GNLP0190

I have lived in Hainford since 1991 and it originally had a post office and shop. These closed and the community of the village suffered. I believe new development in the village would add to the life of the village and would hopefully improve amenities.

Building on this site would have very little impact on the look of the village as it's behind the car spares. Maybe having houses here would encourage someone to come and rescue Hainford Hall, which is standing derelict and unloved in the middle of the very ugly car spares site. What a thing it would be to see this once magnificent building restored; and having people live so close, perhaps in view of the place, would increase interest and perhaps eventually something would happen.

I object to any development in Hainford on the grounds that the proposal is outside the settlement boundary in conflict with the Hainford village status of "other village" and in conflict with the Parish plan. I strongly object to any large scale development of the village that would require a change of status from " other village" to any other status. Hainford is a village not a suburb of a town or city. Our village cannot sustain the large scale proposals connected to this plan. Please preserve our village status and leave the residents alone in peace

The number of homes is not specified but it is a very large site. A certain amount of development could bring some benefits but this looks very large compared to the overall size of the village. The beauty of Hainford is that it is rural, small and quiet. Please don't let large developments change this. If I wanted to live in a service village I would have chosen somewhere else like Spixworth or Coltishall.

Please do not spoil the village with overbuilding and a change of status I have lived there for over 35 years and would hate to see another village become a suburb of the city

Small individual development within Hainford can be absorbed without changing the character of the village significantly. This objection is aimed immediately at site GNLP0190 but the other sites identified in Hainford have to be taken into account as well. The area of the called up sites will roughly double the settlement area of the village. Hainford is a relatively unspoilt village with clusters of houses spaced apart in a rural setting. Development of this scale will change the nature of the village forever. Future development with houses in the quantities mentioned is not sympathetic to the surroundings.

This is a very large and complex site, far more detail would be required before inclusion could be supported. In a village such as Hainford the total amount of development is a paramount consideration. Any development of this site would have to in effect preclude any other building in the village for the foreseeable future.

I can see attractions in potentially opening up further amenity land and use of Hainford Hall. However, the key consideration is the level of building that this village can support. On this point alone it appears that development of this site would be excessive.

1.The proposed development would impact on the setting of Hainford Hall and is not well related to the existing village.

2. The size of the site and potential volume of dwellings is wholly disproportionate to the status,size and aspect of the village.

3..This area of the village is known for longstanding and continuing flooding and unresolved drainage problems.The site is on an area known to be subject to surface water flooding.The sewerage capacity in this location is known to be inadequate.

There is Widespread flooding throughout Hainford due to high water table and overflowing ditches

. Current planning Policy is to steer development to areas with lowest probability of flooding.

4.The site lies outside the Development Boundary.

5. The site is in conflict with Hainfords status of 'other village' which by definition stated in the GNLP still applies.

6. The Development would be in conflict with Hainfords Parish Plan.

7. Wider development in this location would be unsustainable due to lack of adequate infrastructure services, general facilities,limited power supplies, reliance upon oil, electricity power failures and lack of transport services to support this level of development. (when commenting recently on a single dwelling proposal in the Grange Rd area the Highways response was
"in regard to transport sustainability Hainford, which has very limited standard every day facilities is not Considered an acceptable location, the site is not connected to footway links which, in any case, are Sporadic in the village and public transport services are very limited. Accordingly the proposed Development will result in an over reliance of the private car contrary to sustainability objective
8..Narrow and winding rural lanes in this location are inadequate for increased volume of traffic.in many locations it is impossible for two vehicles to pass safely. There would be increased congestion at the junction between A140 and B1354(Waterloo Rd).Also potential congestion at the junction with Newton Rd and the B1354.
9. The Primary school is not accessible by definition as there is only one pavement running from Stratton/waterloo area. There are no pavements from the main settlement in the chapel road area to the South, nor from the West/ A140 Cromer Rd nor from the Eastern side of the village. The reliance being on the private motor vehicle for safe access to the school which is contrary to sustainability objectives
10.The Primary school is small and would not be able to accommodate increased volume of pupils generated If wider development were allowed on this scale.
11. Loss of rural amenity-the site has landscape value.
12.Potential loss of trees

I am objecting to all the site proposals on the grounds that:-
The village has a very high water table and most areas are subject to surface water flooding which at times infiltrate the foul sewer network causing problems whithin properties.The very narrow rural roads with no pavements are unsuitable for increased traffic. We have limited power supply,a sporadic bus service and no local facilities.
All the services and infastructure would be overloaded by more developments; only
small scale housing within the development boundary would be suitable

Hainford has insufficient services to support further build up. Public transport is poor, and electric supply/sewage limited. There are no shops, only one public house. This site would be disperate from the village centre. This is outside of the development boundary.

REJECT this proposal due to:
1. Flooding at most all sites due to high water table in the village,
2. Most all services (e.g. sewage, electricity) barely able to cope with existing population,
3. Virtually no 'social' infrastructure - e.g. no shops, no Post Office, only one pub, Village Hall, Junior/Primary school, and church,
4. Very poor road links and capacity,
5. Very poor public transport links - and nothing that would support commuting into Norwich,
6. Contrary to current Village Plan,
7. No number of properties proposed,
8. Loss of valuable and much-needed farming land in a rural location,
9. Site access would probably have to be onto the Frettenham/Buxton road as the Hainford road infrastructure - especially at this location - insufficient to support much new development. (The Frettenham/Buxton road also unlikely to cope with a great increase in housing).

Initially object on the grounds that the infrastructure wouldn't support a large scale development but would be interested to see the plans and to know how many houses/homes would be proposed. However, Hall Road does already have a lot of traffic during the rush hours and at school drop-off/pick-up times so the impact would need careful consideration by the parish council. Interesting to note, since the closing of Hainford Hall scrap yard the type of traffic (boy racers) has markedly decreased in the village.. despite this not being sited as the cause!

GNLP0582 - Development here would not be a good idea as chapel road already has flooding issues after prolonged heavy rain and the ground next to the entrance in newton road also gets underwater. The gardens of the houses on the east side of the road get flooded. The land behind there is basically a swamp and the wooded area is underwater in winter. The drainage system in Hainford is inadequate at the moment so further development here would be adding to the problem.

GNLP0512 - Development in Lady lane whist the land is not wet, any drainage flows down to Newton road. On the corner of the junction with Lady Lane and Newton road there is already a problem with the drainage ditches which can not cope in wet weather and the ditches stand full of water and cannot run away because of the overload of water and the saturation of the land around.
The water table is very high in Hainford and the drainage ditches cannot get rid of the excess water, putting large areas under concrete will make matters worse.

GNLP0190
This area I presume will be entered off Grange Road opposite Grange Farm. This is a large area with regard to drainage. If this development went ahead I would hope that the drains would go in the direction of Buxton Road if on the other hand the drainage was directed to Grange road. This would be a huge problem for the existing road and properties at the end near the village green. As the ditches here can barely cope and flooding has occurred. The woodland around the old hall is underwater most of the winter.

0069- Too vast,Unsustainable due to,lack of adequate infrastructure to support. This. Flooding and drainage/sewage issues.Outside development boundary.

0065- Flooding,rural roads inadequate, unsustainable due to lack of infrastructure,remote from village.

0393- previous objections from Environment Agency due to significant flooding. Unsustainable,lack of infrastructure to support.Too many properties.

0181- flooding on site, lack of infrastructure to support, disproportionate in size.

0190- too large and disproportionate,flooding and drainage issues Hall Rd,,inadequate infrastructure to support, out of development boundary.

0582- too large/disproportionate, lack of adequate infrastructure to support,flooding on site, TPO's in force.

0512- site is too large, flooding on the sites and on Hall Road at the junction, inadequate infrastructure to support, outside the development boundary. Reliance upon narrow rural roads.