QUESTION 14a: Do you agree with the proposed allocation VC WIC1 REV, Land to the south of Wicklewood Primary School, to accommodate up to 40 dwellings on 2.97ha? Please explain your response.

This consultation deliberately leaves out inconvenient facts that could affect how people reading the proposals might feel about them.
As recently as August 2021, SNDC said that in Wicklewood:
“Hackford and Wymondham Roads benefit from extensive views of the surrounding countryside”.
“The primary school is operating near or at capacity. Further exploration will be needed to ensure primary school needs can be met.”.
These are material facts. The school lacks capacity to support the development and the development would irrevocably destroy the countryside views.

Jan 2023 Reg 19 clearly states the initial allocation of 30 dwellings is on 1.63 ha. The revision states that the original 30 will be on 2.5ha. Where has the additional 0.87 ha come from? This is before the increase to 40.
The Green is not a suitable access road for the amount of traffic to be generated.
There is already unacceptable flooding and surface drainage issues in the village. This will be exasperated by even 30 new dwellings let alone 40.
The increase takes Wicklewood's allocation above SNDC's own limit of 50 for a settlement of this size.

See attachment for full representation.

Please see attachment for full representation.

See attachments for full representation.

I object this this development.
The Green, Wicklewood already floods and this will increase with further properties. It is also a safety issue being next to the primary school, with drop off and collect times already hazardous

Totally inappropriate site on the outskirts of the village, destroying a marvellous open countryside vista. Added to its proposed adjacent huge site it would turn transform the two sites to one vast housing estate!
Would create additional serious road problems as adjacent to dangerous bends, would have poor access and would hugely increase the already existing school parking problems.
Poor local amenities, (school and pub), including no public rights of way for walkers, leading to excessive car use by new inhabitants.

See attachment for full representation.

Please note 9 houses off Milestone Lane (previously Ashcroft project) have a combined sewage system that has a soakaway outlet running through the proposes site. We need assurance that any development will take account of our sewage requirement.
Andrew Grosvenor, Chairman, Ashcroft Lane Management Company Limited

Landscape. Protection empty space.
Landscaping cannot compensate for lost views, more houses more lost. Planting will not match mature trees.
Access. Transport.
Widening The Green from Hackford Road to the access assumes all traffic via Hackford or Wymondham Road. Ignores travel away from Hackford Road. Roads to south require passing places, causing further erosion of verges. No footpaths so walking increasingly dangerous.
Utilities
South no access to mains sewer or gas, have septic tanks, oil. 4 roads no FFTP.
407 properties, (VC W1C1 and W1C2) increase 10 %, ( VC W1C1 REV) 13 %. Out of proportion and high density.

Increasing heavy traffic where there are no footpaths. Already dangerous on the bend with increased traffic going to the school. This is not a well serviced village and additional housing would bring additional cars. Flooding is an issue and The High Street is already used as a cut through. A smaller number of new homes would be more acceptable.

This proposal is in an area of open countryside with outstanding far reaching views.
Also, there are limited facilities in the village for such a large scale development, no shop and a village school that is so oversubscribed with children from surrounding areas that local children can't get in.

Wicklewood Parish Council objects to this proposed allocation:

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. The landscape has not changed between version 18 and 19, so neither should the description of Wicklewood. It is wrong and misleading to remove accurate descriptions just because they do not fit with the new plans. Previous planning applications in this area have been refused on the grounds of obstructing these views. Here is the full history of the official description of this area:
• 1996 – This plan says, “a particular feature is the large open area of land bounded by development on Church Lane, Wymondham Road and High Street” and “the large central open area and good views from within the village of the surrounding countryside all contribute to the rural character of the village”.
• 2003 – No Wicklewood specific section because they severely restricted development in rural villages in this plan. Wicklewood is mentioned under HOU 6 with a few other villages where development was “i) limited to small scale developments of not more than 10 dwellings; and ii) Singly or cumulatively, the development would be in keeping with the form and character of the village and its setting.
• 2015 (current Local Plan) – This plan says, “Hackford Road and Wymondham Road benefit from extensive views of the surrounding countryside”.
Emerging Local Plan: -
JCS Nov 18 - Five sites were consulted on in Wicklewood in early 2018 and a further consultation for additional site put forward were consulted on ending Dec 18. This states that the Hackford Road site is – “less well related to the settlement pattern, being on the opposite side of the road to the main village” and “the site provides open views across the plateau farmland and subdividing it to provide a small amount of housing would affect the setting of the village”.
Reg. 18 – said “Hackford Road and Wymondham Road benefited from extensive views of the surrounding countryside”.
Reg. 19 (March 23) – removes the above comment about Hackford Road and Wymondham Road benefited from extensive views of the surrounding countryside.
Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan – Alternative Sites & Focused Changes (Reg. 18) (current consultation ending 05 Feb 2024) – As Reg. 19 above.
It should also be noted that South Norfolk Landscape Character Assessments Character Area: E3 – Hingham - Mattishall Plateau Farmland, which covers this area states. Large, geometric arable fields are the dominant land cover. From the most elevated areas, for example at High Oak, views to churches within the character area (at Wicklewood and Deopham) and outside the character area (at Hackford) are significant.
This site has been rejected at previous Local Plan due to it being “less well related to the settlement pattern, being on the opposite side of the road to the main village” and “the site provides open views across the plateau farmland and subdividing it to provide a small amount of housing would affect the setting of the village”.
There are serious concerns about the flooding potential of this development. There is already flooding in the area around The Green and Primrose Farm. Water flowing from this site would threaten the nearby Wicklewood Mere which is an SSI. The properties along Milestone Lane are not on main sewers and the additional ground water would impact on their septic tanks. We have also recently had confirmation from Anglian Water that the Wicklewood Pumping Station does not have sufficient capacity to get tankers on site quickly enough to prevent overspill into the river if the pumps fail. Although a generator has recently been installed, this only deals with power failure and would not address any mechanical failure.

Wicklewood currently has a tax base of just 407 properties. To add another 40 or 52 properties is a development out of proportion with the size of the village. There are concerns about the additional traffic movements that will be generated on narrow country lanes where there are few pavements. In the description it states that there is a good range of facilities including a primary school, village hall, recreation field and pub. The work 'including' would imply that there are more facilities, however there are not. There is no shop, Post Office, surgery or any other facilities to support this additional housing. The local school generally runs at virtually full capacity and currently has very few spaces which will not be sufficient to take the extra primary school children anticipated for this size development which could increase the village population by almost 13% and schools in neighbouring Wymondham are also full. There is also no availability for doctor, dentist or vets in the area, all of the current practices in Wymondham are at full capacity

There are not enough amenities to support so many new dwellings. Primary school is full. Traffic terrible in the morning and will be exacerbated by new homes and the necessary building work. Beautiful space to be destroyed.

Wicklewood is a small village and the only amenities are a primary school, a pub and a church. The proposed number of houses is far too many to be supported by the village. The roads are narrow and quite busy at school times and work times and could not safely support much more traffic. I know people have to live somewhere and our village is desirable. A smaller number of extra houses would be fine. More amenities would be fine too but this plan is too large.

I think the individuals that have already objected (highlighting roads, traffic, flooding, school, loss of habitat, lack of services, destruction of village life, urban sprawl, impact on existing residents etc etc), coupled with George Freemans objections, highlight why this is an extremely bad idea (it was a bad idea at 30 let alone an increased number). The village can meet any requirement by sensible single dwelling infill or very small development’s, as has happened previously on the High Street.. This is the countryside and it should be protected not destroyed for no other reason than profit, this has nothing to do with providing homes.

VCWIC1 and VCWIC1REV would look hideous and out of place with the existing character of the village. The sun sets in that area and many people actually stop their cars to park up and take photos of nature at its best. These developments would ruin the countryside and increase the traffic flow on an already busy area and bend. Wicklewood drainage is also poor and we do not trust this would be adequately addressed and therefore add to existing problems. This would also set a precedent for future expansion along the whole length of the field should this go ahead.

The village of Wicklewood has 2 facilities only a pub and a school. The school is oversubscribed. The village has flood problems mainly surface water a new development will add hard paving and roads hall needing drainage. Planners have a poor track record regarding this issue with the infrastructure requiring sewerage including lagoons and sustainable features, substations road enhancement. What will be the planning gain none I can see. I object to badly thought out plans which will lead to more flooding, pressure on a road that already has a dangerous crossroad nearby with no additional facilities promised or shown.

Wicklewood is a rural village with views over the surrounding countryside, it has no local facilities such as a shop Their is no availability of dental provision and doctors are streched beyond the limit and cannot accommodate the recent on going expansion of Wymondham let alone a further large development of Wicklewood. If this is allowed it will pave the way for further expansion and ruin the nature of the village. It is will also increase traffic and make access to the school considerably more dangerous.

Government asks for infill and not extending villages onto good agricultural land.

Hackford and Wymondham Roads benefit from extensive views of the surrounding countryside (as stated in the current plan and Reg 18). This fact has been removed from the Reg 19 statement as it does not support the site allocations VC WIC1. The landscape has not changed between version 18 and 19, so neither should the description of Wicklewood. The development of this site and proposed additional allocation will severely impact the extensive views. In addition, the scale of development is disproportionate to the existing size of the village, will increase traffic levels and adversely impact the surrounding environment.

Development at Wicklewood will change the character of a lovely Norfolk village another example of South Norfolk Council's efforts at ruining the South of the county by building characterless hectares of housing which in the future will not be needed. Global population is expected to decrease starting at about 2050 and the population of this country should be decreasing now if all politicians were not preoccupied by continual growth. We will need the farmland to grow food for the existing population as it is becoming increasingly clear that the world will not be able to provide our food in future.

Having attended a recent Parish Council meeting (well attended, including our district councillor), I agree with everything the PC proposed to submit.

Googling "housebuilding near Wymondham Abbey rejected" for insight before submitting this, I note that, only two-and-a-bit years ago when praising a planning inspectorate decision to disallow an appeal in nearby Wymondham, George Freeman MP commented about "... housebuilders ..." and "... large scale commuter housing on the outskirts of villages and towns with wholly insufficient infrastructure ... ". Wicklewood's infrasructure is wholly insufficient with potential flooding and many other issues highlighted at the Parish Council meeting.

The site is open arable land and provides extensive open views across the plateau farmland. Development here would be poorly related to the existing pattern of development in Wicklewood, unacceptable intrusions into predominately open countryside and would be wholly unacceptable in visual terms.

Piecemeal erosion of this large open land would not enhance the form and character of the village.

The small narrow road ‘The Green’ is already subjected to flooding and development could also impact on the school grounds, which have also been subject to flooding in the past.

Development of this green field site would cause Increased traffic, light and noise pollution, serious road safety issues not just locally but also to and from local schools and facilities along the busy Hackford road or small surrounding single-track roads which are already heavily used by agricultural vehicles and HGVs.
It contradicts Council indication of no more than 12-25 at any one site
There are issues with privacy, flooding, general services (water, internet, street lighting, sewerage, school & power to name a few) it will constitute sprawl of a village that has already had development (20 homes in 2020).

I have serious concerns about the flooding potential of this development. The properties along Milestone Lane are not on main sewers and the additional ground water would impact on their septic tanks

Wicklewood currently has about 400 properties, so to add another 40 or 52 properties is out of proportion with the size of the village. I have concerns about the additional traffic movements that will be generated on narrow country lanes. The Pre-school is full to capacity and the local school only has few places which will not be sufficient for this size development.

The existing settlement limit would seem to be more than sufficient to allow future development when needed without expanding it to the south of the busy Hackford road which would effectively cut the village in half with a busy main road, making it extremely dangerous for pedestrians especially the young and old and ruining what has been outlined as important views across the landscape.
There are multiple issues with water, sewerage, electricity and gas supplies, as well as land drainage, not to mention the lack of local amenities.

I disagree with the proposed allocation of houses on land south of the Hackford Road in Wicklewood. I support Wicklewood Parish Council's letter of objection about this. Still, I would like to add the following:

1. I reiterate one of the Parish Council's primary objections regarding losing the extensive views across this area. Statements have deliberately been removed from the Council's own original submission regarding the importance of retaining these extensive views across the countryside south of Hackford Road, Wicklewood. This is wrong. The Council does not have the right to remove previous statements from documents because they no longer suit its original thinking.
2. The site is on a junction that is a rat-run at certain times of the day. The access to the new site lies on The Green. The current proposal is to widen this narrow lane around the site entrance. But this will be inadequate. The extra traffic generated by another 40 dwellings will make the road dangerous for other road users and pedestrians.
3. This area is also an essential route for migrating toads during their breeding season when they return and then leave the ponds in this area. Their migration involves crossing roads, and many are killed by traffic as they do this. The toad breeding season spans February, March and early April, and the two hours from dusk onwards, particularly on dark and wet nights, are when the greatest toad activity occurs. During this period the Wicklewood toad wardens patrol The Green and the bottom end of Top Road to ensure the survival of toads crossing these lanes. These lanes are close to the proposed development. The extra traffic risk will further reduce an already declining toad population in this area and put the toad wardens, including myself, at risk.
4. A further consideration is that the proposed site is too close to the village school. Further traffic along the Hackford and Wymondham Roads will increase the risk of accidents, particularly on the school bend,
5. Extra housing will increase the potential of flooding, a problem that will only increase each year due to climate change.
6. Wicklwood already has 407 homes, and the infrastructure in the village and the surrounding area cannot support a further 10% increase in the village's population (or more if the buffer is adopted). The school is near capacity, and there is no village shop, meaning people must use their cars to shop.

I am not against further development in the village through in-fill, but I am totally against this site. If you allow these houses to be built on this land south of Hackford Road, you will open the floodgates to developers wishing to build houses right along this scenic area of open countryside.

The proposed area for development has increased in size from January 2023 Regulation 19. Here it states 1.63 ha for up to 30 dwellings. The revision states that this was 2.5 ha which is incorrect. This has now been increased again to 2.97 ha for the plan for 40 homes. The revision also states that there is space for further extension of the proposed revised site if required for this proposed housing plan. This suggests that further green land is already being considered for further development.
SNVCH allocation plan document seeks to allocate a series of 12-25 dwellings of smaller sites across the villages, this proposal does not fit in with this plan. This exceeds the upper end of SNVCP. This increase takes Wicklewood allocation above SNDC own limit of 50 houses for a settlement of this size.
Wicklewood has 3 areas proposed for development - for 12, 6 and also now 40 new homes, a total of 58.
Previous consultation documents have identified the site is not connected to the village settlement, sitting outside the main built form of the settlement and is within a prominent location within the landscape and states intrusion into open countryside.
This proposal ignores the rural character charm of the village and its shared open vista of open countryside. It does not enhance the village characteristics and would sit alone in the green countryside.
Natural infills to follow the natural form of the village would not spoil the village character.
Any development would open up the green land to further development as already indicated in this plan, leaving further green land adjacent and beyond at risk of further development
The density of the proposed housing is excessive, above the suggestion from the VCHP. Currently 403 homes in the village boundary including farmsteads, resulting in an increase of approximately 14%.
The village has basic services only; a primary school, pub, village hall with limited clubs and, bus service until 2000hours.
The suggested access to this proposed development does not include traffic travelling south of the village towards Wymondham College and A11. This road is a narrow rural road with poor visibility which often floods and a problem with surface water. The Green access also floods. The extra traffic will cause safety issues for drivers and pedestrians and cyclists.
The area is known to flooding in its present state, adding homes will only worsen this problem.
The plan does not mention the pending 6 new dwellings on the nursery site (ref 2022/0899) with infill, further homes and small developments possible off the High St in the future.
Wicklewood already has had infill of 12 plus homes with affordable housing on High St over recent years and currently a pending application (ref 2022/0899) is potentially adding a further 5 dwellings on the old Nursery land off High Street. These 5 plus the other infills since 2015 have not been included in the totalling up of increased dwelling allocations.
The proposed development on 2.97h of this field leaves approximately 6.9h of agricultural field left to farm here and this would in many farmer's opinion be uneconomic to farm productively, leading to the potential future further development of the remaining land to its western boundary with Milestone Lane. This proposed site in WW could easily be developed in the same way, loosing all its rural views. Towns are suffering loosing their characters and now villages are to become mini towns. This is destruction of the countryside and the rural characteristics of the village and Norfolk's landscape.

I object to the proposed development as it will significantly alter the visual landscape of our community. Preserving the unique visual identity of our neighbourhood is crucial for maintaining the quality of life for residents. In addition, there is a lack of off-road walking in the area for dogs and prams and this is one of the only fields that is available for this purpose with countryside views.

The junction onto Hackford Road is also not well suited to additional vehicles entering Hackford Road, particularly at that proximity to the school at times of high traffic.