QUESTION 56: Do you agree
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 620
Received: 25/07/2021
Respondent: Mrs Lydia Keep
Already too many cars for the size of village, anymore would just be completely hazardous and would lead to bottle neck situations. The Old Yarmouth Road already has a dangerous speed limit. Not enough facilities to support the amount of residents e.g schools, dentistry, doctors. Other problems include ruining green areas of natural beauty and habitat, not environmentally friendly, the houses are out of keeping in terms of modern architecture in amongst this beautiful village. I don’t want to swap nature for another toy town development.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 702
Received: 27/07/2021
Respondent: Mrs Shirin Salt
The village roads cannot cope with additional levels of traffic. We are a rural community with horses, people and other animals sharing the roads. We do not need street lights and pavements as a rural community we should be allowed to remain rural.
The addition of 20 properties plus 40 vehicles will destroy the rural nature of the community.
As an historic village the nature of that history will be destroyed with another modern, unimaginative development of property which would be better suited to a suburban setting.
Local flora and fauna would be devastated by additional people, development and vehicles.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 717
Received: 28/07/2021
Respondent: Miss Katrina Berey
The more housing that is being built on the fields surrounding our homes, is making the risk of flooding even higher.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 908
Received: 30/07/2021
Respondent: Mr Tom Frost
1. Roads, traffic and safety
2. The environment and nature
3. Pressures on local resources
4. Flooding and safety
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 918
Received: 30/07/2021
Respondent: Mr Matthew Thompson
I object to the size of the development due to the increase in the volume of traffic it will bring.
Support
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 932
Received: 30/07/2021
Respondent: Landmark Associates
In relation to Gillingham, it is considered that the line defining the settlement limit is appropriate.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1232
Received: 01/08/2021
Respondent: Ms Tamsin Watt
Gillingham Settlement Units allocated are greater than 1 hectare, with one site being twice this size. This is not in line with the objectives of the NPPF.
The plan states that the existing primary school at Gillingham is operating at capacity. However, the village clusters are defined on the basis of catchment areas to primary schools. Therefore, it is unclear how the limits of this Settlement Until have been defined and justified.
The FRA relied upon for the development at GIL 1, 2019/1013 needs to be updated in line with EA guidance to support the allocation of these sites.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1243
Received: 01/08/2021
Respondent: Mr Sid Anverali
Gillingham Settlement Units allocated are greater than 1 hectare, with one site being twice this size. This is not in line with the objectives of the NPPF.
The plan states that the existing primary school at Gillingham is operating at capacity. However, the village clusters are defined on the basis of catchment areas to primary schools. Therefore, it is unclear how the limits of this Settlement Until have been defined and justified.
The FRA relied upon for the development at GIL 1, 2019/1013 needs to be updated in line with EA guidance to support the allocation of these sites.
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1313
Received: 01/08/2021
Respondent: Mrs Holly Frost
1. Roads, traffic and safety
2. The environment and nature
3. Pressures on local resources
4. Flooding and safety
Object
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1317
Received: 01/08/2021
Respondent: Mr David Adams
I object to proposals to extend the development zones in Geldeston and Gillingham due to the limitations of the current road infrastructure. Access to the villages of Geldeston and Gillingham is very poor and proposals to increase the number of dwellings will undoubtably make matters worse. Road safety is a major concern due to on-road parking on The Street at Gillingham and at Kells Way in Geldeston; in both locations road widths are reduced to a single lane as current dwellings do not have off-road parking.
Comment
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1416
Received: 02/08/2021
Respondent: East Suffolk Council
No comment on specific site but please consider infrastructure implications in East Suffolk.
Comment
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1608
Received: 02/08/2021
Respondent: Geldeston Parish Council
Geldeston is a small compact village (pop. 397, 2011 census) and as the representative of its residents the Parish Council is glad to see that no changes to the Settlement Limit are proposed. Geldeston’s present population and spatial organisation enable it to preserve a strong sense of community that is much valued by old residents and newcomers alike.
[This is part of the Geldeston Parish Council's collective response to preferred site SN0437]
Support
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1725
Received: 02/08/2021
Respondent: Ms Catherine Bickmore
Agree with existing settlement limit for village of Geldeston . It should not be extended.
Comment
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1795
Received: 02/08/2021
Respondent: Geldeston Parish Council
Geldeston is a small compact village (pop. 397, 2011 census) and as the representative of its residents the Parish Council is glad to see that no changes to the Settlement Limit are proposed. Geldeston’s present population and spatial organisation enable it to preserve a strong sense of community that is much valued by old residents and newcomers alike.
Comment
South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)
Representation ID: 1822
Received: 16/07/2021
Respondent: Broads Authority
'with a further cluster of development at west Kings Dam’ – do you mean along Kings Dam to the west? As written, it does not seem to read well.
• It is not clear if a settlement limit alteration is made for Gillingham. There is a question asking for views, but the text is not clear and a dashed red line is not obvious on the map. It does not say ‘no alteration to the settlement limit is made’ like in other places