QUESTION 23: Do you support

Object

Representation ID: 3

Received: 07/06/2021

Respondent: Mr Martin Scaiff

The proposed site is too large. The negative environmental impact appears to be the most significant of the 3 preferred proposals in an area already suffering from intensive agricultural activity. The increase in traffic through that section of the village is already set to be dramatic with the proposed western link to the NDR and as yet I have not seen any proposal to address this. A development site at this point would add significantly to traffic issues. Creating footpaths or cycle routes between the villages would help mitigate traffic in the area.

Comment

Representation ID: 38

Received: 08/06/2021

Respondent: Mrs julia Robathan

45 houses seems extensive for the village feel. The corner junction is not fit for purpose currently and would require extension work and more appropriate crossings for children walking to school as the road is already too busy.

Object

Representation ID: 86

Received: 15/06/2021

Respondent: Mr John Duckett

The sewage, water and drainage systems will not cope with 45 additional houses.

Cars approach the junction from Honingham Road at speeds far in excess of the 30 mph speed limit. A traffic impact assessment would, in my view, deem an additional 45 houses on this junction as dangerous.

Object

Representation ID: 87

Received: 15/06/2021

Respondent: Mr John Duckett

Flooding. I am concerned that rainwater run off from the development could impact on my property and increase the likelihood of ground water flooding.

Object

Representation ID: 576

Received: 23/07/2021

Respondent: Ms Catherine Hayes

NCC need to develop a climate action plan before any new builds take place . We need more green spaces, a village meadow and ways of conserving what is here rather than increase stress on the failing infrastructure and struggling wild life.

Object

Representation ID: 859

Received: 29/07/2021

Respondent: Barnham Broom Parish Council

Land on the corner of Bell Rd and Norwich Rd, Barnham Broom – Question 23. Too large a development for the village which will result in additional traffic movements, speeding and safety issues for through traffic. There have been traffic accidents in the area and Norfolk County Council are proposing alternative methods of traffic calming and are unaware of the traffic proposals for this site

Object

Representation ID: 1101

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Christine Plaskett

45 houses is too large for this part of the village. Bell Road is already too fast with little or no speed restrictions in place. This will cause danger to children walking to school.

Object

Representation ID: 1263

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Bob Harvey

The site is centrally based and the proposal does offer a significant change to the existing road layout which is a village danger. The forfeiture of some land to accommodate the road improvements would undoubtedly result in further number or dwelling type compromises. The site has been potentially identified as a 45 build, which appears excessive within a central village area and has been met with general disapproval, due mainly to the location and the increased number of vehicle movements resulting.

Comment

Representation ID: 1814

Received: 04/08/2021

Respondent: Kimberley and Carleton Forehoe Parish Council

The Parish Council concurs with the comments of Barnham Broom Parish Council. In relation to site SN4051 K&CFPC comments: 45 dwellings would see a significantly increased number of vehicles in the villages of Kimberley and Carleton Forehoe. The junction would need significant improvement.

Councillors also expressed concern as to whether Barnham Broom Primary School would have capacity for the increased intake in the catchment area.

Developments in Barford and Wicklewood will contribute to traffic through the villages, and appropriate mitigation should be put in place.

Comment

Representation ID: 1879

Received: 22/07/2021

Respondent: South Norfolk Council

The Environmental Protection Team are not aware of any significant land quality issue with this site or adjacent land. However, having regard to the size of the site and sensitivity of the proposed development it is considered that a Phase One Land Contamination Report (Desk Study) should be required as part of any planning application.

The site is on the opposite side of Bell Road to The Bell Inn which has a potential to have a negative impact on the amenity of the residents of any dwellings constructed on the site due to noise and cooking odours. In addition, placing sensitive receptors close to this business could impact its future viability. It is therefore considered that this will need to be addressed as part of any application for dwellings on this site.

Due to the size of this development and its proximity to existing dwellings, an application to develop this site is likely to attract the recommendation that standard planning condition AM05 Construction Management Plan be attached to any approval. It may be worth highlighting to applicants that to avoid any delay in discharging this condition, they may wish to include a Construction Management Plan with their application. If the submitted Construction Management Plan is adequate, the an alternative condition could be attached to any approval requiring its implementation.

Comment

Representation ID: 1928

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Water Management Alliance

See attachment for full response.
SN4051 – Land on the corner of Bell Road and Norwich Road, Barnham Broom.
Outside the IDD boundary, within the Norfolk Rivers IDB watershed catchment.
Major development - If surface water discharges within the watershed catchment of the Board's IDD, we request that this discharge is facilitated in line with the Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable drainage systems (SuDS).

Comment

Representation ID: 2007

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency (Eastern Region)

Foul Water Capacity
For sites SN0552, SN0018SL, SN2110, SN4051, SN0055, SN0174 andSN0196 available information indicates may be around 150 houses planned here in total for preferred and shortlisted sites. Barnham Broom has some capacity for foul water flows (for approximately 50 houses) but not for all the houses planned in these developments. Discussions will need to be held with Anglian Water (AWS), and development must be phased in line with WRC treatment capacity being made available.

Comment

Representation ID: 2118

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

SN4051
See attachment for full details.
Few or no constraints.
Standard information required at a planning stage. "1.] At risk of surface water flooding?: Yes
* 3.33% AEP Event [Extent]: Minor flooding
* 3.33% AEP Event [Depth]: 0.00 - 0.60cm.
* 1.0% AEP Event [Extent]: Minor flooding
* 1.0% AEP Event [Depth]: 0.00 - 0.60cm.
* 0.1% AEP Event [Extent]: Minor flooding
* 0.1% AEP Event [Depth]: 0.00 - 0.90cm.
2.] Internal & external flooding?:
* On-site: No
* Within proximity to site (~500.00m): Yes - Internal Flooding
3.] Watercourses [Online ordinary watercourses or mains rivers]?:
* On-site: No
* Within proximity to site (~100.00m): No
4.] Surface water sewer systems?:
* On-site: No
* Within proximity to site (~100.00m): No
5.] Source Protection Zone?: Source Protection Zone 3
6.] Internal Drainage Board?: No IDB referenced
7.] The site predominantly has superficial deposits of DIAMICTON. Comments on infiltration potential are dependent on a complete geotechnical investigation, including BRE365 Soakaway Testing. Where possible, surface water infiltration should be utilised."

Assessment: Green

Comment

Representation ID: 2181

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Richard Jewson

Number of people: 2

The following is a summary:
More houses need to be built, but it is wrong to use this one-dimensional approach. It should be about allowing communities to grow. This requires vision, leadership and a sense of what community might look like a generation ahead.

Barnham Broom has a primary school, church, village hall and playing field, pub and shop. It faces real issues, particularly roads and transport, but deals with them - e.g. the much-used village hall, recent projects to restore the Church Bells, build a memorial garden, and rejuvenate the Barnham Broom Fuel Allotment Charity. A recent substantial residential development and continued infilling means the population is expanding.

I fully support the attached letter, which proposes how SN4051 might be crucial to community development. Maybe the village playing field with its 60’s village hall could be developed for housing and the proceeds used to acquire and develop SN4051, with improved village hall and playing field facilities. This would provide a gathering space in the centre of our village with village hall, shop and pub.

Comment

Representation ID: 2196

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - Senior Ecologist

Rating: Green no major ecological constraints identified from desk-top search. Surveys, and biodiversity enhancement in accordance with policy required.
The site is part of an agricultural field (grazed), bounded by hedgerows (priority habitats). To the north is an area of deciduous woodland (priority habitat) (see MAGIC). The site is in a SSSI Impact Risk Zone although 'residential' development would not trigger consultation with Natural England. The site is in an amber zone for great crested newts (identified by Natural England as part of DLL licensing). Impacts to priority habitats should be minimised and compensated for, and consideration to the creation of additional priority habitats. Applications for planning consent should be accompanied by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal/Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) which, together with the mitigation hierarchy should inform the design. Consideration should be given to delivering Biodiversity Net Gain.