QUESTION 93: Do you support

Object

Representation ID: 327

Received: 06/07/2021

Respondent: Brockdish & Thorpe Abbotts Parish Council

We do not agree with the concept of a Village Cluster Plan. The site proposed in Brockdish (SN4069SL - Land south of Scole Road) has been proposed without reference to information on flooding. The primary school is 6 Km away and well beyond walking distance.

Comment

Representation ID: 1961

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Water Management Alliance

See attachment for full response.
SN2065REV – Land north of High Road and Harmans Lane, Needham
Outside the IDD boundary, within the Waveney, Lower Yare and Lothingland IDB watershed catchment.
Major development – A riparian watercourse is located to the north of the proposed site which feeds into a Main River within the Waveney, Lower Yare and Lothingland IDD. 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).

Comment

Representation ID: 2017

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency (Eastern Region)

Sites SN0412REV, SN4052, SN2065REV and SN4079 are located within 250 metres of an existing landfill that could result in the nearby community being exposed to impacts including odour, noise, dust and pests. The severity of these impacts will depend on the size of the landfill, the nature of the waste it takes and prevailing weather conditions.
Planning policy requirements (paragraph 182 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)) state that new development should integrate effectively with existing businesses and not place unreasonable restrictions upon them. Where the operation of an existing landfill could have significant adverse effects on new development (including changes of use), the applicant should be required to provide suitable mitigation for these effects. Mitigation can be provided through the design of the new development to minimise exposure to the neighbouring landfill and/or through financial contributions to the operator of the landfill to support measures that minimise impacts.
Environmental Permitting Regulations require operators to demonstrate that they have taken all reasonable precautions to mitigate impacts of their operations. This is unlikely to eliminate all emissions and there is likely to be residual impacts. In some cases, these residual impacts may cause local residents concern. There are limits to the measures that the operator can take to prevent impacts to residents. Consequently, it is important that planning decisions take full account of paragraph 182 of the NPPF. When a new development is built near to an existing landfill this does not automatically trigger a review of the permit.

Comment

Representation ID: 2021

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency (Eastern Region)

Sites SN0274REVA, SN0274REVB, SN4078 and SN2065REV are all located within Flood Zone 3. These sites would all require site specific Flood Risk Assessments to be submitted for at application stage for any proposed development. Further advice can be found here https://www.gov.uk/guidance/flood-risk-assessment-standing-advice.

Comment

Representation ID: 2046

Received: 21/07/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Please see attachments for full response.
Site: SN2065REV, Land north of High Road and Harmans Lane, Needham
Whilst there are no designated heritage assets within this site, the grade I listed Church of St Peter, its boundary wall listed at grade II and Ivy Farmhouse, also listed at grade II lie to the south west of the site. Therefore, any development of this site has the potential to impact upon the significance of these heritage assets.
A heritage impact assessment of the site should be undertaken to assess the impact of the proposed development on the listed buildings and determine if allocation of this site is appropriate, and if it is what mitigation may be required. The findings of the HIA should inform whether the site is allocated and if it is, the policy criterion including any mitigation and enhancement.
Again, this is an important rural gap site in the village and consideration should be given to that role in combination with the setting of the heritage assets.
Complete an HIA to inform the allocation of the site including any mitigation, enhancement and policy wording.

Comment

Representation ID: 2147

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

SN2065REV
See attachment 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): Yes|Ordinary Watercourse
4.] Surface water sewer systems?:
* On-site: No
* Within proximity to site (~100.00m): No
5.] Source Protection Zone?: No
6.] Internal Drainage Board?: No IDB referenced
7.] The site predominantly has superficial deposits of SAND AND GRAVEL. Comments on infiltration potential are dependent on a complete geotechnical investigation, including BRE365 Soakaway Testing. Where possible, surface water infiltration should be utilised." The site is adjacent to a flow path. This must be considered in the site assessment.

Assessment: Green

Comment

Representation ID: 2201

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - Senior Ecologist

Green no major ecological constraints identified from desk-top search. Surveys, and biodiversity enhancement in accordance with policy required.
Site comprises part of an agricultural field between dwellings. Hedges are a priority habitat so losses should be avoided, minimised and as a last resort, compensated for. No other priority habitats are identified (see MAGIC). Site within amber/green habitat zones for great crested newts, and in SSSI IRZ but residential development does not trigger consultation with Natural England. 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.