Home   News   Article

East Walton glamping site gets go-ahead despite traffic fears

Planning news
Planning news

Traffic concerns over the continuing operation of a glamping site in the West Norfolk countryside have been dismissed as “feeble” by a councillor.

County roads officials had opposed a bid for retrospective planning consent for the Bradmoor Woods site at East Walton, after deeming the road leading to it unsuitable for the amount of traffic generated.

But the application was unanimously approved during a meeting of West Norfolk Council’s planning committee on Monday.

And members were critical of Norfolk County Council’s objection to the scheme on road safety grounds.

Avril Wright said: “The whole idea of somewhere like this is to get back to nature. I have to say it’s a pretty feeble objection to something that brings people into the countryside.”

Tony Bubb added: “It’s most unusual to meet any other traffic on that road and if you do, you pull over. It’s not a problem.”

Documents published ahead of the meeting said the site had already been operating for two years, regularly attracting around 20 to 30 visitors at a time.

Alec Birkbeck, on behalf of the applicants Westacre Estate Management, told the committee the operation had actually taken traffic off Narford Lane, because forestry and pheasant shooting activities had ceased in the area.

He also insisted the site would not be expanded from its present capacity and local residents were supportive of the operation.

But Highways officials warned the meeting that granting permission for this scheme could set a precedent for further development in the area.

Questions were raised during the debate about whether the applicant, Westacre Estate Management, should be forced to pay for the provision of passing places on Narford Lane, the road which leads to the site from the A47 through a condition.

But committee member Geoffrey Wareham said they should wait and see if the measure was really necessary.

Tony White added: “If they’ve been doing it for two years and haven’t had a problem, I don’t see why we should put the applicant to that expense.”


Iliffe Media does not moderate comments. Please click here for our house rules.

People who post abusive comments about other users or those featured in articles will be banned.

Thank you. Your comment has been received and will appear on the site shortly.


Terms of Comments

We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions to the reader comments but we may intervene and take such action as we think necessary, please click here for our house rules.

If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report abuse button, contact us here.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More