QUESTION 40: Do you think

Support

Representation ID: 948

Received: 30/07/2021

Respondent: Bunwell Parish Council

SN2126 Land adjoining The Laurels, 114 Bunwell Street - This should be a ‘Preferred’ site. Seen as ideal, particularly if additional numbers of houses transpire to be required in Bunwell.

SN0539 Lilac Farm, Bunwell Street, Bunwell - Should be considered a ‘Preferred site’. Demolition of barns would be required which currently are used by 2 businesses.

SN 0538 Land opposite Lilac Farm, Bunwell Street, Bunwell – Remain as a ‘Standby site’. Some in the village see this stretch as a desirable break in housing with country views and development frontage should be reduced.
REJECTED SITES.
Reasons for rejection fully supported.

Comment

Representation ID: 972

Received: 30/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Phil Gledhill

This is an ambiguous question. The Question poses two possible answers.
Conclusion:
SN2126 Land adjoining The Laurels, 114 Bunwell Street - Should be a ‘Preferred’ site. Seen as ideal.

SN0539 Lilac Farm, Bunwell Street, Bunwell - Also should be considered a ‘Preferred site’. Demolition of existing barns would be required, currently used by 2 businesses.

SN 0538 Land opposite Lilac Farm, Bunwell Street, Bunwell – Remain as a ‘Standby site’. Some in the village see this stretch as a desirable break in housing with country views. Frontage should be reduced.
REJECTED SITES.
Reasons for rejection fully supported

Support

Representation ID: 996

Received: 30/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs nikki garner

See comments to Q39 for details.

SN2126
SN0538REV
SN0539 should be considered preferred sites

Support

Representation ID: 997

Received: 30/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs nikki garner

All three shortlisted sites should be moved to preferred sites

Comment

Representation ID: 1057

Received: 31/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Joanne Binks

The reasons why this was rejected is laughable as all the building work that has been going on along Bunwell street has already been detrimental to look of village, including detrimental to wildlife.

Support

Representation ID: 1458

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kate Jones

We understand that it may not be possible to build all 25 houses on preferred site SN0537 due to the low density scheme. We would like to support shortlisted site SN2126 as an option to split the allocation across the two sites (SN0537 & SN2126). This would reflect the existing pattern of development and protect and respect the character of the village. Each smaller development would then be more in-keeping with existing development boundaries and settlements and will protect the open fields around Lilac Farm and opposite which offer a much needed break in the development boundary within the village.

Comment

Representation ID: 1510

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Crouch

As opposed to development at the ‘Preferred site’ (SN0537): I would prefer to see sympathetic development at SN0539 and SN2126. Aside from specific comments I make about these two sites in my full response to this question: I would like new housing in Bunwell to be in-keeping with that in the surrounding area, of a design that is sympathetic to existing housing in the vicinity, and with any access roads being of similar form to those that already exist in the area.

Comment

Representation ID: 1528

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Nigel Crouch

NO

Comment

Representation ID: 2010

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency (Eastern Region)

Foul Water Capacity
Similar to our response for sites within Barnham Broom above, for sites SN0537, SN1057, SN0538REV, SN0539, SN2126 and SN0602, available information indicates there may be around 120 houses planned here in total. Forncett has some capacity for foul water flows (can accommodate the 'preferred' sites) but does not have capacity for all the houses planned in these developments. Discussions will need to be held with AWS if all development goes ahead, and development must be phased in line with Water Recycling Centre (WRC) treatment capacity being made available.

Comment

Representation ID: 2087

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

SN2126
See attachments for full comments.
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): No
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: 2098

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

See attachment for full details.
SN0539
Few or no constraints.
Standard information required at a planning stage. "1.] At risk of surface water flooding?: Yes
* 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]: Minor flooding
* 0.1% AEP Event [Depth]: 0.00- 0.30cm.
2.] Internal & external flooding?:
* On-site: No
* Within proximity to site (~500.00m): No
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: 2099

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

SN0538REV
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): No
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: 2236

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - Senior Ecologist

SN0538REV - Land opposite Lilac Farm, Bunwell Street, Bunwell
Agrictultural field. Defunct hedge with trees along southern boundary which could be enhanced as part of an application. Site in SSSI IRZ but residential development does not trigger consultation with Natural England. No prirority habitats onsite (see MAGIC). Site within amber habitat zone for great crested newts. 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.

SN0539 Lilac Farm, Bunwell Street, Bunwell
site includes agricultural/industrial building, areas of hardstanding and listed building. Site in SSSI IRZ but residential development does not trigger consultation with Natural England. No prirority habitats onsite (see MAGIC). Site within amber habitat zone for great crested newts. 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.

SN2126 Land adjoining The Laurels, 114 Bunwell Street
Site comprises rough grassland borded with hedges/trees. Site in SSSI IRZ but residential development does not trigger consultation with Natural England. No prirority habitats onsite (see MAGIC). Site #within amber habitat zone for great crested newts. 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.

Rating for these sites: Green no major ecological constraints identified from desk-top search. Surveys, and biodiversity enhancement in accordance with policy required.