Agenda item


Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube.


The Assistant Director presented the report which provided an update on the Lynnsport 1 development and sought final approval to proceed with the scheme.  A copy of the presentation is attached.


The Chair thanked the Assistant Director for the report and invited questions and comments from the Panel, as summarised below.


Councillor Crofts commented that the Internal Drainage Board Easement Strip was wider than he expected, and the Assistant Director explained that this was at the request of the Internal Drainage Board.


In response to further questions from Councillor Crofts relating to air source heat pumps, the Assistant Director explained that technology had improved, and they required the same amount of maintenance as a gas boiler.  He explained that retrospective installations could be problematic, but they were generally fine in new builds.  He explained that modern air source heat points were virtually silent.


Councillor Colwell asked about piling foundations and the impact on residents and the Assistant Director explained that a different type of piling would be carried out which was quieter.  Inspections and reports would also be carried out as required.


In response to a further question from Councillor Colwell, the Assistant Director explained that a traffic management plan would be adopted for the site and the plan for Marsh Lane would also be implemented at the same time.  Councillor Colwell asked if the Panel should consider a recommendation to Cabinet for a second raised table in the area and additional traffic calming measures.  The Assistant Director explained that a request could be made to Norfolk County Council Highways.


Councillor Collingham asked who would be responsible for ensuring the site was complete and the Assistant Director explained that the Council had a Clerk of Works who regularly inspected to ensure all was up to standard and it would be up to the Council, as the developer, to ensure that the site was complete and that the necessary adoptions were in place.


In response to a question from Councillor Collingham it was explained that the proposed large windows may have to be reduced in size to comply with Building Regulations.


Councillor Bone asked what would happen to excess energy generated through the solar panels, would there be battery storage opportunities, and who would get the revenue from any energy transferred back into the national grid.  The Assistant Director explained that battery storage had not been considered at this stage and storage of energy would depend on regulations.


In response to questions from Councillor Bubb it was explained that there was a connecting route through the site, and areas which were not adopted would be subject to a management agreement which transferred to property owners who would pay a company for maintenance.


The Assistant Director explained that work was carried out with schools on street naming.


Councillor Colwell referred to flood risk concerns from surface water and it was explained that an additional pumping station had been provided which was of benefit to the wider area.


Councillor Kemp addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34.  She was concerned about unadopted drainage and who would be responsible for maintenance.  The Assistant Director confirmed that all drainage on site would be adopted, and all construction had to be carried out to an adoptable standard.  Drainage would be maintained by a company to approved standards and the cost would be recovered through property water bills.


The Panel discussed Planning Policy and it was suggested that a briefing be presented to a future meeting of the Panel.


The Panel discussed a potential additional recommendation to Cabinet about ensuring that the development was completed, up to standard and had adequate calming measures, but generally felt that this was already covered by the fact that the Council was the developer and had a duty to provide a quality standard of properties.  Highways issues would also be considered via the Norfolk County Council Highways adoption process.


The Portfolio Holder for Business, Councillor Beales thanked the Panel for their useful comments and explained that the Council’s ambition was to deliver quality housing development sites and the Council have been able to bring forward sites that the private sector may not due to constraints such as water management and drainage.  He explained that the issues raised by the Panel relating to a second raised table and traffic calming would be discussed with Norfolk County Council Highways as required.


Councillor Beales also referred to the use of air source heat pumps and reminded Members that in ten years or so gas boilers would not be able to be fitted, so the Council, as developer, had to be responsible in future proofing the site and providing the most energy efficient measures.


Councillor Beales also explained that he would seek clarification on the impact unadopted areas would have on affordable homes and ensure that an update was available in readiness for the Cabinet meeting.


The Panel agreed to move into exempt session to consider the exempt information contained within the report.


Supporting documents: