Toggle menu

HEMB1 - Notice of commencement of examination and examiner's initial questions

The following notice of commencement of the Hemsby Neighbourhood Plan Examination and initial questions were sent by email from the examiner. 

Hemsby Neighbourhood Plan Examination

27 December 2022

Thank you for inviting me to undertake the examination of the Hemsby Neighbourhood Plan.

Having received all the necessary documents my examination has begun. 

I have reviewed the material for any 'fatal flaws' that would prevent the examination proceeding, and at this stage I have found nothing that needs to be addressed. I do not anticipate the need for a hearing.

There are some issues on which clarification from Great Yarmouth Borough Council (and where appropriate the Broads Authority) would be helpful:

  • Do Great Yarmouth Borough Council and the Broads Authority consider the submitted Plan to be in general conformity with the strategic policies of the development plan? I am aware of the representations made on the submitted Plan.
  • Which documents comprise the development plan for the neighbourhood area?

There are a number of points on which further clarification from Hemsby Parish Council would be helpful (and any additional comments from the local planning authorities on these would also be welcome):

  • How were the Hemsby Parish Design Codes (2020) prepared and was this work subject to any public consultation separate from the consultation on the Plan?
  • Policy 3 - is there a definition or other details for what constitutes a 'particularly sensitive location'?
  • Paragraphs 6.8 and 6.9 - what is the evidence base for the statements made in these paragraphs?
  • The Plan refers to 'major' development in a number of policies (e.g. Policy 3, Policy 6, Policy 7) - is there a definition or threshold for what constitutes major development?
  • Policy 5 - what are the 'county parking standards' and where may they be found?
  • Policy 5 - please can an explanation be provided as to the purpose of including 'or in a way that does not impede the free flow of traffic on neighbouring streets' and how it relates to demonstrating parking provision sufficient to meet county parking standards.
  • Paragraph 8.8 - are further details of the 'review of walking and cycle provision' available?
  • Policy 6 - does the first paragraph relate to both opportunities within the built up area and those identified in Figure 2 or just to opportunities within the built up area?
  • Policy 3 and Policy 6 - is it the intention that the need for new street lighting not to harm the purpose of Green Corridors identified in Community Action 4 should be recognised in the Plan's policies?
  • Paragraphs 8.25, 8.27 and 8.28 - what is the evidence base for the statements made in these paragraphs and how are these translated into the specific parking standards in Policy 8?
  • Policy 9 - what is the evidence base supporting provision of additional off-road parking in these two locations?
  • Policy 9 - the Plan refers variously to 'King's Way', 'Kings Way' and 'Kingsway' so please can the correct name be confirmed?
  • Policy 10 - is it the intention of the reference to 'hotels' that they are not supported or that the criteria for support applied to other new tourist accommodation does not apply to hotels? What is the rationale and evidence for adopting a different approach to hotels?
  • Policy 11 - what is the intention of including 'feasible' as a separate consideration to whether a tourism facility is 'viable' and why does the same requirement for providing 'robust evidence' not apply?
  • Policy 14 - is it the intention that this Policy applies to tourist accommodation and what is the rationale for not including non-residential development?
  • Policy 14 - given the Plan's recognition of the significant impact of climate change on the neighbourhood area what is the rationale for planting only 'native' trees under this Policy?
  • Paragraph 11.7 - what is the meaning of 'indicative' in relation to the proposed Green Corridors - for example is it a reference to their location/boundaries or to their status?
  • Policy 15 - are the 'Buffer Zones' identified in Figure 5 intended to be treated as Green Corridors for the purposes of this Policy?
  • Paragraph 11.8 - is there any further evidence or explanation of the process for identifying the Green Corridors available?
  • Figure 5 - Green Corridors - is a larger scale map and/or one with more precise boundaries available?
  • Figure 6 - Local Green Spaces - is a larger scale map and/or one with more precise boundaries available?
  • Figure 7 - Views - does the different length of lines used to depict the 'scope of the view' for some views serve any purpose?
  • Policy 17 - given the dynamic nature of many of the views such that they can be experienced from more than a single location how have the points identified in Figure 7 been decided?
  • Figure 8 - Non-designated heritage assets - is a larger scale map and/or one which more precisely locates each asset and its boundaries available?

Given the seasonal break it would be helpful to have feedback by 13th January at the latest.

I understand that the Parish Council is considering the consultation responses to the submitted Plan and may wish to submit views on them to the Examination. I would welcome this within the same time frame.

My requests and the responses should be made publicly available, such as by putting them online. 

I may come back with further questions or requests as the Examination proceeds. I shall be visiting the area next month.

Thank you for supporting the process. It will be helpful if all correspondence is shared between Hemsby Parish Council, Great Yarmouth Borough Council and the Broads Authority and I am happy to receive correspondence direct. 

Tony Burton


Last modified on 30 January 2023

Share this page

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share by email