Fully reject this proposal. This type of proposal is completely wrong for a village of this size, and linear shape.

The idea of a service linear village to add 200+ houses over 3 rural entrances (2061 / 2063 / 2064) is simply a land grab by a developer. There are so many issues with such a development like this, it's amazing it's got this far.

1) Access - all 3 access points are dangerous. The main road 'The Street' is small, and already has too many traffic. It is a national cycling route. Adding another 400 cars plus on those 3 developments alone would cause an increase in road accidents. There has already been fatalities on this very road with cyclists.

2) Rockland St Mary is a linear service village - it should not have building outside of the linear line, and boundary line.

3) Wildlife - numerous protected species live in and around these sites. We have over 20 bats live in and around GNLP2061's proposals. They are legally protected already. Owls also live around all the surrounding farmland. Highly likely other species would be destroyed in adding 200+ houses.

4) Pollution - extra pollution, next to the National Broads park is unacceptable, for a world renowned site. Will cause issues with the natural wildlife. This goes for all additional sites, other than GNLP2070. Also - light pollution will affect the nocturnal animals, in and around the broads from the new sites, driving the local wildlife away.

5) Access - the access of these roads will be tight. The space next to 101 and 103 The Street is very tight. You then will have 100 cars + coming out of this small gap, turning out onto The Street. This is so unsafe. Many cars park on the road, causing blind spots. Not to mention the increased traffic coming from the A146. It is not needed.

6) Pavement - GNLP2061 and GNLP2063 are both on the side of the only pavement in the village. Many elderly with poor sight, and school children will now have 2 extra crossings. This is completely unnecessary, and will cause issues.

7) Drainage - there are already mains drainage issues. Many of The Street properties were flooded only recently. 107 The Street had major damage, as did many others. How can adding another 50 / 100 / 150 + houses to the main line drain be a positive outcome? This will only add more pressure on the main drain system, causing further property flooding for the current residents.

8) residential amenities - the local surgery is already working 3 days, where many Rockland St Mary residents have to drive to Poringland for doctor appointments. As many residents in Rockland are elderly, having them drive / get the bus over to Poringland when less and less appointments will be available has to be considered. These developments do have a direct impact on residents in many ways.

To conclude, GNLP2061, along with GNLP2064 and GNLP2063 are such poor area to develop. The impact on so many people, wildlife, main roads, cycle routes, drainage to name a few, means these proposals have to be strongly rejected.