QUESTION 99: Do you think

Comment

Representation ID: 75

Received: 13/06/2021

Respondent: Mrs Kirsten Remer

Having moved into Alan Avenue when it was only 40 houses, more development does not concern me if it is planned well BUT access does and on street parking of existing residents will cause issues, down the road so this needs addressing/managing Another access road via the playing field and Grove Way could be considered - not through the playing field - drainage issues. Also drainage needs to be looked at carefully- needs to be separate to the exiting drainage running 'under' Alan Avenue.

Support

Representation ID: 242

Received: 30/06/2021

Respondent: Mrs Dawn Turnbull

As a resident of Newton Flotman before the current Alan Avenue development I think the shortlisted sites should be rejected. Newton Flotman has already been developed (current Alan Avenue development) which adversely affects my home. The additional traffic joining/exiting the A140 has caused the junction to become extremely dangerous. More pollution, increased traffic generation and noise, increased risk of accident, loss of greenspace and agricultural land, loss of biodiversity/wildlife/trees/hedging. Reduced safety for pedestrians in the village. Increased pressure on already pressurised facilities (doctors/sewers/communications etc). I would not support access via Church Road, no pavements/lighting/severely reduced pedestrian safety, it's already terrifying!

Object

Representation ID: 560

Received: 22/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Carol Watson

The shortlisted site SN4025 is not suitable:
There is no adequate accessSN4025. Alan Avenue is not suitable and was never designed for an additional volume of traffic. Church Road is not suitable either.
Concerns with sewerage capability and drainage from the site. There are already issues in the village which will be exacerbated by any new developments.
Concerns about the safety of pedestrians as the area around SN4025 is used by most residents in the village to exercise, walk to the mobile library, walk to the Village Centre and Playgroup, cycle, walk dogs, and visit the children’s play area.

Support

Representation ID: 605

Received: 24/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Stuart Partridge

Both SN4024 and SN4025 should be rejected based upon lack of detail regarding access and impact upon the existing infrastructure and wildlife of the village.
The village already lacks some key services (shop, full time GP, pub) and has narrow roads unsuitable for extra traffic.
It is a quiet village providing a, much needed, contrast between Norwich and Long Stratton and any major growth will dilute the relatively tranquil nature of Newton Flotman

Support

Representation ID: 692

Received: 27/07/2021

Respondent: Rachael Graver

Alan Avenue - Newton Flotman
Inferior GP provision with NewtonFlotman closed, only dispensary. LongStratton struggling and already at capacity. Mulbarton publicly admitted struggling. Concerns with sewerage, the pumping station regularly needs pumping out. Drainage a common issue during heavy rain.
Dangerous Flordon Road/A140 junction unable to cope with current traffic volume. No engagement with Highways and ParishCouncil since 2019. School is already at capacity with temporary classrooms. The infrastructure needs to be in place first.

Object

Representation ID: 752

Received: 28/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Hannah Kill

SN4025 Should be rejected. The village can not cope with anymore housing. The access to Alan Avenue is already hard due to off road parking. Many families walk up to the playground through Alan avenue and already feels precarious at times. There are so many reasons this is not suitable. Health provisions, schooling, air pollution, the environment, lack of services, drainage is poor and sewer system already struggles to cope. There is already a permitted development to be completed - you can not know the impact on the village facilities until Completed.

Comment

Representation ID: 781

Received: 29/07/2021

Respondent: Newton Flotman Parish Council

SN4025
The Parish Council agree that this would be an unsuitable site for all the reasons listed for site SN4024.

SN0594
The Parish Council would not support this site unless the A140/Flordon Road junction was improved.

Object

Representation ID: 870

Received: 29/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sandie Gray

SN4024

Comment

Representation ID: 881

Received: 29/07/2021

Respondent: Ms Xenia George

I think the council ought to be looking at brownfield sites on the edges of busier towns with better infrastructure rather than tagging houses onto areas where there is already a dearth of decent services. These shortlisted sites will just end up full of houses where residents need to drive to local amenities, leisure activities, schools, dentists, doctors, shops.

Support

Representation ID: 937

Received: 30/07/2021

Respondent: S MASLEN

Unless it is on brown field sites they should all be rejected. You are not preserving the community and environment for future generations with this form of environmental vandalism.

Object

Representation ID: 1055

Received: 31/07/2021

Respondent: Ms Pamela Goodwin

Agent: Emma McMurdock

Lived in the village 46 years and no longer feel safe walking due to current traffic and people parking on the paths. It is an accident waiting to happen. Developers make broken promises about improving roads. A140 / Flordon Road junction is dangerous with the added hazard of cars on the streets. There are no facilities in the village. We don’t need more houses

Object

Representation ID: 1092

Received: 31/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Trudi Wilson-Berry

Land off Grove Way, Newton Flotman SN4025

This site is unsuitable because access to the site would be via Church Road, which is a narrow one-car-at-a-time road. The traffic levels are already difficult and any additional housing would make this road treacherous. There is no foreseeable ability to widen the road or even add a footpath.
Amenities are already lacking in the village.
The small school is full and the GP Surgery has not been open to see patients for some time.

Object

Representation ID: 1093

Received: 31/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Simon Wilson-Berry

SN4025 site is totally unsuitable for development. Church road is a single track road that currently struggles to cope with the current traffic. The area is heavily used by children, dog walkers and residents and any further development would be a great safety concern. Services are already poor and would not be able to support any further increase in residents. Newton Flotman is a small Norfolk village and should remain so.

Object

Representation ID: 1110

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Miss Georgina Fitchett

We acknowledge we need more houses but we simply don’t have the infrastructure in our village to sustain more houses

Support

Representation ID: 1580

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: N Sviridov

Village is overdeveloped without the neccessary underlying structure, i.e. post office, school, transport,shops - the roads are packed. It is at a critical level the village is not coping.