QUESTION 130: Do you think

Comment

Representation ID: 110

Received: 18/06/2021

Respondent: Mr Brian Frith

Comment submitted on behalf of Forncett Parish Council, who at their meeting on 17/06/21 agreed that they did not wish to suggest any changes to the recommendations for preferred or shortlisted sites (both of which are in Tacolneston). The Council also agreed that they did not wish to propose any changes to the rejected sites in Forncett End. Please take this as also being the response to Qu 130 and 131.

Comment

Representation ID: 1161

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Magnus Magnusson

My client considers that their ‘rejected’ site (SN2031) should be allocated (and/or included within the settlement boundary) instead of, or at the very least, in addition to, currently ‘preferred’ site allocation SN1057. Indeed, it is their view that site SN2031 is inherently more suitable (sustainable) than site SN1057 for the reasons outlined within the Supporting Statement and associated documents that accompany this submission.

Support

Representation ID: 1545

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sarah Manning

I support site SN0016Rev. previously known as GNLP0121 then GNLPSL0016 now recorded as SN0016.
I don't consider I can sum up my reasons in 100 words other that the site was submitted for one self build with an area 0.12 hectares, NOT as assessed 24 houses site area 0.95 hectares. I object to the HELAA and site score and consider due process has not been followed.
I wish to attach a document supporting my reasons.

Comment

Representation ID: 1721

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Bidwells

Site SN4019:
Concern that the content of the original submission has not been fully appreciated. Landowner stated that land could be made available for parking for school, yet assessment states there would be no public benefits.
Current school parking for parents dropping-off/collecting is very limited. Causes major traffic problems and this will be worsened with 40+ dwellings.
A new car park for the school as proposed within original submission together with direct walkway from the car park to a B1113 crossing would alleviate these problems, remove parked cars from the B1113 and Hall Road and make it much safer for children travelling to/leaving school.

Comment

Representation ID: 2097

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

SN0602
See attachment for full details.
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): Yes - External Flooding
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): Yes
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: 2224

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.
SN0602 - Agricultural field access via 'the fields' bounded on three sides by hedges (priority habitats). No other priority habitats identified (see MAGIC). Site in amber habitat zones for great crested newts. Site in SSSI IRZ, but residential development doesn't 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. (southern field/hedge boundary forms parish boundary).