QUESTION 117: Do you support

Comment

Representation ID: 462

Received: 19/07/2021

Respondent: Seething Parish Council

Seething Parish Council agree this would be infill equivalent to development on the East side of Street (Hawthorne House, Portelet, Mallards, Fieldfare and Fallowfield) and West side of Street between Holmlea and The Cottage. We have no major objection provided that the large, healthy mature Oak within hedge midway along site is wholly protected; the Little Mere should be similarly protected.

Support

Representation ID: 546

Received: 22/07/2021

Respondent: Otley Properties Ltd

Agent: John Long Planning

SUPPORT - Otley Properties, on behalf of the landowners, can confirm that preferred settlement extension: Site: SN0587SL, Land to the west of Seething Street, Seething can be supported, and agree that any development is likely to be small scale (up to 5 dwellings) and linear in form to reflect the character and appearance of the neighbouring area. The intention remains to bring forward the site within 5 years of the adoption of the plan.

Support

Representation ID: 1550

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Matthew Tinkler

Supported on the basis of any development being linear in form to reflect the character and appearance of the neighbouring area.

Comment

Representation ID: 1974

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Water Management Alliance

See attachment for full response.
SN0587SL – Land to the west of Seething Street, Seething
Outside the IDD boundary, within the Waveney, Lower Yare and Lothingland IDB watershed catchment.
Minor development - No further comments

Comment

Representation ID: 2055

Received: 21/07/2021

Respondent: Historic England

Please see attachments for full response.
Site: SN0587SL, Land to the west of Seething Street, Seething
This site is adjacent to the Seething Conservation Area and close to the grade II listed Breydon Cottage and The Walnuts. 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 conservation area 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.
Complete an HIA to inform the allocation of the site including any mitigation, enhancement and policy wording.

Comment

Representation ID: 2131

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

See attachments for full response.
Few or no constraints. Standard information required at a planning stage.
"1.] At risk of surface water flooding?: Yes
* 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]: Minor flooding
* 0.1% AEP Event [Depth]: 0.00- 0.30cm.
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): No
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 DIAMICTON. Comments on infiltration potential are dependent on a complete geotechnical investigation, including BRE365 Soakaway Testing. Where possible, surface water infiltration should be utilised."
Assessment: Green

Comment

Representation ID: 2217

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.
Allocation to left of road, in agricultural field (wide field margin). hedge along eastern boundary (priority habitat), but no priority habitat identified see MAGIC). Site in amber risk zone for great crested newts (pond adjacent). Site in SSSI IRZ but residential development does not trigger NE consultation. 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. PROW along southern boundary.