We have set out below our views of the proposal GNLP0531 for 200 houses submitted by the landowner in connection with the Greater Norwich Local Plan.
We are absolutely opposed to the development for the following reasons:-

1. It is outside the area only recently defined in the South Norfolk Plan as being suitable for residential development. That decison was reached after a tortuously long consultation period of several years and surely, if the proposed area was not included after extended consideration then, it should not be included now.
2. The land is most attractive prime agricultural land overlooking and visible from the Broads Authority area of responsibility. The loss of greenbelt agricultural land should be resisted and the hilltop location of much of the proposed area ( closest to the main village ) means it would be visible for miles around.
3. The proposal would adversely impact on the setting of a listed building, namely our home The Old Hall, which has most rooms overlooking the land in question. Obviously this would impact on the value of our property and the enjoyment of the occupiers, of its garden in particular.
4. We are in the process of building a smaller new home to the south of The Old Hall, for our own occupation. The house is carefully sited and designed so it is only visible from the Old Hall from one upstairs window ( a dressing room ) and from no ground floor windows. The house will enjoy extensive views to the east and south, which views would be lost if the proposal is supported. The large full height windows would then overlook a building site, again adversely and significantly effecting enjoyment of the property and its value. If the proposal is adopted we would move out of the village.
5. The proposal would adversely effect virtually all of the existing houses and bungalows from one end of the site to the other, many of which back on to the land.
6. Rockland St Mary is a pleasant rural village, just 6 miles from Norwich. It has a good community, and assetts and services appropriate for its size. The nature of the village would change drastically if this proposal is allowed and most certainly not for the better. The linear nature of the village would be still further extended making it difficult to get to the shop or school without driving and isolating the eastern part from the west.
7. The school would be overwhelmed. Delivery and collection of children is already a nightmare as there is no parking for parents and this would be so much worse if this development proposal goes ahead. The enjoyment of the owners of homes in School Lane and nearby areas would be very adversely affected.
8. The potential access points are entirely inadequte. That at the extreme western frontage is very narrow and is not currently used other than on rare occasions for a tractor and is hemmed in by residential properties, which would prevent a more intensive use. In any event the sight lines are inadequate and do not meet modern standards. The access point at the top of New Inn Hill would be very dangerous, with inadequate sight lines, is opposite another junction and on the brow of a hill on a bend . We note that planning permission was recently turned down for a single dwelling almost opposite this point, partly due to access concerns.
9. The proposed development would create perhaps 2000/2500 traffic movements a day, greatly increasing the associated risks to road users and pedestrians alike.
10. The services in the village are inadequate to serve this site. We know from our own experience that the drainage system is at maximum capacity, that the electrical infrastructure could certainly not cope ( even for our new dwelling we have had to have a reduced power supply, because of capacity ) and we have no doubt that the water supply is also inadequate.
11. There are many much more suitable sites shown on the Norwich Local Plan.