NORDELPH COMMUNITY WEBSITE: August 2007

We have a new heading this month -- and a new slogan. Below, we bring you up to date with the proposed developments for the village church site, and discover some darker dealings than we expected! Meanwhile, placing your mouse over the church in our heading will make it vanish -- as the Diocese of Ely seems determined to accomplish. We humbly suggest that they play with our 'video game' for a while instead of desecrating the village!.

Church development

The Village Meeting on July 25th, to discuss the plans for the church, was exceptionally well attended: some 23 people were present for the open part of the gathering (after everyone had their say, the meeting continued as a Parish Council meeting). As expected, the Council recommended the rejection of the planning application, and we summarise their reasoning below.

 


High Street, by the church Conservation Area.

You can read this website's summary of the plans by clicking on this link. Much more comment was forthcoming at the meeting -- one astute resident had measured the driveways from the plans and observed that they were shorter than many larger contemporary cars! The inevitable loss of the trees on the site was something else that people felt strongly about. No one spoke in favour of the plans, although the meeting was split between those who didn't want to lose the church at all, and those who recognised that the funds for restoring it were unlikely to materialise, and that the main concern was to ensure that the site was developed as an amenity, and not simply a grubby little commercial development.

The church lies in the Nordelph Conservation Area, which is illustrated in the thumbnail on the right above. To see a full-size version of this, simply click on the map. The report establishing this recognised that the church was an iconic building, visible from miles away across the Fens. The purpose of the Conservation Area is not to ban all devlopment, but to ensure that it is carried out in a manner sympathetic to the neighbourhood. The present proposal is neither sympathetic to the memory of the church, nor the buildings nearby -- some of which have been forced by the conservation regulations to make their own developments expensively conform to the area.

Another concern was the effect of building housing at the narrowest part of High Street. The possible effect is illustrated in the left hand photo, taken during routine tree maintenance operations last year.

But perhaps the most startling revelation came from a correspondent writing after the meeting. A closer inspection of the plans revealed that they were drawn up before the Diocese began discussions with the village over the future of the church!

The Diocese appeared to be as surprised as the village that the application had been lodged. In almost identical correspondence to a number of residents, Archdeacon Hugh McCurdy has said:

"I was not aware that such an application had been issued to the Planning Department.
This matter has been dealt with by Joliffe's (the Diocese Land Agents) on behalf of the Diocese and
next week, I have a meeting with them when I assumed I would get an update on the progress they had made on a number of  "projects" including Nordelph.
By the sound of things, they have taken action before our meeting and no doubt they will brief me about that."

This hardly explains why these plans, at some level of detail, have been in existence and unacknowledged during the period of what now emerges as a bogus consultation exercise!
We have invited the Diocese to comment on this, and on our next matter, for publication on this website. At the time of publication, we have had no response, but will post anything as soon as we receive it.

The other issue we put to the Diocese emerged from the discussion of the plans at the meeting. The plans are so obviously flawed that they are almost sure to be rejected -- because of the density of housing, traffic problems and the lack of sewerage and drainage among others. A suspicion has been voiced that this application is designed to fail. Why? So that when it is resubmitted in a more acceptable form, the villagers' fire has already been drawn on the issue of change of use from amenity to commercial development. Many concerned residents are hot under their collars over the present plans. It is likely that they would be less strident a second time around! Eternal vigilance is necessary.

At the Parish Council meeting immediately following the open meeting, the Council recommended rejection of the application, citing the following reasons:
The application appeared to assume that permission had been given for the demolition of the Church. The application for this had been withdrawn in January 2001 and no further application had been made.
As this is in the village Conservation area it was felt that it was too intensive a development and not in keeping with the surrounding existing buildings in the High Street.
There are several trees around the site, which should be preserved.
The present church wall, which is an important feature of the village street scene, would be destroyed if this development were to be allowed.
The proposal to make 3 new entrances on to the High Street in addition to the two already there at this very narrow part is not practical particularly as no provision for turning appears to be possible on the very narrow frontages proposed for the new dwellings.
The plans make no provision for sewage disposal and there is no main sewerage system in the village.
There does not appear to have been any flood risk survey carried out on the proposed site.

This is not enough!

The Parish Council were at pains to point out that they cannot themselves reject the application, but can only recommend so to the Borough Council. And furthermore, the Parish Council is just one of the 'stakeholders', and has only one voice. If you want to defeat this proposal (and despite our editorial stance that we will be happy to give space to anyone in support of the plans, we have yet to meet anyone that thinks this is a good idea) your action is needed.

If you have not already done so, we urge you to write with your objections to Mrs J. Jacques at Kings Court, Chapel Street, Kings Lynn PE30 1EX, or by telephoning 01553 616226. The reference number of the application is: 07/01210/F. You may wish to object on three separate issues: (a) inappropriate development within a Conservation Area, (b) a significant change of use from being a village amenity (and one of the last such) to a commercial development, and (c) the details of the plans. Objections must be received by Tuesday August 7th.

You are also represented by two Borough Councillors, Vivienne Spikings and David Pope. Mrs Spikings is Chair of the Development Control Board that will adjudicate on the application, unless there are no objections and the matter can be dealt with summarily. In a conversation with your webmaster, Mrs Spikings advises us that steps have already been taken to bring the application in before the Board. However, because of her role as Chair, Mrs Spikings is less free to speak as a representative of the vilage than Mr Pope. We suggest that you copy any letters of objection to these councillors (yes, we know they'll see them as official board papers, but copies in advance send messages about how much this matters to you). And urge David Pope (especially) to speak up in opposition to the plans. If you click on their names above, you will be taken to their pages on the Borough Council website, where you can find their contact details.

Raft Race 2007

Sadly, there will not be a Raft Race this year -- volunteers weren't forthcoming in sufficient numbers, despite some hard encouragement from those who wanted some expression of community spirit beyond objecting to the church!

However, there WILL be a Disco on Sept 22nd in the village; the music will be from the 50s to the present date, Tickets £5.00 that will include sausage supper -- it's all booked so hope the tickets sell. A bar is being applied for. Tickets can be got from Jane, Alan, Maria and Julia.(01366 324380/324321). No children under 14 allowed. Fingers crossed it goes well, because we are hoping to have a New Years do if it does!.