Policy VC BAR1 – Land at Cock Street and Watton Road
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)
Representation ID: 2540
Received: 28/02/2023
Respondent: Silfield Ltd
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Whilst I can understand the landscape improvement value to Barford of removing the commercial site, the change of use to housing removes premises for two businesses and employment, without an alternative site allocated in the village. The site is also compromised by the access next to the B1108 junction which is now unsuitable for residential use given the volume of traffic. The development ignores the significant amenity space, improved access for Back Lane and landscaping available from other proposed sites. 20 houses will be on a busy B road with poor access and limited amenity space.
The plan should take into account wider benefits to housing development such as provision of green space and improved access where available. These should be considered alongside environmental benefits and and benefits to the wider community. This allocation simply fits 20 houses onto a commercial site, it offers no benefits beyond the housing itself. Landscape improvements are there but limited given the size of the plot and the need for housing, amenity provision and environmental benefit are negligible. I would propose that the commercial site is retained for employment allowing the vacant land south and north of a remodeled Back Lane to provide the housing and green space. This would deliver significantly enhanced amenity land and a safer, improved access for Back Lane onto the B1108 for use by the development and other traffic. The plan must take account of the amenity and environmental benefits available on other available sites.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)
Representation ID: 2551
Received: 28/02/2023
Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
- Proposed single access point to Cock St is so close to B1108 that likely to endanger highway safety.
- No reason for pedestrian footway to connect Cock St with Back Lane, which is a narrow rural road. Link would not provide additional access to local footpath network. Back Lane unsuitable for significant pedestrian use.
- Concern over likely damage to heritage assets.
- Wish to see a severe limit on height of any houses to prevent housing from dominating beautiful and ancient centre of village.
- Density of proposed housing considerably greater than at present. This development will badly damage amenity of Barford, particularly on entering from west.
- Any contamination survey should be undertaken before any permissions are granted.
- No consideration given to flood risk associated with run off. Assessment must apply to additional run off into village and valley where flooding of dwellings more likely. Impact on sewage release into gardens and homes must be considered.
Support
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)
Representation ID: 3143
Received: 03/03/2023
Respondent: Norfolk County Council - Strategic Planning Team
Cllr Margaret Dewsbury (Hingham) has indicated that if the development is agreed there would be a need for a reduced speed limit and a pedestrian crossing of some sort.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)
Representation ID: 3161
Received: 01/03/2023
Respondent: Historic England
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within the site boundary, the grade II listed Sayers Farmhouse lies to the south west of the site. There are glimpsed views farmhouse from the site. Any development of the site has the potential to impact on the significance of this listed building.
We welcome the completion of an HIA to consider the impact of development on this asset and the non-designated Cock Inn.
We welcome the reference to Sayers Farm in bullet point 4 and the reference to heritage assets in bullet point 5.
We recommend that Sayers Farmhouse should also be referenced in bullet point 5 in relation to layout and design. The bullet point would read:
‘…given to the setting of Sayers Farmhouse and The Cock Inn.’
Amend bullet point 5 to read:
‘…given to the setting of Sayers Farmhouse and The Cock Inn.’