Object
New, Revised and Small Sites
Representation ID: 17022
Received: 17/11/2018
Respondent: Mr Robin Parkinson
My comments on this proposal set out above relate to:
Traffic - significant health, safety, traffic volume, noise and light pollution
Access - The proposed access to the site is wholly impractical. Accessibility to services are already limited and this proposal would add significant problems. Utility capacity - existing services are at capacity. Flood risk - there are ground water issues for this sloped site - the development will aggravate this. Compatibility with neighbouring use. These proposals are out of scale with this ancient village, pose major intrusion with sound,fumes, light and fumes pollution.
I will register my objections to this development in the following order
1)TRAFFIC - volume impact and safety
2)ACCESS
3)ACCESSIBILITY TO SERVICES
4)UTILITIES CAPACITY
5)FLOOD RISK
6)COMPATABILITY FOR NEIGHBOURING USE
Traffic - The site described sits to the west of the A140 Ipswich Road. Although this road is not currently designated at a trunk road it is a very busy arterial road linking Norwich with Ipswich and the coastal ports and westward to the midlands. The proposal, as currently described would significantly increase the volume of traffic (in excess of 600 traffic movements per day and links to other traffic increasing proposals set out in the GNLP would create traffic chaos. It would pose a major safety risk increase both to the village residents seeking access to or egress from the village via Church Road and to through traffic. The road is single carriageway, with a number of speed restrictions through its length and at rush hour the road now becomes gridlocked usually caused by traffic turning into or out of the junction on the A140.
ACCESS - the proposed entry / exit to the site uses the existing (little used farm entrance) the proposal for a ghost island for south bound traffic is wholly unsuitable for such a busy road.
ACCESS TO SERVICES - As a small village there is currently minimal service provision or plans for infrastructure improvement.
UTILITIES CAPACITY -I am advised that the existing sewerage and utilities services are already at maximum capacity.
FLOOD RISK- I am advised that while the flood risk is not great, there are significant issues with surface drainage, the sloping nature of the site will aggravate this problem and will necessitate significant structural work.
COMPATABILITY WITH NEIGHBOURING USE - This proposal is wholly unsuitable to be located in agricultural land adjacent to this ancient compact village. The scale of the proposal would totally dominate the village and the landscape views of approaches to the village. The noise, light and fumes pollution would significantly and negatively impact on the village.
I conclusion I find the proposal as damaging to the whole village and would represent corporate vandalism perpetrated for purely economic reasons.
CONCLUSION - This is the wrong proposal set in the wrong site, there are numerous alternative suitable sites within South Norfolk.