QUESTION 158: Do you think

Showing comments and forms 1 to 17 of 17

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 14

Received: 07/06/2021

Respondent: Mr Michael Savage

Representation Summary:

we agree that the rejected sites should not be considered for the reasons as stated

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 166

Received: 22/06/2021

Respondent: Mr Magnus Magnusson

Representation Summary:

No, site SN4045SL is suitable, available and achievable. The evidence base documents that have informed the preparation of the consultation draft VCHAP have correctly identified my client’s site as being one of the 2 most suitable (‘sustainable’) options for allocation within the settlement of Wicklewood. My client sees no reason why any alternative site should be selected for allocation ahead of theirs. Please find supporting statement submitted alongside this submission as a PDF.

Attachments:

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 210

Received: 27/06/2021

Respondent: Professor Stephen Brown

Representation Summary:

Wicklewood Nurseries, High Street, Wicklewood is the most favourable site because it would enable development of land at the centre of the village, consolidating its footprint instead of extending its sprawl. It could also provide access to further land at the core to the village, south of Church Lane, allowing further consolidation.

Support

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 496

Received: 20/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Vaughan Harrington

Representation Summary:

SN0232REV
There is development down this road and is part of the Wicklewood village already, can't see a problem linking properties up. Any heritage sites would be revealed and addressed (a positive).

Support

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 498

Received: 20/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Vaughan Harrington

Representation Summary:

SN0535 - There would be a way to achieve the building here, just that there's not enough profit in it (builder buys a house in the way, and knocks it down, if need be). It has never stopped building properties in the past.

The "island" of Wicklewood could be fully utilised for building if wished. Maybe not yet, but in time it will be. It will happen.

Support

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 499

Received: 20/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Vaughan Harrington

Representation Summary:

SN2179 East of High Street
The land is a large parcel and building does not have to be by the streams edge. It could be located in the elevated position, close to the garage adjoining property east of High Street. Ideal for building. There are properties on the west side of High Street, and close to the stream. I can't see the problem building here.

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 729

Received: 28/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sallyann Weston

Representation Summary:

I would prefer to see infill development, such as the site SN0535 rather than creating large developments on the outskirts of the village

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 772

Received: 28/07/2021

Respondent: Mr joel pailes

Representation Summary:

Site SN4064 has merit above and beyond the allocated sites. It is a site not currently visible from the road side therefore will not alter the historic form and character of Wicklewood
Wicklewood is a unique village in South Norfolk will almost full development one side of the main thoroughfare and none on the other, this characteristic should be protected by South Norfolk - not compromised for eternity.
This site allows this unique characteristic to be maintained.
It does not take countryside away.
It also places new residents in the heart of the village allowing easier and easier integration.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 852

Received: 29/07/2021

Respondent: Wicklewood Parish Council

Representation Summary:

Objection from Wicklewood Parish Council
The parish council believes that an estate development like this in a small village will alter the whole character of the village which has previously developed by small developments which are more easily integrated into the community. The parish council would support smaller, infill, road front developments which would be better integrated.

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 951

Received: 30/07/2021

Respondent: Mrs Alison Foyster

Representation Summary:

More housing cannot be built along these small lanes, accessed from a minor road.

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 1050

Received: 31/07/2021

Respondent: Mr Alan Highet

Representation Summary:

At its recent meeting, Wicklewood Parish Council concluded (if I recall correctly) that while it recognises the need for more housing generally and that Wicklewood can expect to contribute, there is opportunity for infill development within the current Settlement Limit. It opposes development beyond the existing Settlement Limit, implied by the District Council’s proposals; and I have responded to previous questions with my views. I agree with the PC's sentiment; therefore other infill sites might be selected instead of the two preferred sites outside the Settlement Limit if other, reasonable criteria are met.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 1195

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Mr John Sellors

Representation Summary:

GN2179 The location is unsuitable for development; since a large proportion of the site is prone to flooding; and not only next to the edge of the stream. Development of this site would have a major impact on the views across open fields which are enjoyed by many. There is an abundance of wildlife on the land including dear, barn owls and pheasant. Exit from the site is unsuitable, and the speed at which some cars drive past the site is increasing to the extent they launch themselves over the bridge. Resultant damage to the road surface is clear evidence.

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 1331

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Mr Ralph Withers

Representation Summary:

Should be allocated as preferred if any…
The shortlisted site in Wicklewood Nurseries:
It is an infill site, amenities already exist within the village boundaries, access is easy and is not directly onto a busy main road.
There is no loss of employment envisaged by such a development here. The nurseries are no longer viable.
This is clearly the best site for development in Wicklewood.

Object

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 1375

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Icon Planning and Environmental Ltd.

Representation Summary:

On behalf of our registered Clients (the landowners) for site SN0535, we attach our full response to question 158 and associated evidence.
We strongly disagree with the description of a ‘narrow access driveway’, as the access in question is approximately 6m wide.
We also see we see the proposed allocation site as an opportunity to offer a lower density addition to the preferred allocations in Wicklewood, diversifying the characteristics of new development.
In addition, the provision of new housing would not require any expansion to the settlement boundary but would rather facilitate development on underutilised land within the existing settlement.

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 1729

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Ms Meryl Taylor

Representation Summary:

Site Ref: SN0249SL

Please can the planning department note that in addition to the large number of TPO trees on the land adjacent to the workhouse/St George at Wicklewood., the Diocese has confirmed that 150 bodies are still buried on that site, which means it is consecrated land. and not suitable on those grounds for building on.

Comment

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 2080

Received: 14/07/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - LLFA

Representation Summary:

See attachments for full comments.
Assessment: Green
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): Yes - Internal Flooding|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): No
5.] Source Protection Zone?: Source Protection Zone 3
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

South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 18 Draft)

Representation ID: 2237

Received: 28/09/2021

Respondent: Norfolk County Council - Senior Ecologist

Representation Summary:

Green no major ecological constraints identified from desk-top search. Surveys, and biodiversity enhancement in accordance with policy required.
SN4064 - site currently used as a flower nursery. No priority habitats identified onsite see MAGIC). Site in green habitat zone 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.