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

Object

Representation ID: 1196

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Michael Banks

There simply is not sufficient infrastructure in the village to accommodate an extra 50 housing units. I suggest you find more available sites nearer to Norwich city or at least consider sites nearer Poringland which has much more relevant infrastructure (including a post office which Brooke no longer has)

Object

Representation ID: 1199

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Michael Banks

Ref: SN0432REVA, East of Norwich Road

The extra dwellings not sufficiently supported by local infrastructure. Even recently lost Brooke Post Office. Sites should be found nearer Poringland for better infrastructure or even nearer Norwich city.

Object

Representation ID: 1201

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Michael Banks

Ref: SN0432REVB, West of Norwich Road

The extra dwellings not sufficiently supported by local infrastructure. Even recently lost Brooke Post Office. Sites should be found nearer Poringland for better infrastructure or even nearer Norwich city.

Object

Representation ID: 1203

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Michael Banks

Re. list of shortlisted or rejected sites:

NO allocations! All those listed have explanations for why there they have been rejected and I totally agree with these reasons. The one that is shortlisted is also not acceptable - it falls into the category of being way too close to the treasured heart and character of Brooke Village itself and the conservation areas. It would be a travesty to ruin our beautiful and protected village by imposing new developments that are totally out of character with our historic village. And the aesthetics ... God forbid!

Object

Representation ID: 1204

Received: 01/08/2021

Respondent: Michael Banks

Yes. For the reasons and reservations stated in this document.