The site outline states there is a precedent as eel catcher close was built here. But this was a special development for social housing. No other housing has been allowed here and we were promised that no further developments would take place. The best way forward would be to place six or so houses sideways on to the road that run southwards, so dimiishing the visual impact and not enclosing houses in the close.

The proposed development is not to the west of eel catcher close, but incorporates a large area directly behind the houses. This area is to the SOUTH
of Eel Catcher close. The linear layout of the village means that every house in the village (bar six or seven houses in the new development in Bee Orchard way), have open access to the rear with fields and open gardens. The Eel Catcher Close has very short gardens, less than half the length of the average house in the village. Any buildings to the rear of Eel Catcher Close will destroy the open aspects, views and enclose the whole close in a block of houses back to back. There would be a busy road to the front and houses to the rear, destroying the nature of the residents sense of being in a village altogether. The two plots of land have been adjoined to create a massive block on open access to the feilds, the views and to enclose and destroy the only open area of the village where the valley can be accessed and seen.

The Planning Authority to respect the statements made when Eel Catcher was allowed to be developed for social housing.

As advised in 2021 the site is outside the development area. Eel Catcher Close was developed strictly under the terms of a Rural Exception Site for social housing only. When permission was granted under those terms, the Parish Council and its parishioners were given assurance at a public meeting that this would not set a precedent for further development of the adjoining land.

This plan is unacceptable.

The visual impact of more housing on this site will be seen for miles, Eel Catcher Close is already clearly visible from the other side of the Valley and more housing of this scale would be unbearable in what is a beautiful and special natural environment, with just arable farming land. There are ancient trees along the footpath. The villagers were given assurance that no more develoment would be allowed after Eel Catcher Close was built and this must be honoured.

plans should be scrapped

The Regulation 18 document claims Eel Catcher Close development in
2017 set a precedent for development of the site. This is not the case. Eel Catcher Close was deemed an ‘exception site’ for developing outside the Village Development Area, only because it was used for social housing. An exception site cannot form a precedent for further open
market residential development outside the boundaries of the settlement. This invalidates the application.
The linear development of the villages is arranged so that all houses have an open space behind them. Even in build up areas, like School Lane, every house has open fields behind it. The development running behind eel catcher close would destroy all access and open views and the gardens being very short (half the length of other houses on that side of the road) privacy would be destroyed.
There is a covenant on the land behind Eel Catcher Close that prevents houses being built there (title number NK484850).
South Norfolk District Council has failed to identify the historic
significance of the Old Hall which is a listed building and that the land of VC ROC1, which
shares a historical functional relationship with the farmstead makes to its significance, and
subsequently has failed to access it's impact..
21 buildings have been placed opposite Eel Catcher Close and this has created a full to bursting point situation on sewage and utilities and has added to the housing considerably.

As stated in the Highways report, one or two houses may be allowed, but any more would create problems for access, traffic issues, and destruction of trees and fauna.

There are three issues that are incorrect in this proposed plan. The proposed site is to the SOUTH of eel catcher close, not to the west, the double nature of two sites means this would run behind eel catcher close. The village is in one long line and everyone has access to feilds at the rear, even in built up areas like school lane. The close would have no privacy as the gardens are very short and open access to feilds and views would be destroyed.
The road access is both listed as amber and RED in the report submitted and therefore not a valid site as the road is often used as a substitute for the A146 when this is closed (twice this year already because of road works and accicents). The precedent in the supporting documents is invalid as it states there is a precedent by the eel catcher close development. This wasn only allowed for social housing and was a special exception. The new development is NOT social housing and a provision may be made for one or two but this is easily avoided. The village limit would be breached and the footpath that is proposed leads to nowhere at all, just a narrow strip of grass with no pavement on the street. There is also a covenant on the land behind eel catcher close to protect the barn - and ancient building and this is protected.

No Housing

The housing will have a major visual impact on the area making it less attractive as a tourist destination.
It will have an adverse affect on wildlife by reductiing habitat space, especially for birds such as skylarks which nest in those fields; a once common bird but whose numbers have plummetted in recent years. Those fields have been frequented by flocks of geese ; I enclose photos I have taken of large flocks of geese using those fields, allocated for housing. Badgers have also been seen in the area.
We cannot afford to lose any more mature trees

Ensure extensive research has been undertaken with due diligence.

There are a number of issues regarding Public Right of Way, footpaths and road safety. Please see the attached documents.