45.1

Showing comments and forms 1 to 5 of 5

Object

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

Representation ID: 2312

Received: 12/02/2023

Respondent: Wicklewood Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Factual comments have been removed since the Reg 18 submission

Change suggested by respondent:

Wicklewood Parish Council repeats it's view that an estate development like this in a small village will alter the whole character of the village which has previously developed by small developments which are more easily integrated into the community. The parish council would support smaller, infill, road front developments which would be better integrated

Object

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

Representation ID: 2425

Received: 23/02/2023

Respondent: Wicklewood Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

In the current plan and reg 18 it states that Hackford and Wymondham Roads benefit from extensive views of the surrounding countryside. This fact has been deliberately removed from the Reg 19 statement as it does not support the site allocations VC WIC1 and WIC2

Change suggested by respondent:

Reinstate the factual comment about the views from Hackford and Wymondham Roads

Object

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

Representation ID: 2625

Received: 03/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Chris Baines

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Reg 18 stated that Hackford Rd & Wymondham Rd benefit from extensive PUBLIC views of the countryside. This has been deliberately removed in reg 19. This could lead to a potential legal challenge.

Change suggested by respondent:

Refuse allocation

Object

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

Representation ID: 2661

Received: 03/03/2023

Respondent: Ms Sue Knights

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Regulation 18 draft states
'Church Lane and Low St are located on the north-facing slope of a valley, and the dwellings here and on Hackford Road and Wymondham Road benefit from extensive views of the surrounding countryside.'
'Hackford Rd and Wymondham Road extensive countryside views' have been taken out of Regulation 19 draft , these open extensive views will be lost with the proposed plan. Previous assessments of this area also support the far reaching open views.

Change suggested by respondent:

Regulation 18 draft states it considered an alternative scheme on a smaller parcel of land would be the most appropriate option in this location and yet this was rejected in the new plan. I would ask that the Reg 18 suggestions be re-considered as more appropriate.

Object

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

Representation ID: 2964

Received: 08/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Alan Highet

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Road links aren't ideal - to Wymondham/Hingham have dangerous junctions (Crownthorpe/Hackford). All others single-track (few passing-places) - to A11 passing Wymondham College (school run to WC and Wicklewood Primary, return journeys twice-daily), to Kimberley and all surrounding villages feeding the primary school. Flash-flooding. Hackford Road double-bends unsighted; and already threatened by increasingly dangerous/busy traffic (getting heavier and faster) including heavy lorries, supermarket/other deliveries. Increasingly irresponsible parking outside school car-park. Infrastructure already inadequate; facilities poor – few buses outside commuting, pub survival? (rarely busy), church unsafe, nearest shop/post-office/doctor/dentist c4 miles. Rural views provide heritage and amenity value to all passing through.

Change suggested by respondent:

Scope exists already for more in-fill housing. Restrict otherwise, to preserve amenity value in the face of inadequate infrastructure and to avoid putting further, Isustainable pressure on roads that are mainly inadequate for miles around and include bust school runs to Wymondham College and Wicklewood Primary, and indeed on the routes to Wymondham/Higham. The proposals are too open ended, and likely to be the thin end of a wedge that will destroy Wicklewood as a traditional Norfolk village.