Biggest concern it the amount of houses - maybe 20 or so would be easier to accommodate with the current infrastructure?

It is difficult to fully comment without seeing a site plan but I think that 40 houses sounds like too many. I would be concerned about the increase in traffic around the village (80ish extra cars) and not sure if the local school would be able to accommodate the extra pupils.
I like the idea of open space near the shop (with parking for the shop?) and would hope that this open space would extend along Bell road down to the pub.

If, however, there is no other option to build elsewhere in the village, I would object to the number of houses proposed. Taking into account the negative impact on the village in terms of increased pressure on school capacity, the additional cars and the noise, 15 houses with trees around the edges of the development should be the maximum permitted.

The prospect of 40 new houses on a field in the centre of the village is a concern. As a resident of Bell Road near to the crossroads I would prefer that this field is not changed.

I believe that 40 houses is far too many to put on a site of this area, particularly if one of the priorities is to maintain a natural feel in agreement with the adjoining areas. 10-15 houses would seem like a maximum number.

Unfortunately, there are no specifics on how the site would be laid out. The entrance to the site should be off of Norwich Road, as there is already traffic congestion due to driveways and businesses on Bell Rd. Specifics on how the local services such as the school and sewerage will cope, are necessary. Obviously these services will need to be expanded. Additionally, the intersection of Bell and Norwich road presents a serious hazard, there is no visibility. This issue must be dealt with in the realignment of Bell Rd. Children need to walk to school safely.

Of course one of the main attractions of Barnham Broom is that there is a natural space that extends into the middle of the village. The proposed build would inevitably ruin this, despite trying to maintain a natural landscape on the corner- I can’t see any way around that.

The reason I answered “No” to the previous questions, is that there is not enough information given, nor layman’s description of the specific plan. However I would like to make several comments. I think the proposed plans to maintain natural space at the corner of Bell Rd and Norwich Rd are a highlight of the proposal. Nevertheless, this natural space should extend at least down to the edge of The Bell pub, in which case it could be used as a space for those enjoying the pub. This would make the site far more attractive. Still I object.

- Entrance should be off if Norwich Road. There is no way Bell Road will cope, as all driveways and businesses are located on Bell Road. Even with expansion of the road this would not work. The main flow of traffic from the A47 to Wymondham is also Bell Road. It would be a congestion nightmare.

- The intersection is already far too dangerous, especially for children. Simply saying the road will be realigned and not giving real specifics on how the hazard of the intersection will be dealt with, is unacceptable. The plan simply states that it is s danger. We need to know exactly what will be done, reassure us that it won’t get worse.

- 40 houses is far too many. Specifics on the layout of the site is lacking, I would say max 10-15 would be a more reasonable number.

- The talk of maintaining a natural feel is too ambiguous. More specifics are necessary. I would suggest extending the natural border of the site from the corner down to the end of Bell Pub at least. Having open, usable space, for pub patrons would be a real asset.

- Transparency on plans for infrastructure (schools, roads, sewerage) should happen before people are asked to support such a drastic increase in housing.

One of the primary assets of Barnham Broom is open natural landscape that extends throughout the village. Building on this site, even if it is done with priority given to maintaining the natural ambiance, will not do this village justice. Furthermore, 40 houses is surely far too many for such a small plot, this would contradict the main objective of being in synch with surrounding nature. The lack of specifics on how the school, sewerage, and road infrastructure will cope with such a large development is certainly a downfall of the plan thus far.

Review and offer alernative locations to the edge of the village.

The development significantly alters the fabric of the area. It amounts to serious 'cramming' in a low-density area, losing the neighbourhood's open aspect and valuable green space and demonstrably harms the amenities enjoyed by residents. It does not respect local context, as it is overbearing, out-of-scale and out of character compared with existing properties in the vicinity. Isn't in keeping with the low-density street distribution, pattern and proportions of surrounding buildings along Norwich and Barnham Broom Roads to the development's E, NE & S which is entirely out of the area's character and to the detriment of the local environment.

Modify policy text to read:

Early engagement with Anglian Water to ensure that there is adequate capacity, or capacity can be made available, in the wastewater network.

See attached document.

We particularly welcome the clear and robust policy wording with respect to hedgerows/trees in Policy VC ROC: ‘The developer of the site will be required to ensure: ‘Protection of the trees and hedges on the site boundaries…’ and Policy VC LMI: ‘Protection and enhancement of the ecological/biodiversity features of the site, including the established trees, hedgerows…’

We recommend that similar policy wording is applied to the policies listed below to ensure that the Local Plan consistently provides robust protection for all hedgerows/trees on these allocated sites, as appropriate. Where removal of any part of a hedgerow or a tree/s is absolutely unavoidable, we recommend that policy wording should also include reference to mitigation measures and ideally reflect the updated biodiversity duty required in the 2021 Environment Act to have regard to the enhancement of biodiversity.

VC BB1 (Barnham Broom), VC BRE1 (Bressingham), VC HAL2 (Hales and Heckingham), VC SWA2 (Swardeston), VC NEE1 (Needham), VC WOR2 (Wortwell), VC NEW2 (Newton Flotman), VC SPO3 (Spooner Row), VC TAS1 (Tasburgh), VC BUR1 (Burgh St Peter), VC WIN1 (Winfarthing)
Hedgerows (Priority Habitat)

Local Authorities have a duty under the NERC Act 2006 and the Environment Act 2021 to have regard to the conservation and enhancement of Priority Habitats in their decision making. Hedgerows are listed as a Priority Habitat under the requirements of section 41 of the NERC Act.
Also of relevance is: National Planning Policy Framework, (NPPF), 179: ‘-To protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity, plans should…62 b) promote the conservation, restoration and enhancement of priority habitats, ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species; and identify and pursue opportunities for securing measurable net gains for biodiversity.’

Trees
Trees are given some protection in legislation, for example, from the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). However, we strongly recommend that the Local Plan provides fuller, more detailed and comprehensive protection as described above.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 131: Trees make an important contribution to the character and quality of urban environments, and can also help mitigate and adapt to climate change. Planning policies and decisions should ensure that……. appropriate measures are in place to secure the long-term maintenance of newly-planted trees, and that existing trees are retained wherever possible.