QUESTION 7b: Do you think there are any specific requirements that should be added to the allocation policy to accommodate the extra 10 dwellings?
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3360
Received: 19/01/2024
Respondent: Water Management Alliance
Adjacent to the Waveney, Lower Yare and Lothingland IDD.
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).
See attachment for full response.
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3390
Received: 24/01/2024
Respondent: Norfolk County Council - Minerals and Waste Team
Proposed allocation VC DIT1 REV is 2.42ha and underlain by safeguarded mineral resource, sand and gravel. We consider that it is appropriate and relevant for the requirements of a strategic policy (in this case Policy CS16 of the Norfolk Minerals and Waste Core Strategy) to be included in a site allocation policy where it sets out how the policy will apply to a specific site at the development management stage.
Therefore, the policy wording for this site should state: ‘This site is underlain by a safeguarded mineral resource; therefore investigation and assessment of the mineral will be required, potentially followed by prior extraction to ensure that needless sterilisation of viable mineral resource does not take place.’
See attachment for full submission.
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3410
Received: 24/01/2024
Respondent: Norfolk County Council
The Highway Authority does not objection subject to satisfactory access.
Please see attachment for full representation.
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3425
Received: 24/01/2024
Respondent: Norfolk County Council - Natural Environment Team
There is a Site of Special Scientific Interest to the east of the site, and County Wildlife Sites to the south-east and south-west of the site. It is also situated within a designated River Valley Landscape. Impacts of new developments on these close lying sites, and its situation within the River Valley should be taken into consideration.
See attachment for full representation.
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3490
Received: 26/01/2024
Respondent: Ditchingham Parish Council
Submitted as both a comment and objection on response form.
Subject to the sufficiency of suitable infrastructure, Ditchingham Parish Council is not against the provision of more housing in the village. However, the Council cannot support further development of the land north of Rider Haggard Way unless the access is changed from Hamilton Way (right opposite the primary school) to either Waveney Road or Thwaite Road.
Submitted as both a comment and objection on response form.
Subject to the sufficiency of suitable infrastructure, Ditchingham Parish Council is not against the provision of more housing in the village. However, the Council cannot support further development of the land north of Rider Haggard Way unless the access is changed from Hamilton Way (right opposite the primary school) to either Waveney Road or Thwaite Road.
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3536
Received: 31/01/2024
Respondent: Historic England
We welcome the preparation of the HIA. The recommendations of the HIA in relation to archaeology should be included in the policy requirements.
See attachment for full representation.
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3591
Received: 01/02/2024
Respondent: Anglian Water Services
It is noted that the site is proposed to be increased to accommodate an additional 10 dwellings to bring the site total to 45 dwellings. Based on current information, there is capacity at Ditchingham WRC for small scale growth –however, this may be impacted by cumulative growth from other commitments including the new proposed allocation SN4020 within the WRC catchment.
In addition to our previous recommendations for policy wording we would suggest the policy is amended to state: Early engagement with Anglian Water to identify infrastructure crossing the site and connection to the local water recycling network.
See attachment for full representation.
Object
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3637
Received: 03/02/2024
Respondent: Cornerstone Planning Ltd
No (see comments on Question 7a)
No (see comments on Question 7a)
Comment
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan - Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18)
Representation ID: 3749
Received: 05/02/2024
Respondent: Norfolk Wildlife Trust
The option to extend the existing allocation homes at this site could have an impact on Broom Heath CWS, which is around 200m away. This site is potentially sensitive as highly accessible heathland. There is a strong body of evidence showing how increasing levels of access can have negative impacts on wildlife. Issues are varied including disturbance, increased fire risk, contamination and damage. We recommend that policy wording should reflect the proximity to the CWS and any applications should review any potential indirect disturbances to this site in an ecological assessment, in particular with respect to potential visitor pressure impacts.
The option to extend the existing allocation homes at this site could have an impact on Broom Heath CWS, which is around 200m away. This site is potentially sensitive as highly accessible heathland. There is a strong body of evidence showing how increasing levels of access can have negative impacts on wildlife. Issues are varied including disturbance, increased fire risk, contamination and damage. We recommend that policy wording should reflect the proximity to the CWS and any applications should review any potential indirect disturbances to this site in an ecological assessment, in particular with respect to potential visitor pressure impacts.