I am writing with regard to the above proposed sites, I object most strongly, as the proposed developments would overwhelm such a small village and its existing community.
The infrastructure is such that our small school and medical practice would be unable to cope with such numbers. Rockland has no railway station and a very limited bus service, which was very recently in danger of being lost altogether due to cuts and is unable to run in our recent bad weather. Therefore, the community is highly reliant on their cars and many residents cycle to work etc. An increase in households would undoubtedly have a major impact, as the considerable increase in traffic through the village would not only create noise/air pollution but a significant hazard.
Access to the village is either via long winding single lane roads (Run Lane/Bullockshed Lane) or along Bramerton Lane. Not only are all these roads prone to flooding and are treacherous in severe winter weather, there are blind bends/accident spots and entrances/exits to several farmyards and their very large, slow farm vehicles. In particular site GNLP0165 is on a blind bend which floods across the whole road frequently and is also the main route for farm traffic (tractors, trailors and combine harvesters) throughout the year, as the farm is located at the beginning of Run Lane.
Many parents park on The Street to take their children to the primary school on School Lane, they have to do this, as School Lane is a small cul-de-sac and there is little suitable parking there. This means they are then crossing The Street near another bend with very young children, those near enough to walk are also doing the same. Many drivers already approach this part of the village far too fast, an increase in traffic would just compound this safety issue.
Furthermore, Rockland is well known by many as a National Cycleway, not only by locals but tourists alike, Rockland sees many cyclists using the route, sometimes in large groups. Although very good to see, this also can make it tricky for drivers to pass by safely. With several Environmental Conservation Sites, the Wherryman's Way, wonderful views, the entrance to Rockland Broad via the Staithe, (with its free moorings) fishing, kayaking and holiday cottages near proposed site GNLP0531, Rockland attracts many visitors. Many of these visitors are therefore enjoying the outdoor pursuits on offer and are on foot or cycling. A significant increase in traffic would inevitably have a devastating impact on all of the above with regard to the health and safety of the residents, visitors and wildlife and the view as you enter the village would be lost forever. No matter what style of housing is proposed at GNLP0165, it would be the first thing you see as you enter the village and could not make up for the loss of sloping green pastures, with grazing livestock and the Norfolk skyline that greets visitors and residents as we see our village sign and the entrance to our home.
As you can see, Rockland St. Mary although small, holds so much of what is wonderful about Norfolk countryside, do we really want to risk losing this and changing it forever.

Michaela Martin
4 Rookery Hill, Rockland St. Mary