South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Allocations Plan (Reg. 19 Pre-submission Draft)

Object

Representation ID: 2544

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The site VCBAR1 is not available for development.
Three businesses currently operate out of the garage including a car maintenance and repair shop, a used car seller, and a business in the offices upstairs. Historically, there has long been a business of this type here. Loss of this local employment goes against the delivery of sustainable development. There is no overriding economic, environmental or community benefit from redevelopment or change to another use which outweighs the benefit of the current lawful use continuing.
The businesses are well-supported by the residents of Barford and Wramplingham.
See uploaded documents.

Object

Representation ID: 2545

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The proposed development of 20 houses in this location will have a significant impact on the distinctive landscape characteristics of the area. The change is not just to the greenfield site affected but to the landscape and visual amenity of the whole village.
There is no suggestion in the proposal that there has been any attempt to consider or design a high quality landscape design.
The proposal is also contrary to health and safety policy (Garage site) and should be assessed in advance of progressing with the proposal.
See uploaded document.

Object

Representation ID: 2546

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Location of access: The single access point to Cock Street is too close to the B1108 and is likely to endanger highway safety. We propose it should have a red rating.
The likely increase in traffic (more than 80 vehicle movements per day) is likely to cause significant queuing and disruption at an already hazardous junction between Cock Street and the B1108.
Highway safety will also be compromised by the provision of a footway (of no recreational value) through the site connecting Cock Street to Back Lane (unsuitable for pedestrian use) to the west.
See uploaded document.

Object

Representation ID: 2547

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Re heritage, development of the site will adversely impact on the setting of Sayers Farm (Grade 2 listed) which, due to the bend in the road, will directly face the site. Also, the compression of 20 homes into this small site will not enhance the setting of the Cock Inn, nor the ancient centre of the village which is adjacent to the site. The hedgerows are unlikely to screen the site significantly due to the height of modern housing.
The lack of consistency with national policy means the proposal fails the test of soundness.
See uploaded document.

Object

Representation ID: 2548

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Any sewerage capacity assessment, has not taken into account the full recorded history of repeated sewerage capacity incidents in the village. Barford has been subjected to much sewage release into resident’s gardens, and on occasion into houses because the sewage system is unable to cope with the combination of effluent and rainfall. Adding additional houses to the system will continue to put further load on it.
Barford and Wramplingham are already susceptible to property flooding, which we consider is exacerbated by run off from housing developments that feed into the Tiffey and adjoining rivers.
See uploaded document.

Object

Representation ID: 2549

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Discussions have been ongoing for decades, and the problem continues to worsen. Therefore, we do not agree with additional housing to be considered until this issue has been solved. The “3 recorded instances” is INCORRECT. There have been many more. We understand that Anglia Water have put the village of Barford on a list of “Villages of Concern”. Recent “remedial actions” by Anglia Water have yet to be tested for their efficacy.
See uploaded document.

Object

Representation ID: 2550

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The village has grown but the limited services have declined or not kept pace: a small village school (often over-subscribed), a 1960-s built small village hall, and an hourly bus service to Norwich and one weekly service to Wymondham. No village shop for the 4-village cluster.
VCBAR1 will not contribute to a sustainable village. Indeed, it will have the opposite effect. 24 houses have been built during the recent past which have not benefited the residents other than to permit a few landowners to benefit from the “windfall” associated with building on green field sites.
See uploaded document.

Object

Representation ID: 2551

Received: 28/02/2023

Respondent: Barford & Wramplingham Parish Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

- Proposed single access point to Cock St is so close to B1108 that likely to endanger highway safety.
- No reason for pedestrian footway to connect Cock St with Back Lane, which is a narrow rural road. Link would not provide additional access to local footpath network. Back Lane unsuitable for significant pedestrian use.
- Concern over likely damage to heritage assets.
- Wish to see a severe limit on height of any houses to prevent housing from dominating beautiful and ancient centre of village.
- Density of proposed housing considerably greater than at present. This development will badly damage amenity of Barford, particularly on entering from west.
- Any contamination survey should be undertaken before any permissions are granted.
- No consideration given to flood risk associated with run off. Assessment must apply to additional run off into village and valley where flooding of dwellings more likely. Impact on sewage release into gardens and homes must be considered.