GNLP0441

I am writing to object to the proposal to use land on Middle road for new homes. There is already 2 sites that have been approved for planned growth and I believe any more would be too much for the village. The road infrastructure is inadequate to support the increased traffic. The additional homes will have a significant impact on the character of the countryside. There are already not enough local services to support the community,the closest doctors/dentist is Brundall and there are no local shops. The bus service is poor. There are other more suitable locations within the NDR boundary that would support new housing.

The Parish Council objects to this site as it is contrary to our Service
Village designation, which states developments should be up to 20
dwellings.

Developing this land would also be on Grade 1 Agricultural Land, surely
brownfield sites should be used first?

Great Plumstead in particular has no infrastructure. There are currently
no schools, shops or doctors etc within the Village. The nearest school is
located within Little Plumstead which is at capacity, The nearest dentist
is Blofield, which is already nearing capacity. There is no shop within
the Parish at all, the closest shop is in neighbouring Parishes.

It is presumed that the exit/entrance of this site would be located on Hare
Road. This could be dangerous as the road is not very wide and there have
already been accidents on this road. Alternatively an exit/entrance onto Middle Road would equally be unsuitable. This road has increased in traffic since the opening of the new bridge and the closure of Low Road and Smee Lane. Middle Road itself is not a wide carriageway and at parts cannot support two vehicles passing each other.

Drainage/soakaways would need to be investigated on this site as Hare Road
is known for flooding in various parts.

It's quite astonishing that a land agent had the audacity to suggest this site yet alone actually put it forward for consideration! The fact that the GNLP clearly states from the outset that this land is PRIME HIGH GRADE ARABLE LAND should be enough to stop it being considered in the first place.

Furthermore, the report states that Great Plumstead is a serviced village. Serviced with what, exactly? There is no post office or shop for a start, and the public transport links are far from what should be considered as frequent!

Taking into account the 1000s of houses already allocated within the NDR boundary and also the further 1000s of houses already allocated towards Rackheath and Blofield/Brundall suggests to me that there is absolutely no need for any houses to be allocated on this site!

The allocation for houses which has already been approved is more than enough expansion for what should actually be classified as a "non-serviced village".

The final point I'd like to make relates to the additional amount of cars and traffic that this allocation would generate, yet alone if the allocation for the adjacent field were to be approved too! The road network is incapable of taking much more traffic. The roads are already struggling already and introduction of more cars would only make the situation worse to the point that the infrastructure will simply fall apart.

Despite what some might think, Great Plumstead still holds on to a RURAL feel, but now that the NDR is within spitting distance, it appears that the local councils believe it to now be merely a suburb of Norwich. This should NOT be the case. As far as I'm concerned, it should be remain to be classed as a rural village. Not another "commuterville".

This site would have significant impact on the countryside, as stated in your own brief (GNLP) this land is high grade arable land, we as a county have to put a stop to the loss of agricultural land.
Also this small village already has 2 approved sites and from research that has been carried out we know that this is adequate for the area. Not to mention the housing already given the green light or indeed much more suitable sites within this area that have been put forward, either within the NDR boundary (sensible) or outlining villages, therefore this land should never have been highlighted, its totally unnecessary.
In addition there are no local services in Gt Plumstead even though incorrectly it is stated there is. (there is no shop, PO, reasonable bus service etc...). Despite the NDR the local roads here cannot take anymore cars, we are plagued with issue,s be it pot holes, verges damaged, accidents or congestion, more houses result in many more cars. This alone is an issue to peoples health.
Also with trees, hedges, fields being destroyed what about our wildlife..... We are lucky to have some beautiful birds, animals, creatures in our villages these are at risk with swathes of concrete.
The people who have chosen to live in this small village want a country life in a small community, this proposed site would totally change the village forever.

We strongly object to proposals for further homes in the village until infrastructure is improved. There are no facilities for a local shop (which forces residents to use cars to get to the shops at Brundall), limited bus service (which finishes after 5pm and again forces people to use their cars) and local roads which are falling apart under the strain of the additional traffic.

The roads often flood (Hospital Lane being a prime example) and major potholes are not being addressed.

Roads and infrastructure are essential to improve quality of life for residents of the Plumsteads.

We strongly object to proposals for further homes in the village until infrastructure is improved. There are no facilities for a local shop (which forces residents to use cars to get to the shops at Brundall), limited bus service (which finishes after 5pm and again forces people to use their cars) and local roads which are falling apart under the strain of the additional traffic.

The roads often flood (Hospital Lane being a prime example) and major potholes are not being addressed.

Roads and infrastructure are essential to improve quality of life for residents of the Plumsteads.

GNLP0441 - Land at Middle Road, Great Plumstead
On behalf of our client, Mr Derek Jones, we strongly recommend that Land at Middle Road, Great Plumstead should be allocated for residential development, comprising approximately 30 dwellings. The site is considered to be entirely deliverable, and capable of making a significant contribution towards satisfying the Councils' housing needs during the period to 2036. The site was submitted previously as
part of the Call for Sites consultation in 2016.
Our client owns a landholding in Great Plumstead, displayed with the blue line on the attached site plan.
This site comprises 4.230ha, and the entire landholding was submitted as part of the Call for Sites consultation. However, it is recognised that a large estate development that a landholding of this size could support may not be suitable for the local context of Great Plumstead. This representation therefore aims to revise the red line plan for the site to 1.957ha to create a smaller-scale development between Hare Road and Middle Road, while addressing any issues raised by the preliminary assessment of the site in the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA).
In support of this representation, a Highways Assessment has been undertaken by Orari Transport Planning to demonstrate that safe and suitable access to serve residential development at the site can be achieved.
In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework's (NPPF) definition of 'deliverable', set out in footnote 11 to paragraph 47, the site represents a suitable location for development now, is available immediately, is achievable with a realistic prospect of housing being delivered on the site, and is viable.
These points are addressed in further detail below.
Assessment of Deliverability
Suitable
Great Plumstead is identified in the Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk (JCS) (2011) as a Service Village, which can accommodate small-scale housing development, subject to form and character considerations. The site lies to the north-east of Great Plumstead, which does not have an adopted Settlement Limit. However, residential development in this location would represent a logical and proportionate extension to the existing settlement.
As mentioned previously, the site has received a preliminary assessment of its suitability for residential development in the HELAA. The summary below addresses the planning constraints identified at Land at Middle Road:
Access: Amber rated. To demonstrate that access can be achieved to the site, Orari Transport Planning have prepared a Highways Assessment in support of this representation. The Assessment demonstrates that suitable access to the site can be achieved from Hare Road and Middle Road to serve frontage development and a potential Mews Court style development. While the exact form and layout of the
development is yet to be established, this demonstrates that suitable access can be achieved on site. Minimum 2.4m x 90m visibility splays, in accordance with DMRB, can be achieved. From this, it is apparent that suitable access can be achieved to deliver a modest residential development on site. Therefore, the site should receive a Green rating for access.
Accessibility to Services: Amber rated. The site is situated to the north of Great Plumstead. The village contains a village shop, village hall with car park, playing field and playground, church, allotments and a bowling green. The village is served by a bus service (KonectBus 5C), which runs through the village along Church Road, providing hourly access between the village and Norwich Monday-Saturday.
All of these services are within walking distance of the site.
The Great Plumstead, Little Plumstead and Thorpe End Garden Village Neighbourhood Plan (2015) identifies accessibility to services in the village as an issue, to be addressed through the enhancement of footpaths, especially along Water Lane, which links Great Plumstead to Little Plumstead. Similarly, Hare
Road and Middle Road are not served by any footpaths currently, leading to potentially unsafe pedestrian conditions on both roads. To remedy this, the site can accommodate footpaths to serve new dwellings on the site, and the existing dwellings along Hare Road and Middle Road, thereby providing an
important community benefit. From this, it is apparent that the site is well related to local services, and would engender improvements to the local footpath network. Therefore, the site should receive a Green rating for accessibility to
services.
Utilities Capacity and Utilities Infrastructure: Green rated. It is anticipated that local utilities infrastructure has capacity to accommodate residential development in this location.
Contamination and Ground Stability: Green rated. The site is undeveloped, and poses no contamination risk, and the site is level.
Flood Risk: Green rated. The site is within Flood Zone 1, and the site is not at risk of surface water flooding.
Market Attractiveness: Green rated. Great Plumstead is a desirable location within close proximity to Norwich and the wider region.
Significant Landscapes and Townscapes: Amber rated. The site is not within any special landscape designations. The site is bordered by hedgerows fronting Middle Road and Low Road. These hedgerows screen the site from Middle Road and Low Road. These hedgerows would be retained where possible, and they would mitigate any landscape impacts. Furthermore, the revision of the site area engenders a
residential development of an appropriate and proportionate scale in terms of Great Plumstead's scale. From this, it is apparent that the development of the site would not adversely impact upon landscapes and Great Plumstead's townscape, so the site should receive a Green rating.
Biodiversity and Geodiversity: Green rated. The site comprises agricultural land, with low ecological value. As mentioned, the hedgerows on site will be retained where possible as part of any residential development. Detailed ecological assessment would be provided at the planning application stage.
Historic Environment: Green rated. The site is not situated within the vicinity of any listed structures or monuments.
Open Space and GI: Green rated. The site is in agricultural use, so residential development may include open space and green infrastructure, thereby providing an important community benefit.
Transport and Roads: Amber rated. The Highways Assessment prepared by Orari Transport Planning for the site demonstrates that there are no traffic generation or highways safety issues that would preclude the provision of residential development of up to 30 dwellings on site. Indeed, the proposals would enhance highways safety by providing footpath access from both Hare Road and Middle Road. From this, it is apparent that the development of the site would not adversely impact upon the local
transport network, and would deliver important enhancements. Therefore, the site should receive a Green rating.
Compatibility with Neighbouring Uses: Green rated. Residential development at the site would complement existing residential uses to the east of the site. The site comprises Grade 1 Agricultural Land. While residential development on site would reduce Grade 1 land, the decision to revise the red line plan will retain most of the landholding as farmland. Furthermore, Grade 1 land is plentiful in the local area, so the loss of farmland resulting from development in this location would not endanger food security.
From this review of the planning constraints identified within the HELAA assessment, it has been demonstrated that Land at Middle Road does not contain any planning constraints that would preclude residential development, and forms a suitable location for residential development in the Plan period to 2036.
Available
The site is within the ownership of Mr Derek Jones, who has instructed Bidwells to submit this representation on his behalf. The site is not restricted by any leases or restrictive covenants. Therefore, the site is therefore available for development.
Achievable
The Greater Norwich Local Plan Regulation 18 Consultation document identifies, in the analysis of the six growth options, that the allocation of small/medium size sites for residential development is paramount to securing housing delivery in the Plan period to 2036: The size of allocations will also be a key consideration. Whilst larger sites can provide new services and facilities, recent experience has shown that they are more difficult to get off the ground. Smaller sites are often more likely to deliver and can support the vitality of existing settlements. Land at Middle Road comprises a smaller site, which can be delivered quickly to achieve appropriate and
proportionate growth in terms of Great Plumstead's local context.
Furthermore, based on the suitability assessment above, it is demonstrated that there are no site-specific constraints which could threaten the delivery of residential development on the site. Therefore, residential development on the site is deemed to be entirely achievable.
Viable
Development of the site for residential purposes is considered viable, taking into consideration the various policy requirements in relation to matters such as affordable housing provision and CIL contributions. Further evidence on viability can be provided on a strictly private and confidential basis, should this be deemed necessary at the appropriate time in the planning process.
Summary
As outlined above, the site is suitable, available, achievable and viable, and is therefore deliverable. Residential development in this location would represent a logical extension to the existing settlement, providing an appropriate, thoughtful and well-designed development, in accordance with objectives of the
Great Plumstead, Little Plumstead, and Thorpe End Garden Village Neighbourhood Plan (2014-2034). The Highways Assessment prepared by Orari Transport Planning demonstrates that a suitable access can be achieved onto Middle Road and/or Hare Road to serve a residential development. The only planning constraint that cannot be mitigated through development is the loss of a portion of Grade 1 farmland. As discussed, the revision of the red line boundary means that most of the Grade 1
farmland within the landholding will now be retained. Furthermore, the allocation of this site for up to 30 dwellings could satisfy Great and Little Plumstead's entire housing need in the Plan period to 2036. This would focus development in Great Plumstead to one site, thereby reducing the risk of residential
development in less suitable locations within the parish, while safeguarding larger areas of high quality agricultural land in the local area.
On this basis, the site should be taken forward as an allocation for residential development in the emerging Local Plan, and would represent sustainable development.