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

Comment

Representation ID: 1116

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

LMPC broadly agrees with the Objectives but does not agree that the current process has met the aims described in Objective 1. LMPC was expecting the VCHAP process to provide an opportunity for local people to comment on possible changes to the settlement boundary.

Support

Representation ID: 1117

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

Little Melton PC agrees with the policy on Standard Requirements and notes the policies for -
-Minimising impact on amenity of existing residents
-landscaping consistent with a rural, edge of village location

Support

Representation ID: 1120

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

Little Melton PC agrees that there should be a policy for design and that developments on the edge of villages should be appropriate for the locality. Three of the recent developments have not made adequate provision for parking and this has led to cars being parked on nearby roads and pavements.. There is poor public transport in LM and most houses have at least two cars.

Support

Representation ID: 1121

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

Particular attention should be given to providing accommodation that is attractive to older people wishing to downsize. There should be communal facilities such as visitor accommodation and flexible support arrangements. There are many large houses that are occupied by single elderly residents, these houses would become available for families if better alternatives were provided for the elderly.

Comment

Representation ID: 1123

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

Please note that 30 houses have been built at the 2015/1697 site, not 27 as stated. Several recent PAs have been turned down as being outside the Settlement Boundary and that has lead to debate about the role of the Settlement Boundary. The PC would have preferred there to have been a consultation with parishioners before this current plan was issued.

Object

Representation ID: 1126

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

The site is in the Landscape Protection zone and will suffer air and noise pollution from the A47. The junction with Green Lane has poor visibility. Please read the attached document for multiple other reasons for objection.

Object

Representation ID: 1127

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

SN0488 is also in the Landscape Protection zone and suffers even more from air and noise pollution than does site SN4052. The junction problems affect both sites equally.
SN2044 is not suitable for a development of 25 houses. Please see attached doc for more detail.

Comment

Representation ID: 1767

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

LMPC broadly agrees with the Objectives but does not agree that the current process has met the aims
described in Objective 1 to provide opportunities for self-builds. LMPC was expecting the VCHAP process to
provide an opportunity for local people to comment on possible changes to the settlement boundary. Several
recent PAs have been refused as being outside the Settlement Boundary (one PA was also inside the
Landscape Protection zone), people are now confused that there is a Prefered Site that is not even adjacent
to the Settlement Boundary and is inside the Landscape Protection zone - this undermines faith in the
planning system.

Support

Representation ID: 1768

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

LMPC agrees with the policy on Standard Requirements and notes the policies for -
● Minimising impact on amenity of existing residents
● landscaping consistent with a rural, edge of village location

Support

Representation ID: 1769

Received: 02/08/2021

Respondent: Little Melton Parish Council

LMPC agrees that there should be a policy for design and that developments on the edge of villages should be
appropriate for the locality. Three of the recent developments have not made adequate provision for parking
and this has led to cars being parked on nearby roads and pavements.. There is poor public transport in LM
and most houses have at least two cars.