16.9

Showing comments and forms 1 to 10 of 10

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 2293

Received: 06/02/2023

Respondent: Resident

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Plan takes no account of further properties adding to heavier traffic congestion in The Street where the traffic is bottlenecked and virtually a one way street. There is no facility to widen road. Accidents have occurred here but non injury accidents are not recorded by the Police and go through insurance companies so it appears that there is no problem. Vehicles have to back up round the sharp blind bend into the path of other vehicles.

Change suggested by respondent:

Refuse planning permission or car park to be provided on land east of Daisy Way on the first bend in The Street coming from the Beccles direction for residents of The Street only so that parking outside of the houses is stopped and thus allowing full vehicle access in both directions, double yellow lines to be placed on both sides of The Street to enforce compliance.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 2386

Received: 21/02/2023

Respondent: Miss Andrea Dipple

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The recent development incorporting Daisy Way does not provide suitable access onto The Street for an additional 44-88 cars a day. NCC Highways have confirmed that this is not safe and that a secondary entry/exit point is required. Access is only via travel along The Street and specifically the blind Z-bends within Gillingham. The Highways Agency have already confirmed that these bends cannot cope with the additional traffic that these proposed developments would bring. This area lies within a Flood Risk Zone 3 and access would be unsafe when flooded.

Change suggested by respondent:

The recent development incorporting Daisy Way does not provide suitable access onto The Street for an additional 44-88 cars a day. NCC Highways have confirmed that this is not safe and that a secondary entry/exit point is required. Access is only via travel along The Street and specifically the blind Z-bends within Gillingham. The Highways Agency have already confirmed that these bends cannot cope with the additional traffic that these proposed developments would bring. This area lies within a Flood Risk Zone 3 and access would be unsafe when flooded.

Attachments:

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 2437

Received: 23/02/2023

Respondent: Mr Eliot Ross

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

One single access point into the estate will be insufficient for the number of residents that will be housed. I would also argue as to the local improvements made on the site frontage, a newly paved walkway along the single access point is bare minimum and also not in keeping with the aesthetic of the walkway either side of the new development.

Change suggested by respondent:

A single access point for the proposed estate is unsafe for the amount of vehicles that will be using it and will cause congestion. The area also lies in a flood risk zone and appropriate measures need to be taken to mitigate the risk especially for existing residents of the street as current houses are situated at the bottom of the hill near the blind bend.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 2439

Received: 23/02/2023

Respondent: Miss Lucy Butcher

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

A single access and exit point will not be safe.

Change suggested by respondent:

The second estate not to be built.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 2449

Received: 24/02/2023

Respondent: Ms Tamsin Watt

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The proposal for a single access and exit point to an estate which will have over 100 vehicles using it is not safe and is therefore unacceptable. The local road network and acute blind bend along The Street can not cope with the level of additional traffic this development would bring. These points have been confirmed by NCC Highways in its response to the recent planning application 2022/1993. The entire site lies within Flood Risk Zone 3b, as confirmed by the Environment Agency (response to 2022/1993) and safe access and egress can not be provided at times of flooding.

Change suggested by respondent:

The allocation of VC GIL1 as a preferred site for development is not appropriate. The provision of only one access point is not safe and at least two access points should be provided, as confirmed by NCC Highways in its response to planning application 2022/1993. The entire site lies within Flood Risk Zone 3b and safe access and egress during times of flooding can not be provided. This was confirmed by the Environment Agency who submitted a holding objection to the recent planning application 2022/1993 at this location. For these reasons the allocation of the Gillingham Site is not in line with planning policy and the site should not be allocated for development.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 2738

Received: 05/03/2023

Respondent: Mrs Emma Elliot

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The addition of over 100 cars using the single access/exit point at Daisy Way is not safe, as agreed by NCC Highways. The Street, with its blind bend, cannot cope with the additional volume of traffic, confirmed by the Highways Agency. It is already unsafe for current residents. There are flooding issues in the new estate, not unexpected as the entire area lies in Flood Risk Zone 3 confirmed by the Environment Agency, this will cause access issues when it occurs and may result in run-off issues to other properties.

Change suggested by respondent:

A second entry/exit point required but this will not solve the issue of unsafe traversing of the blind bend on The Street or the volume of additional traffic.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 2868

Received: 07/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Nick Goodge

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

This seems to be a very strange place to build new homes as the land is particularly clay based and always flooded after medium rainfall. Maybe that is why the landowner is pushing to develop it? Either way an estate of that size will have a major impact on negotiating the dangerous bend on the street due to another 80 plus cars trying to use it every day. I also think that there should be a second entry or exit to such a large estate for safety purposes as the extension area will likely to have issues to with flooding.

Change suggested by respondent:

A second entry/exit road to the extension of Daisy should be required due to the current Daisy way already seeing flooding in medium rainfall days.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 3004

Received: 08/03/2023

Respondent: Mrs Susan Oglesby

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Single access and exit point for proposed additional housing would not be safe, as agreeed by NCC Highways.

Change suggested by respondent:

Second access and exit point from a main road and away from The Street is needed.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 3018

Received: 08/03/2023

Respondent: Ms Julia Johnson

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The proposal to use Daisy Way as a single vehicular access point is not supported by NCC Highways in their review of the recent undetermined 2022/1993 Outline Planning Application which comments on the application for 44 properties on the GIL1 site. Their attached response recommends at least two points of access for developments of this scale (around 70 units total). Daisy Way is an unadopted private road which is not constructed for this scale of development and would not safely accommodate traffic during construction. Traffic will also worsen if the school is extended, further supporting the need for two accesses.

Change suggested by respondent:

The site should be either removed from the Plan or two points of access be stipulated as necessary as per the NCC Highways recommendation and to relieve use of Daisy Way.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Representation ID: 3036

Received: 08/03/2023

Respondent: Mrs Elizabeth Wilson

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

The current entrance/exit at Daisy Way is very near a bend and another road junction so is already a busy junction. The addition of more housing and therefore more vehicles will make it an even busier junction. There is already insufficient parking for the existing housing and on-street parking increases during school times so this junction could potentially become very dangerous. There is no other place to create alternative access points.

Change suggested by respondent:

As there does not appear to be an alternative point of access I can see no viable change other than to abandon the housing scheme.