GNLP0281

The entry to Peregrine close is hard as is and to allow possibly an addition 40 cars to enter via it is crazy (2 per household). Speeding is also a big issue in the area no cars or lorries pay attention to signs. The houses themselves I have no issue with just how you want people to access them.

This site was has been turned down twice already . On the map also a road access to the rear access of The Grange House property has been deliberate not been shown on the map clearly for a reason The only access to this road is for residents and then people to walk down for access to the footpath.There are certain residents of Grange road who actually own part of Grange road so access that way would be impossible and the road which is only maintained by the people who live in these houses and could take NO more Vehicles due to its construction of ash stone .The Loke to the site proposal once had a turn around point for lorries / dustcarts . Fireengines the owner has removed this at his end so now all heavy vehicles delivering have to reverse down this like making it very dangerous . If the other access mentioned via Peregrine Close is used it just causes more problems with the 600 + lorries entering into Cantley each day . As i have lived and worked for the farming company which once owned this site i do know that the 2 bungalows that are their at present are prefabricated buildisngs and were bricked round several years ago thus demolition of these would create a serious health hazard to remove as they are full of asbestos and as well be very costly .The land proposed also had a very large farm pond in it which over the years have been filled in and jn the last 3 years all kinds of stuff was carted down there and dumped in it before finally covering with topsoil and grass . This must have caused some contamination . There is no gas in Cantley as mentioned and also no Mains sewage to the present buildings the water pipe is not 6 inch mains either , it is a lot smaller There are also very few people local who work at the factory due to contractors being bought in over the last few years and this and the local public house is the only source of employment . There is not a great demand for houses in Cantley either as there is only one way in and one way out .The site also has owls and much wildlife on it .

I would object to this site being developed for several reasons.
The area was previously considered for development as part of a low cost housing scheme and declined, on the access issue and also reasons of suitability for house building. The road, Grange Road, is not an actual made up road and its state is in relatively poor condition. There is only one way up and down the road with a single lane. It used to have a turning circle that vehicles could go down, turn around and then drive back up the lane, this has now been closed off and even emergency vehicles have had difficulty getting to the bungalows at the bottom, even the bin lorries now have to reverse down the lane to collect rubbish. At the bottom where the proposed area is was once a pond that has since been filled in with a variety of items, anything that could be dumped there, before being buried. We have witnessed trailer loads of rubbish being taken down there to be dumped before it had topsoil cover it over and be grassed. The area at the bottom of Grange Road has also been known as to get extremely wet with rainfall. There is currently an access to the Grange within the area that is highlighted but the access is not shown on this map.
Local people living on this lane are not in agreement with this as some of them currently own the part of the lane at their threshold. I dispute the fact that this would be much needed housing and boost the income to the local area as well as providing accommodation for the Sugar factory. Cantley does not have much local employment as most factory workers are contractors coming in from outside. The ground conditions do have contamination and have previously been very boggy. There is no gas supply in Cantley, it would have to be bottled gas. There is no mains sewerage at the site. I feel the comments made by the landowner about how soon to allow this application are rude and inappropriate to local people.
Extra housing in this area would mean more traffic exiting onto the main beet route which at times can be difficult. If access is to be via Peregrine close then consideration must be give to the children living there as they play out in their close currently, although the red area showing the site only shows access via Grange Road.

I think these houses would be a huge obstruction and very unappealing visually when walking the Cantley to Limpenhoe footpath. The plan is conflicting in that it states access would be down Grange Road but draws that it would be via Perigrine close. Grange road is not suitable access due to the road being lumpy and under maintained. Peregrine close provides access to the main road right near a pedestrian crossing and with high traffic volume travelling through this stretch of road daily to the factory, it can be extremely difficult to get out onto the main road. Read more b

I am objecting to the new development, cantley has not long has some new houses built around that area and although 20 houses may not be many it's quite a few for our small village and more than likely not even enough room at the local school for any new children moving into the village.

Peregrine Close was provided as access to new affordable homes for Cantley. Grange Road would have cost too much to improve to full highway standard, it was stated. Peregrine Close is not full highway standard either, more like a shared drive. Access for 20 homes via either route would be grossly inadequate. Cantley has already developed in haphazard directions and further development on the proposed site would exacerbate this uncoordinated spread. The site is on the wrong side of the sugar factory access route for the village school with poor pavements provision on that route.

I live on Peregrine close and I don't think the proposed development provides sufficient access.The road is a single carriageway, which has no suitable access for large construction vehicles without causing significant disruption, nor will it be suitable to have another 20 or more cars having to come up and down it. I feel we will often be blocked in.
The lorries from the factory constantly speed past Peregrine Close, which is already a danger to my children who have only the little island there to cross, I feel more traffic will only make it even more hazardous.

The drains for Peregrine Close block about 3 or 4 times a year, 20 new dwellings will put further strain on the existing pipelines.

The infrastructure of the village does not support 20 new dwellings, the local school is near to capacity from surrounding villages children, there are no amenities in the village such as a shop or doctors surgery, both Acle and Brundall GP surgeries are at capacity and are not taking new patients on, the nhs dentist at brundall has an extensive waiting list. Our appointments have been cancelled the last few months due to the (3rd) dentist (this year) leaving and them being unable to find another one.

The area of proposed development is low lying resulting in surface flooding every year with poor drainage.

The close proximity of the factory does not make this an ideal site for development due to noise and light pollution.

The affect of building works on the proposed site may have an impact on the local wildlife, for example a large herd of red deer reside in the small woodland on the farm field next to the area to be developed.

The current buildings to be demolished potentially used asbestos in the buildings, safe removal and disposal would need to be considered to prevent risking the health of the workers performing the demolition.

I do not consider this site is suitable for development. Access is a major problem. In contradiction to the submission form, Grange Road is co-owned and the applicant is aware of this as it was previously raised in planning application No. 20152057. Grange Road is unsealed and totally unsuitable for the possible increase in traffic (between 20-40 extra vehicles). The proposed site is often waterlogged and possibly contaminated, as the applicant believed it was previously used as 'a local unofficial tipping ground for all manner of waste' (PA 20152057).

I wouldn't consider this site appropriate for development. The whole site floods and is dangerous after rain, land movement due to underground voids are noticeable and would make building work risky. Providing reliable utilities would be costly. Grange Road water supply uses decrepit lead piping and sewerage pipes are problematic (sewerage issues on Peregrine Close too). The existing land contamination and risk of disturbed asbestos would be a huge issue for the area. Proximity to the factory would make the properties unpopular and unpalatable for tenants. Grange Road and Peregrine Close junctions are dangerous due to heavy campaign traffic.

I object for many reasons. (Only have 100 words)
It will spoil a lovely space.
The village is not big enough for a development of this size.
The road is not suitable for 40 + cars and will be extra pollutions and be unsafe.
It will ruin natural habitat deers, bees, bats, great crested newts, owls with boxes on the site.
My house will be significantly over looked including bedrooms and bathrooms.
The area will be over populated.
It is next to a public footpath.
The amenities in the village will not cope.
site is near a new housing development.

Small village, inadequate services already: no shop, no space in school, no Dr's surgery, next to no public transport, no street lights. The man proposing is widely disliked and a poor landlord at best.
Hazardous to wildlife, rare species living within a mile of proposed plot, including red deer, water voles, perigrines, badgers, cuckoos etc.
Surrounding village schools and Drs are also over subscribes and impossible to get appointments at without extra homes being built.

Small village, inadequate services already: no shop, no space in school, no Dr's surgery, next to no public transport, no street lights. The man proposing is widely disliked and a poor landlord at best. Hazardous to wildlife, rare species living within a mile of proposed plot, including red deer, water voles, perigrines, badgers, cuckoos etc.

Small village, inadequate services already: no shop, no space in school, no Dr's surgery, next to no public transport, no street lights. The man proposing is widely disliked and a poor landlord at best. Hazardous to wildlife, rare species living within a mile of proposed plot, including red deer, water voles, perigrines, badgers, cuckoos etc.

I object to this. It will spoil the natural landscape that is already there. The size of the plot will mean the houses are cramped together. The area is already populated and there are some new houses so to add another 20 more so close would not be in the interest of the village. The road is a single track which is not suitable for the number of cars and there will not be enough parking spaces on the site as it's just not big enough.

Small village, inadequate services already: no shop, no space in school, no Dr's surgery, next to no public transport, no street lights. The man proposing is widely disliked and a poor landlord at best. Hazardous to wildlife, rare species living within a mile of proposed plot, including red deer, water voles, perigrines, badgers, cuckoos etc.

Small village, inadequate services already: no shop, no space in school, no Dr's surgery, next to no public transport, no street lights. Hazardous to wildlife, rare species living within a mile of proposed plot, including red deer, water voles, perigrines, badgers, cuckoos etc.

Cantley does not have a shop (and we do not want one), we do have any gp surgeries. Our school is full and would not be able to accept any new pupils. Small village, inadequate services already, next to no public transport, no street lights. The man proposing is widely disliked and a poor landlord at best. Hazardous to wildlife, rare species living within a mile of proposed plot, including red deer, water voles, perigrines, badgers, cuckoos etc. This would bring no good prospects to our small community. The bungalows would not be affordable housing and would not benefit any local first time buyers.

The proposed site is currently accessed via Grange Road a narrow unmade lane which is barely sufficient to meet current needs. The site boarders onto woodland inhabited by Red Deer, Barn Owls, Voles, Badgers and Peregrines to name a few. The facilities in Cantley are insufficient at best currently with no shops, minimal public transport and little street lighting. The local amenities like Doctors and Dentist surgeries are already impossible to register with and current residents need to go further afield to access these services. The village school is also near capacity. Current facilities can not support additional housing!

The proposed access to property development via Grange Road or Peregrine close does not provide sufficient access, both roads are small residential roads, which has no suitable access for large construction veicles without causing significant disruption to existing houses along both roads.
Small children play together in the relative safety of Peregrine Close under the supervision of their parents as the main road is too dangerous for them to cross, opening up the close to an access road wil prevent the children from enjoying time with their friends safely.
Grange Road is privately owned and the existing residents are not happy that access wil be via their road, which means Peregrine Close would be considered. as a resident of Peregrine Close I am not happy to have the extra traffic that 20 houses will provide, parking for new properties will be limited possibly resulting in people from new development blocking our road with their cars or their visitors cars.

The drains for Peregrine Close block frequently resulting to dynorod/anglian water being called out 3 to 4 times a year, 20 new dwellings will put further strain on the existing pipelines.

The infrastructure of the village does not support 20 new dwellings, the local school is near to capacity from surrounding villages children, there are no amenities in the village such as a shop or doctors surgery, both Acle and Brundall GP surgeries are at capacity and are not taking new patients on, the nhs dentist at brundall has an extensive waiting list (I have been on said list for 3 years)
Limited public transport, bus service only runs a couple of times a day to Great Yarmouth and Wroxham, whilst there is a train station the trains at peak times are already overcrowded.

The area of proposed development is low lying resulting in surface flooding every year with poor drainage.
The close proximity of the factory does not make this an ideal site for development due to noise and light pollution.

The affect of building works on the proposed site will have an impact on the local wildlife, for example a large herd of red deer reside in the small woodland on the farm field next to the area to be developed.
The current buildings to be demolished potentially used asbestos in the buildings, safe removal and disposal would need to be considered to prevent risking the loval enviriment and the health of the workers performing the demolition.

Great crested newts live here. It would be detrimental to the environment. And protected species.

I object to this as I have seen a lot of species of animals around the suggested area such as great crested newts, red deer, badgers all the building work will cause troubles for all the animals

This is a terrible idea that will be fought by the rspb as the cuckoo, bittern and peregrines live here, and the UK wildlife Trust as the meadow and woodland create ideal habitats for toads, newts, hedgehogs and large Red deer. The roads in question are not made for so many people, in fact the village of Cantley isn't! It is outrageous to even consider it.

Upsetting and destroying a small rural village unable to deal with 20 new homes. UK average is most families are made up of 2 parents, 2 children. Cantley CANNOT handle 80 new residents. The local resources are lacking already. Not to mention the protected wildlife this would endanger!

As I am a rspb representative I object to this plan as I know about the protected species around the planned site like the natterjack toad, the bittern and the hedgehogs and the pair of mating barn owls that I have also seen

This proposed development is far too large for the village. The site would significantly alter the landscape of the area. I have used the land north of the sugar beet factory for many years, it is rural and very sensitive from a natural history perspective. This development would ruin an area of real nature and beauty. The increased traffic would be too much for the access roads, and I feel that this is an isolated area of the village and the introduction of access roads even if from Peregrine Close would overload and destroy the nature of that part of my village.

This development would have an adverse effect on the area's diverse wildlife (including protected species) and natural habitats of many birds and animals.
The village does not have the facilities (school spaces, public transport, GP etc) to provide for an additional 50+ residents.
The proposed access road is not suitable for potentially 20+ vehicles to be using. If a new access road were to be built, this would have further negative impact on the natural environment.

Having previously lived in The Grange for over thirty years we know the area very well and totally disagree with the plans. This would destroy the beautiful outlook over the marshes which support masses of wildlife and surely the old pond could not be built on anyway! The Grange Road is totally unsuitable for more traffic, and the thought of enclosing the Grange with a new road to the north from Peregrine Way would completely ruin the majestic Georgian house.

This development seems like a terrible idea,the village surely can't cope with this?! If this were to go ahead what could possibly stop future developments going ahead too?! The roads are wholly inappropriate, really. This is all without due care & consideration for how the wildlife would potentially suffer. I know I speak on behalf of no end of people on this issue. I find the whole idea rather depressing. I do hope that this proposal is thought about very long & hard. With respect.

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am writing to you regarding the planned development "GNLP0281" in Cantley.

The current plan shows access to the proposed development via Grange Road. Grange Road is at present a dirt track with lots of pot holes, this is immediately opposite our property.

Grange Road also provides access to a public footpath which goes from Station Road through Grange Road and past the rear of the Sugar Factory.

I am concerned about the increase in noise and traffic this would bring infront of our house.

GNLP0041 - Wroxham Football Club 20 dwellings
Where would the current football club go? This might also visually impact on the Broads landscape and the existing Wroxham Conservation Area - early discussion about this would be welcomed. This site is also within the Wroxham Conservation Area.

* Salhouse
GNLP0157 - Tourism Use
This appears to be partly in the Broads area. Would welcome early discussions on this.
Likely to be too late to allocate anything in the Broads Local Plan. Other than Tourism
Use, no other details provided. What is this for? This is also partly within the Salhouse
Conservation Area.
* Acle
GNLP1049 - residential development
This is right up to the border with the Broads. Would welcome early discussions on
this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark
skies. Could have significant visual impact.
GNLP0007 - 12 dwellings
This is near the border with the Broads. Would welcome early discussions on this.
Would be extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies.
Early discussions welcomed also on GNLP 0384.
* Postwick
GNLP0370 - 75 and 115 dwellings and primary school
This is right up to the border with the Broads. Would welcome early discussions on
this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark
skies. Could have significant visual impact. Could have significant visual impact.
* Whittingham area
GNLP0360 - Deal Ground site - Residential led mixed use redevelopment to include
employment, retail community uses, potential primary education provision and local
greenspace and biodiversity areas.
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads.
Redevelopment of site could give rise to new opportunities for pedestrian/cycleway
bridge over River Yare. The creation of this new connected access to Whitlingham and
the Broads National Park from the centre of Norwich would highlight the River
Wensum Strategy aspirations along with those of the Broads Local Access Forum.
Could have significant visual impact.
* Norwich
GNLP1011 - protect as sports centre in community use.
Support
GNLP0409 - Deallocation of Policy CC17b and the area of CC17a.
Please can you expand on what this means please? Why is this being de-allocated?
GNLP0068 - Residential-led mixed use development for an undetermined number of
dwellings (Despite its small size the site could support a high density development and
is thus considered suitable for the land availability assessment.)
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
NB/SM/rpt/020318/Page 5 of 7/200218
affect the Broads.
There may be access issues if development was agreed at this location. The River
Wensum Strategy has identified this site as a potential continuation "link" of the
Riverside Walk and any development here would need to consider this in their
proposals. Could have significant visual impact. Issues around continued canalisation of
the river.
GNLP0401 - Residential-led mixed use development for approx. 400 dwellings with
retail and/or other appropriate city centre uses at ground floor level.
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads.
Redevelopment of site could give rise to new opportunities for access to River
Wensum for small craft and canoes along with pedestrian access to the waterside.
Could have significant visual impact. Issues around continued canalisation of the river.
* Surlingham
GNLP0374 - Residential development
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Potential
for visual impact on the Broads landscape
* Rockland St Mary
GNLP0531 - 200 dwellings
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads. Potential for significant visual impact on the Broads landscape.
* Cantley
GNLP0281 - Demolition of existing dwellings and residential redevelopment for approx.
20 homes with new entry road from Peregrine close
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads. Potential amenity issues associated with Cantley Sugar Beet Factory
(business already in existence). Potential for high visual impact over open marsh
landscape.
* Haddiscoe
GNLP0455 - Employment, storage and distribution uses.
This is near our border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be extending
the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Potential for visual
impact on the Broads landscape. Also GNLP 0414 More limited potential for visual
impact but early discussions on this would also be welcomed.
* Gillingham
GNLP0274 - Residential development of an unspecified number.
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Potential
for visual impact on the Broads land scape.
* Geldeston
GNLP1004 - resi 4-5 dwellings
NB/SM/rpt/020318/Page 6 of 7/200218
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Darkest
area of the Broads. More limited potential for visual impact. Located within the
Geldeston Conservation area.
* Kirby Cane
GNLP0303 - 11 dwellings
GNLP0304 - 15 dwellings
GNLP0305 - 32 dwellings
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies.
* Chedgrave
GNLP0541 - 5-8 dwellings
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads. Potential for visual impact on the Broads landscape.
* Loddon
GNLP0313 - 68 dwellings
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. More limited
potential for visual impact.