Object
New, Revised and Small Sites
Representation ID: 17121
Received: 24/11/2018
Respondent: Mr Robin Parkinson
This is not a single site but two fields bisected by a farm track.The site is set on the western edge of a service village. The scale of the proposal cannot be described as infill.The site is hemmed in by the main train line to the east and power lines to the west.Access/egress is a major problem as is additional traffic using Church Road.Environmental problems include:loss of agricultural land, damage to wildlife and wildlife corridors.The site is in proximity to the ancient and listed village church.Ameliorating surface water problems would risk damage to existing ditches and ponds risking ecological damage.
This proposal is both impractical and unsuitable and out of scale with the character of this rural village - is certainly not 'infill' The site itself is described as a single site but is in fact two fields separated by a farm track and hemmed in by power lines less than 100 metres to the western edge of the site and by the main London / Norwich train line immediately to the eastern boundary of the site. There are also power lines which run overhead to the eastern part of the site.
There is significant issues relating to access and egress to the site, the track which is proposed currently serves farm traffic and two properties, the track bisects the garden of one of these properties and given its current width would be wholly insufficient to support the traffic generated by 20 dwellings and service/delivery vehicles. The proposal would also interfere with existing rights of way.
The proposal for 25 houses would generate in excess of 100 traffic movements per day onto a c class road approximately 100 metres from a level crossing and add to the already standing traffic at the Church Road junction with the A140.
This is agricultural land and would be a loss of amenity and resource if converted to residential use. The eastern edge of the site would be within the 400 metre exclusion zone set out in Para. 4.1 of the HELAA report in relation to the ancient village church and the village green
The site has significant surface water issues, requiring significant ground work for drainage which would interfere with the existing ditches and ponds with risk to wildlife and to ecology. A development of this scale cannot be described as 'infill' it would put strain on the existing limited services and would result in additional light and noise pollution and be an encroachment on the village's character.
The proposal is questionable in terms of financial viability since the site work necessary given the size and anticipated GVD (given the proximity to the railway and the power lines)would indicate that its viability would be marginal (Para 5.13 of HELAA)