.



Mr Carter thought that the land did have a value and that selling it would just shift the responsibility and cost.



Councillor Bowes asked if it would set a precedent if the land was sold and asked if other pieces of land had been sold by auction. The Executive Member for Assets & Strategic Development said that some land was being sold as people made applications. Other land had been transferred to Parish Councils at nil consideration. Some people had attempted to register land with the Land Registry because they had fenced it. It was a very difficult job for the Land Management Officer.



The Chairman was concerned that even if the land was sold, the Council might be required to take enforcement action if Mr R continued to park on it as it would be a breach of planning law. The Executive Member disagreed, saying Mr R would not require planning permission to park his cars if he had a prescriptive right. He went on to say that he made a lot of delegated decisions and he considered each one carefully. He had thought that selling the land was the best option in this case.



The Vice-Chairman sympathised about the number of pieces of land and the problems associated with them. However, in this case the residents had approached the Council for support in protecting the land and had not received it. The lack of action had increased the cost.



He was saddened by the language used; saying the land had no strategic value when it was obviously valuable to the residents. The Council had a duty to protect Public Open Space. The prescriptive right had not been determined. The real issue was that there had been encroachment onto Council land and nothing had been done about it.



Mr Bambridge was concerned that the purchaser of the land could apply to move the Rights of Way but it was confirmed that the footpaths did not actually cross the land.



Mrs Jolly noted that although the land to be sold was very small it formed part of a much larger area which might have future strategic value as a ransom strip.



Mrs Matthews wondered why the problem had only come to light now if the parking had been taking place for 20 years.



The Chairman thought that the nub of the issue was that the recommendation was based on there being a ‘likely’ prescriptive easement. He did not think a decision should be taken without unequivocal evidence. It was clear that the land did have importance to the people in that part of Thetford. If there was no prescriptive right and the land was sold and the owner stopped public use it would be a problem for the Council.



Mr Kybird agreed and said that the factory site to the rear had potential as a redevelopment site which enhanced the land’s strategic value in terms of providing additional access to that site possibly by a cycle way in future.



Mr R Richmond completely agreed. Mr Joel asked what alternatives were available.



The Scrutiny Officer advised that the Commission could recommend that the decision maker reconsidered their decision or refer the matter to Council.



The Land Management Officer advised that the correct process had been followed regarding enforcement and legal advice had been sought. She could only give advice on the information she had been sent. That information was limited and had been supplied by the complainant. The amount of years that the land had been used as a car park was not known. The Solicitors acting for Mr R said that they believed he had a prescribed right. They had not provided any evidence.



The Chairman asked the two Ward Members what evidence they had and Mrs Armes advised that Mr R had lived in the house for 13 years but she could not say how long he had used the land.



Mr Rogers proposed that the matter be deferred and Mr R asked to produce evidence. Mr Kybird said that Mr R would have to prove that he had encroached on every piece of the land.



The Executive Member explained that the Council had no legal right to ask Mr R to prove his prescriptive right.



Members debated the possibility of taking enforcement action or of putting in posts to restrict access to the land. It was pointed out that they were likely to lead to costs for the Council. Another suggestion was to offer the land to the Town Council, but the Land Management Officer advised that the Town Council were unwilling to assume responsibility for land with any encumbrances.



The Vice-Chairman seconded Mr Roger’s proposal to defer the application and the Executive Member was happy with that and hoped that the necessary information would be forthcoming.



RESOLVED to defer the decision and delay the sale until the matter could be reconsidered with more evidence on the period of time that the land had been used by Mr R at the next meeting of the Commission.

Radio Norfolk interview on young people in Thetford - 4th December 2012

Problems along Elm Road thanks to work by BT

Dear Norfolk County Council Officer

I hope you are well.

As you will be aware I have been complaining about the state of the pathways around Elm Road for sometime. Imagine my suprise therefore when lorries turned up to work on the pavement along Elm Road. I enquired and found out however that they were from BT and would be digging up the area for pipework to be installed/replaced.

Do they need to notify NCC in advance of such action? what arrangements are in place to notify residents in advance?

Whilst the confusion that ensued at the start of the work receeded, myself and other residents are particularly disappointed at the finished pathway - see attached photographs.

The area looks a complete mess, with the pathway looking very messy, loose chippings, and the road itself still with loose bits of tarmac and the road not adequately cleaned in my opinion (Sand that was used for the works was just dumped straight onto the road).

Does NCC have a view in relation to this? and to what extent can you request that they come back to tidy the area sufficiently?

Terry