How can increasing the village using sites GNLP2061 / 2063 / 2064 be in the interest of anyone else, but the developers?

These 3 sites can increase housing in the village by 50%! The whole village would increase by 50% overnight. This is a massive jump for such a small village.

These 3 sites are unsafe due to the access onto 'The Street'. It is a small road, with already 1000 cars coming through daily (1000 cars come through daily according to the Rockland St Mary speed camera, added to the village recently). If you add another 250 houses, that is easily 500 extra cars on the road. Another 500 cars coming through the village. Again, a 50% increase in traffic. That causes pollution, loss of wildlife, and most importantly, the added risk of injury. Only last week, a car crashed into a wall on the Street, causing large damage to the car and wall. This would increase the chances of this happening again and again.

2 of the 3 sites are over the only pathway in the village. The children walk to school along this path. The village is made up of many pensioners, which, respectively, some have poor eyesight. Walking to the post office would become even more troublesome with extra cars coming out of 2 extra junctions.

Local Resources would be stretched to the max., when no additional funding will be added. This has been confirmed by a local councillor.

Local wildlife - there are bats in the back of our garden. I'm sure there are many more in the area. Destroying their own habitat cannot be a good thing. All these sites are close to the Broads National Park. It can't be good for any creature to have large scale development on their doorstep.

Access onto the street is tight enough already with cars parked on the road. Adding another 3 access points along it will cause injury, and possibly worse. It's a shame they have even been proposed.