QUESTION 27: Do you support

Object

Representation ID: 573

Received: 23/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Charlotte Wyndham

- traffic and cars speeding through the village is already a major problem. Building more houses will increase this. (Unless you pedestrianising the bridge is an option)
- green belt land and the environmental impact on this
- flooding - this occurs in Bawburgh- building here could put more strain on this and cause drainage problems.
-lack of amenities in Bawburgh to support more people. (I.e the school is small 98/99 children and would not be able to cater for more young families.

Object

Representation ID: 587

Received: 23/07/2021

Respondent: Bawburgh Parish Council

Bawburgh Parish Council strongly objects to this site. It would increase village dwellings by approx 20%. Bawburgh has already seen an increase in properties of 12% over last 5 years.
Connectivity is poor - access to shops, buses, GP's etc. is extremely sparse.
Development here would severely impact upon the townscape and landscape due to high elevation and rural character. Site also within a number of landscape designations – including bordering the conservation area.
Dispersal of storm water from recent developments on Stocks Hill has significantly increased risk of flash flooding.
Also, concerns over light pollution on such a large development.

Support

Representation ID: 1782

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Poppyfields (Norfolk) Ltd

The site is well located, 330m from school and 350m to the pub; village hall is directly opposite. There are good footways and main road is 20mph . Owners of site wish to include provision for a village shop as part of scheme.
Land is relatively level, and is an ‘infill’ parcel.
There are limited mature hedges/trees; A47 traffic is not notably known. Site not highly visible in landscape - notable views towards Norwich
Highways proposals, for access and footway connections have been considered further. Flood risk EA preliminary assessment undertaken to demonstrate no issue.
Landscape assessment concludes that whilst site could detract from views towards bypass, there are positive measures e.g. central access road, with wide verges would create positive vista.

Land is ready and available to be progressed.

Comment

Representation ID: 1886

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 Stocks Hill to The Village Hall 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 light from headlights of exiting cars. 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: 1929

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Water Management Alliance

See attachment for full response.
SN4053 – Land to the east of Stocks Hill
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).

Object

Representation ID: 2031

Received: 21/07/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Please see attachments for full response.
Site SN4053 Land to the east of Stocks Hill.
Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within this site, the site lies immediately to the south of the boundary of the Bawburgh Conservation Area. Any development of this site therefore has the potential to affect the Conservation area and its setting including views into and out of the Conservation area.
A heritage impact assessment of the site should be undertaken to assess the impact of the proposed development on the Conservation Area and determine if allocation of this site is appropriate, and if it is what mitigation may be required. The findings of the HIA should inform whether the site is allocated and if it is, the policy criterion including any mitigation and enhancement.
Complete an HIA to inform the allocation of the site including any mitigation, enhancement and policy wording.

Comment

Representation ID: 2115

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

SN4053
See attachment for full details.

Few or no constraints.
Standard information required at a planning stage. "1.] At risk of surface water flooding?: No
* 3.33% AEP Event [Extent]: No flooding present
* 3.33% AEP Event [Depth]: No flooding present.
* 1.0% AEP Event [Extent]: No flooding present
* 1.0% AEP Event [Depth]: No flooding present.
* 0.1% AEP Event [Extent]: No flooding present
* 0.1% AEP Event [Depth]: No flooding present.
2.] Internal & external flooding?:
* On-site: No
* Within proximity to site (~500.00m): Yes - Internal Flooding|Yes - External 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 2
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." "The reports of internal flooding within ~500.00m of the site boundary are unconfirmed reports.

The site is adjacent to a flow path. We advise this must be considered in the site assessment."

Assessment: Green

Comment

Representation ID: 2208

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.
Agricultural field bounded along three sides by hedges (priority habitats). No other priority habitats onsite (see MAGIC). In SSSI Impact Risk Zone but residential not a trigger for Natural England consultation. Site within strategic GI corridor, and in green habitat zone for great crested newts (identified by Natural England as part of DLL licensing). 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.