Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19098

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Ros Callis

Representation Summary:

JCS - this proposal is not 'very limited infill'.
GNLP states will focus growth in villages with services - there are none in Swainsthorpe.
GNLP states locations need to reduce need to travel - contradicts this.
Road unsuitable for construction vehicles.
Road through village unable to cope with additional cars from development.
JCS states proposal should protect and enhance character and culture of area - contradicts this.
Loss of arable land and green open space.
Extra cars add to congestion and hazards on A140 making it more dangerous








Full text:

The Joint Core Strategy (JCS) states, as an 'Other Village' very limited infill can occur without affecting the form and character of the village. This proposal for 20 houses is not very limited infill but proportionally a large development for a tiny village to be built in a field alongside existing properties.

GNLP states that it will focus rural growth on villages with services - Swainsthorpe does not have a school, doctor's surgery, shop or any other services.

GNLP states the need to reduce environmental impact contributions to climate change and air pollution - locations need to reduce the need to travel. This proposal contradicts this. It will increase the need to travel by car as there are no services in Swainsthorpe. This will increase pollution and contribute to poorer air quality.

Access for vehicles and staff during construction of the proposed development would cause a potential hazard on a narrow, uneven road. Church Road, the main access road through Swainsthorpe has several blind bends and is not suitable for large construction vehicles.

This development could add up to 40 extra cars to the road through the village (developments in Mulbarton would add to this number). This road has a level crossing for the high speed railway line and is narrow and uneven with several blind bends (Church View, The Vale, Gowing Lane). It is not suitable for more traffic.

JCS - This proposal does not protect and enhance the individual character and culture of the area - development would destroy, not protect, rural green fields, harm wildlife and the countryside.

Loss of productive arable land - this field has been farmed for generations. Build on brownfield sites.

Loss of green, open space enjoyed by many villagers.

Highway safety - Increased traffic on A140 from this development will add to existing daily congestion and compromise road safety. There will also be increased traffic from large housing developments in Long Stratton. It is already extremely difficult to turn right from Church Road onto the A140 during rush hour. I have to turn left onto the A140, which is almost as difficult, and swing round in the Caistor turning to then get back onto the A140 to travel to work. Traffic from this development will back up along Church Road during busy times.
To travel by public transport it is necessary to cross the A140 at some point. Even with an island on this road it does not feel safe standing in the middle of the A140 with lorries and cars thundering along past you.
It is also very dangerous at present to turn right from the A140 onto Church Road due to the excessive amount of traffic and narrowness of the turning lane. This can be extremely frightening especially when lorries are approaching in front of you and from behind. Any increase in traffic volumes, such as created by up to an additional 40 cars would make all of these situations even more dangerous.

The A140 is the main route for a high number of emergency response vehicles. Sirens can be heard many times throughout the day and any increase in traffic would delay these vehicles potentially putting lives at risk.