Distribution Map of the favoured, reasonable alternative, contingency and unreasonable sites

I have been told by you that I am only allowed to object to this proposed traveller site if submit pre agreed objection subjects that you have agreed upon.

This includes: When assessing the suitability of sites for allocation we must focus on material planning considerations which include (but are not limited to) things like overlooking/loss of privacy, traffic and highway safety issues, noise, effect on listed buildings/conservation areas, layout, density and design of development and nature conservation.

Seeming as people are being silenced on their opinions I don't find it fair thay we can only say pre agreed subject and will be raising this at my next GNP meeting. But I would still like to object to this site

GYPSY AND TRAVELLER SITE (Ref GNLP5009)

The village already has a most suitable site – the Council is about to re-open the gypsy and traveller site on Long Lane on the outskirts of the village and funds have already been allocated for this. In the past this was in effect a travelling and residential site (as some did not move from the site). It beggars belief that the Council also wish to locate a site within, or immediately adjacent to, a conservation village in one of the quietist parts of the village.

The road network would be unsafe – the approach to the site is down Hockering Lane, a narrow road past the village school leading to a cul-de sac. This is not a through road. This road is one of the quietist in Bawburgh, a conservation village, and children would no longer be able to safely play there. It is a cherished amenity for the heath of adults and children.

Residents, people using the school and dog walkers, park their cars on the road which greatly restricts the effective width of the road (especially at week ends). The movement of large gypsy caravans and associated commercial vehicles up and down this road, together with visiting friends and relations of the gypsies and travellers, would put villagers and children at an unacceptable risk.

The route through the village over the narrow bridge crossing the river is only wide enough for one vehicle at a time, and oncoming traffic cannot be seen. The increased traffic, especially from large gypsy caravans and their associated commercial vehicles, would make an already precarious crossing unsafe for both pedestrians and vehicles.

Elderly villagers live in the neighbouring bungalows and they also would be at risk from the traffic.

Unacceptable response time for emergency services – If routine burning take place, as has happened in the past on such a site (see below), fire engines for example may suffer delays in accessing the site.

The site is on contaminated land – in the past there used to be a sewage works on the site and the land is contaminated. The land would therefore need to be de-contaminated at great expense before it was used.

Unsafe hazards from the gas main – the site is near a gas main and if activities are undertaken as in the past (such as burning etc see below) then the risk of a gas explosion may well be unacceptable.

Toxic air hazard to residents – if the burning of waste occurs (as has happened in the past – see below) there would be a hazard to residents as the site is in the centre of the village.

Unacceptable flooding risk – the site is on a water meadow that is prone to flooding.

Environmentally unfriendly – the proposed site would destroy a beautiful natural water meadow and associated wildlife habitat for ever.

If activities are undertaken as in the past (such as burning etc see below) there will be environmental damage.

The site is low lying and so sewage from the site would need to be pumped with the possibility of leakages and environmental damage.

The are insufficient facilities – there is a small school which is full (the school capacity is 105 children and 106 are in the school), a public house and a village hall.

The only bus service is a bus on Friday that runs to Wymondham at 9.20 and returns at 12.45 after a journey of nearly an hour each way. Hence shopping or visits to doctors’ surgeries would involve travel down the narrow approach road.

The local surgeries are oversubscribed and there are no local NHS dentists where residents can register.

The increased traffic around the school may lead to parents not sending their children to the school, and this could put at risk the viability of the school.

Major issues in the past – there was a gypsy and traveller site, in Long Lane within the village parish, which was opened in 2014 and closed in July 2020 due to a major fire. I understand that during this period the site was occupied by many unauthorised visitors, and on the site there was commercial waste, fly-tipping, toxic material and evidence of burning waste on a large scale and these gave rise to environmental concerns. All of this cost a lot of money to sort out. Also on several occasions the village hall site was occupied illegally and the village incurred a large expense to remove the visitors, and to clean up and secure the site. This caused a lot of anguish with villagers.

There are obviously major problems in managing, maintaining and policing gypsy and traveller sites. Villagers have suffered in the past from such a site and they do not want a site within or immediately adjacent to a conservation village.

Adverse effects on mental health and welfare - Perceived risks can also be as damaging to mental heath as actual risks. The village has suffered major problems in the past from gypsies and travellers that have caused a lot of distress to villagers. The thought of gypsies and travellers arriving again in the village and the associated perceived, and possibly real risks, will adversely affect the mental health and welfare of villagers.

GYPSY AND TRAVELLER SITE (Ref GNLP5009)

The village already has a most suitable site – the Council is about to re-open the gypsy and traveller site on Long Lane on the outskirts of the village and funds have already been allocated for this. In the past this was in effect a travelling and residential site (as some did not move from the site). It beggars belief that the Council also wish to locate a site within, or immediately adjacent to, a conservation village in one of the quietist parts of the village.

The road network would be unsafe – the approach to the site is down Hockering Lane, a narrow road past the village school leading to a cul-de sac. This is not a through road. This road is one of the quietist in Bawburgh, a conservation village, and children would no longer be able to safely play there. It is a cherished amenity for the heath of adults and children.

Residents, people using the school and dog walkers, park their cars on the road which greatly restricts the effective width of the road (especially at week ends). The movement of large gypsy caravans and associated commercial vehicles up and down this road, together with visiting friends and relations of the gypsies and travellers, would put villagers and children at an unacceptable risk.

The route through the village over the narrow bridge crossing the river is only wide enough for one vehicle at a time, and oncoming traffic cannot be seen. The increased traffic, especially from large gypsy caravans and their associated commercial vehicles, would make an already precarious crossing unsafe for both pedestrians and vehicles.

Elderly villagers live in the neighbouring bungalows and they also would be at risk from the traffic.

Unacceptable response time for emergency services – If routine burning take place, as has happened in the past on such a site (see below), fire engines for example may suffer delays in accessing the site.

The site is on contaminated land – in the past there used to be a sewage works on the site and the land is contaminated. The land would therefore need to be de-contaminated at great expense before it was used.

Unsafe hazards from the gas main – the site is near a gas main and if activities are undertaken as in the past (such as burning etc see below) then the risk of a gas explosion may well be unacceptable.

Toxic air hazard to residents – if the burning of waste occurs (as has happened in the past – see below) there would be a hazard to residents as the site is in the centre of the village.

Unacceptable flooding risk – the site is on a water meadow that is prone to flooding.

Environmentally unfriendly – the proposed site would destroy a beautiful natural water meadow and associated wildlife habitat for ever.

If activities are undertaken as in the past (such as burning etc see below) there will be environmental damage.

The site is low lying and so sewage from the site would need to be pumped with the possibility of leakages and environmental damage.

The are insufficient facilities – there is a small school which is full (the school capacity is 105 children and 106 are in the school), a public house and a village hall.

The only bus service is a bus on Friday that runs to Wymondham at 9.20 and returns at 12.45 after a journey of nearly an hour each way. Hence shopping or visits to doctors’ surgeries would involve travel down the narrow approach road.

The local surgeries are oversubscribed and there are no local NHS dentists where residents can register.

The increased traffic around the school may lead to parents not sending their children to the school, and this could put at risk the viability of the school.

Major issues in the past – there was a gypsy and traveller site, in Long Lane within the village parish, which was opened in 2014 and closed in July 2020 due to a major fire. I understand that during this period the site was occupied by many unauthorised visitors, and on the site there was commercial waste, fly-tipping, toxic material and evidence of burning waste on a large scale and these gave rise to environmental concerns. All of this cost a lot of money to sort out. Also on several occasions the village hall site was occupied illegally and the village incurred a large expense to remove the visitors, and to clean up and secure the site. This caused a lot of anguish with villagers.

There are obviously major problems in managing, maintaining and policing gypsy and traveller sites. Villagers have suffered in the past from such a site and they do not want a site within or immediately adjacent to a conservation village.

Adverse effects on mental health and welfare - Perceived risks can also be as damaging to mental heath as actual risks. The village has suffered major problems in the past from gypsies and travellers that have caused a lot of distress to villagers. The thought of gypsies and travellers arriving again in the village and the associated perceived, and possibly real risks, will adversely affect the mental health and welfare of villagers.

Object to GNLP5014.

I would consider myself a regular tourist in the area as I have family there. The site proposed is not suitable.

It is a quiet rural location which currently sees very few if any travellers. A 15 pitch site would irreparably change that and spoil the countryside setting.

Also it is a very busy junction and often difficult to join/cross the dual carriageway. With the upcoming change to dual the A47 at Blofield it will only be getting busier and more dangerous, additional traffic will not help this.