Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)
Representation ID: 3056
Received: 01/03/2023
Respondent: Mr George Gunning
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
1. Statutory conservation implications not considered.
2. Site does not respect scale and character of village.
3. Not clear to what extent neighbouring land will be further absorbed for development.
4. Significant extra traffic will be generated on unsuitable roads. Increased litter and environmental damage.
5. Daily peak school traffic, rat run traffic and new developments do not appear to have been modelled into proposals.
6. Marlingford and Roundwell travellers sites are nearby and already house travellers.
7. No local amenities - just one pub.
8. Due to lack of amenities, houses will likely bring two car families - this has not been modelled in.
9. Primary school does not have capacity for extra children.
10. Village has no walkways or cycleways.
11. Bawburgh bridge is extremely old and vulnerable. Also dangerous for pedestrians.
12. Flooding and sewerage already a problem and will get worse.
13. Stocks Hill is narrow and is congested at school opening/closing. Traffic further exacerbated by delivery vehicles. Much of traffic ends up in Hockering Lane - potentially dangerous.
14. Issue of environmental pollution evidence at P&R site, which planners are fully aware of.
The proposed site does no respect the scale and character of our existing village environment. The site would have the wrong impact and effect on the appearance of the local environment in so many ways. Traffic volume, volume of houses and type.
The selection of Stocks Hill is unreasonable and unsound. Placing it within the village is ill-conceived and ill-planned and ill-thought through.