GNLP0296

Showing comments and forms 1 to 14 of 14

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 12859

Received: 26/01/2018

Respondent: Miss Carol Mason

Representation:

Both Buckenham Lane and Buckenham Road are single track roads unable to take the increase in traffic this development would bring. There are already problems near the spa crossroads with Buckenham Lane/Norwich road with traffic and parked cars, numerous minor bumps and accidents. The visual impact of this development is negative and merges Lingwood with Shrumpshaw.

Full text:

Both Buckenham Lane and Buckenham Road are single track roads unable to take the increase in traffic this development would bring. There are already problems near the spa crossroads with Buckenham Lane/Norwich road with traffic and parked cars, numerous minor bumps and accidents. The visual impact of this development is negative and merges Lingwood with Shrumpshaw.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 12860

Received: 06/02/2018

Respondent: Ms Anna Carter

Representation:

Unless a huge amount of money and resource was put into bringing our small villages infrastructure up to code, to deal with so many additional homes/people, we are concerned for the safety of our and other peoples children on our small roads. As well as the elderly residents in our immediate area. Concerns about more flooding, lack of light to our property and space in our school. Not to mention the environmental impact on owls and bats that fly over the proposed site (which we as a family enjoy watching).

Full text:

We live on Buckenham Road in a mid terrace house.

*Buckenham Lane and Buckenham Road are single width roads with no pavement on either. I walk both my children to school and already have to make way for traffic by mounting grass verges or going into peoples gardens to keep my family safe. With more houses come cars, therefore this will make our Roads extremely unsafe.

*Cross Roads at Buckenham Lane is already very congested due to the fact it's next to the Spar Shop and Chip shop. Our car has already been hit twice at this location due to the the amount of traffic and insufficient space.

*Cross road at Buckenham Road is also very dangerous. The corner is so tight people cut the corner vearing into the opposite lane. This is at the point of many residential care homes where ambulance access is often needed. Also cars have mounted pavements at this point as it is directly where a bus stop is, endangering my children and anyone else that correctly use a footpath.

Our son attends Lingwood Primary Academy. His reception class is already at capacity.

Farm traffic is heavy on both Buckenham Road and Buckenham Lane, taking up the entire width of these roads.

We have no doctors surgery or dentist in Lingwood.

Our property is unique in that it is the only terraced house situated on Buckenham Rd, so we have no natural light from either side of our property. Houses placed directly behind our property are in danger of plunging our already dark house in to further darkness.

When Norwich Road floods at The Huntsman Pub the road can be closed to traffic. The other route out of Lingwood is through a manually operated train barrier. This would struggle to cope with the amount of additional cars the proposed 110 properties would cause (on the assumption 2 cars per property would place an additional 220 cars onto our very small single lane roads).

Our new Village Hall already struggles to cope with the amount of people that attend it during popular events such as Bonfire Night.

Light, noise and air pollution from the proposed site can only have a negative impact on our village. Our back garden backs on to the field of the proposed site. We get to watch deer, rabbits, hares,pheasants, grouse, bats owls and a multitude of birds from our back garden. All of this would be lost if the proposed site was to go ahead.


The proposed site is approximately 200 yards from a known flood area. An area that has flooded so regularly that our local pub has shut due to the amount of times it has flooded in the past 2 years. this included the flow of raw sewerage.

I urge you before any further decision is made to visit our property so we can show you the concerns we have, especially road safety and lack of light.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 12868

Received: 29/01/2018

Respondent: Mr John Turner

Representation:

The proposed development is totally unsuited to the area for many reasons, Road safety, Danger of flooding, Pressure on amenities,Over development of Village.

Full text:

I write representing my entire family, which have been resident of Lingwood for the past 30 years.
We consider the site in question to be:
(a). Very unsafe with relation to motor vehicles associated with such a development, the surrounding roads are not suited to the current level of traffic without adding far more.
The turning into Buckenham Lane from Norwich Road is very narrow and not suite to traffic increase.
(b). The Village infrastructure cannot cope with such a large development, Schools, Doctors Dentist etc are currently at breaking point through high numbers, and could not stand a large increase.
(c). Your summary mentions the site is subject to standing water, this makes light of the potential for flooding of any properties allowed on the site.
(d) In general Lingwood has problems with none of the entry roads to the Village being suitable for purpose at the current levels.

In closing we feel such a development would totally change the Village, in a very negative manner.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 12979

Received: 12/02/2018

Respondent: Lingwood and Burlingham Parish Council

Representation:

GNLP0296 Buckenham Road and Lane. The Parish Council object on the grounds that the site is at the far end of the village and would encourage traffic through the village and onto the single track lane and Road. The junction at Buckenham Lane with Norwich Road is busy as there is the Spar Shop and Chip Shop. The site is excessively large for the amount we have to allocate and we do not require this amount of additional properties in our Parish.

Full text:

GNLP0296 Buckenham Road and Lane. The Parish Council object on the grounds that the site is at the far end of the village and would encourage traffic through the village and onto the single track lane and Road. The junction at Buckenham Lane with Norwich Road is busy as there is the Spar Shop and Chip Shop. The site is excessively large for the amount we have to allocate and we do not require this amount of additional properties in our Parish.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 13011

Received: 12/02/2018

Respondent: Mr Darren Spall

Representation:

The roads surrounding this proposed site are single track joining an already very busy crossroad junction where road accidents often occur.

Full text:

The roads surrounding this proposed site are single track joining an already very busy crossroad junction where road accidents often occur.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 13878

Received: 21/03/2018

Respondent: Mrs Christine Goodwin

Representation:

no doctors/dentist. Brundall/Blofield doctors full, no dentist in Blofield. Brundall dentists have waiting lists. Overcrowding at Lingwood primary, Acle high school/Thorpe. Added cost to NCC for school buses. Increased traffic getting onto A47 (via Blofield slip road) to Norwich/Yarmouth causing further congestion/increasing accidents. Bats, barn owls/other wildlife affected. Roads around site single track & farm machinery/sugar beet lorries frequently on these roads. Crossroads at Buckenham Lane dangerous, added traffic making worse/increasing congestion at Spar/chip shop. No paths on Buckenham Lane/Buckenham Road.Drainage poor and sewage/surface water increase putting further flooding/sewage problems on Norwich Road near Huntsman pub. Noise/air pollution. Buses infrequent.

Full text:

no doctors/dentist. Brundall/Blofield doctors full, no dentist in Blofield. Brundall dentists have waiting lists. Overcrowding at Lingwood primary, Acle high school/Thorpe. Added cost to NCC for school buses. Increased traffic getting onto A47 (via Blofield slip road) to Norwich/Yarmouth causing further congestion/increasing accidents. Bats, barn owls/other wildlife affected. Roads around site single track & farm machinery/sugar beet lorries frequently on these roads. Crossroads at Buckenham Lane dangerous, added traffic making worse/increasing congestion at Spar/chip shop. No paths on Buckenham Lane/Buckenham Road.Drainage poor and sewage/surface water increase putting further flooding/sewage problems on Norwich Road near Huntsman pub. Noise/air pollution. Buses infrequent.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 14856

Received: 20/03/2018

Respondent: Mr Anthony Willsher

Representation:

The area proposed has been agricultural land since time immemorial and is listed as "Grade 1 agricultural", producing excellent high quality crops every year. To turn this visually attractive area into what will essentially be a separate village, divorced from the main village would be a travesty. The present access roads to the proposed development would require substantial upgrading to the detriment of the rest of the village, which currently has deplorable access roads to the A47.

Full text:

The area proposed has been agricultural land since time immemorial and is listed as "Grade 1 agricultural", producing excellent high quality crops every year. To turn this visually attractive area into what will essentially be a separate village, divorced from the main village would be a travesty. The present access roads to the proposed development would require substantial upgrading to the detriment of the rest of the village, which currently has deplorable access roads to the A47.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 15407

Received: 21/03/2018

Respondent: Mr Richard Mack

Representation:

The proposed development is too large.
The proposed development is in the wrong place.

Full text:

The proposed development is too large - extensive enhancement of amenities and infrastructure would be required, both within the village and in terms of the adjoining road network before any development on this scale should be considered in Lingwood. Additionally, a development of this size and apparent density would have a significant negative impact on the character of the village.

The proposed development is on the wrong (south) side of the village to facilitate road access to the main A47. Based on standard estimates it would generate an additional 770 vehicle movements per day on narrow and single carriageway roads through the village and on single carriageway roads connecting to the A47 to the north. Significant congestion would result at the already hazardous junction of Norwich road and Buckenham Lane, as well as the Buckenham Road/Norwich Road junction and the railway crossings on Chapel Road and Station Road, with associated risks to safety.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 15424

Received: 21/03/2018

Respondent: katrina Mack

Representation:

This would be the wrong side of the village and generate too much traffic accessing the A47 in either direction. Norwich road, which has the Spar shop and chip shop, would become very congested at peak times with the extra vehicles and accidents would thus be likely. The facilities of the village are not suitable for that density of housing and it would change the nature of this rural village.

Full text:

This would be the wrong side of the village and generate too much traffic accessing the A47 in either direction. Norwich road, which has the Spar shop and chip shop, would become very congested at peak times with the extra vehicles and accidents would thus be likely. The facilities of the village are not suitable for that density of housing and it would change the nature of this rural village.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 15503

Received: 21/03/2018

Respondent: Sue johns

Representation:

There is no infrastructure in place to take this development. It does back onto an "estate". Just a few individual properties. Buckenham road nor Buckenham lane will take the extra traffic, as both being single tracks. No space at local GP surgery. Limited space at newly built school. Public transport not up to scratch. Where are the people going to work? They will have to commute to Norwich or Yarmouth, better to build houses in the suburbs of these places.

Full text:

There is no infrastructure in place to take this development. It does back onto an "estate". Just a few individual properties. Buckenham road nor Buckenham lane will take the extra traffic, as both being single tracks. No space at local GP surgery. Limited space at newly built school. Public transport not up to scratch. Where are the people going to work? They will have to commute to Norwich or Yarmouth, better to build houses in the suburbs of these places.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 15506

Received: 21/03/2018

Respondent: Lisa Johns

Representation:

Basically our village is not suited for this development, lack of infrastructure being the main point. We have already had new 2 recent developments built which has not helped this.

Full text:

The local area cannot support 110 properties. Both roads are single track Buckenham Road and Buckenham lane both being single track. Walking my dog I take my life into my hands having to get out of the way of speeding cars! Increasing this will no doubt cause an accident. The roads are already in a dire state of repair in the village,increasing traffic flow will only add to this problem. We have no medical centre in the village and surrounding villages medical centres are nearly full, some are full and no longer taking any patients. The newly built school in the village will not be able to support all the extra children these developments would bring. There are not really any job opportunities in the village either.

Object

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 16650

Received: 22/03/2018

Respondent: Norwich Engineering Society

Representation:

Although the site is large, and its haphazard shape presents difficulties in arranging well proportioned housing layouts, the overriding factor is that it would not only be both an unwarranted destruction of prime agricultural land but also the presence of a substantial estate alongside it would destroy what is now a pleasing invigorating and healthy country walk for villagers, with potential to extend it to satisfying and enjoyable views.

Full text:

These state that GNLP0380 and GNLP0296 are preferred to provide140 dwellings, with GNLP0379 adding 27 and GNLP007 possibly adding more. While my comments relating to the Growth Options point to the fallacy of this requirement, I must reinforce this view by pointing out the severe problems that would ensue if either of the preferred sites were to be considered in detail.
GNLP0380 lies beside Blafield Road, the main road into the village from the west - basically single track with passing places. At present two roads enter Blafield road opposite 0380's eastern boundary. With 30 dwellings two entry/exits would be preferred but with the eastern approach being via virtual double bend with very poor sight lines, NCC are likely to raise concerns regarding safety as even three opposite entries would lead to this stretch becoming 'accident prone'. Additionally, the much higher housing density would compare badly with Neve's Close opposite.
GNLP0296 is bounded by a single carriageway Buckenham Lane on its West side, The wide verge contains a dry ditch and an avenue of mature trees. The lane is much used by villagers, particularly dog walkers and occasional joggers, causing cars to slow down to pass .as the verge banks are high in places. Despite the ditches, the lane tends to flooded in the lower middle section, sometimes being too deep for cars to proceed. It also provides an enjoyable link to footpaths off the lower Buckenham Road leading to Buckenham Woods or around the Amenity Site giving extensive views over the Yare Valley The proposed site is part of a much larger field of high grade Agricultural land which has been fully cropped for the last 25 years ( at present with a winter cereal).The present electricity supply to our house (and adjacent properties on Norwich Road Lingwood and Strumpshaw) crosses the above field on poles running NW from Buckingham Road to the 4th pole pole, a 'stones throw' from our fence, from where it is taken underground to a pole on the Strumpshaw side of Buckenham Lane.
and then overhead to poles feeding our and adjacent properties. Clearly any planning consent would require the complete re routing of this supply even though a substantial part of the line lies outside 0296. The likely route via Buckenham Road and Lane is likely to conflict with poled telephone lines so it may require 'under grounding' with consequent higher cost. Site entrance is best achieved via Buckenham Road as it has been widened to two lanes past the Council houses. Here there are just two trees, much smaller and more widely spaced those in Buckenham Lane so their removal results in much less interference with Nature. Thus overall, although the site is large, and its haphazard shape presents difficulties in arranging well proportioned housing layouts, the overriding factor is that it would not only be both an unwarranted destruction of prime agricultural land but also the presence of a substantial estate alongside it would destroy what is now a pleasing invigorating and healthy country walk for villagers, with potential to extend it to satisfying and enjoyable views.

Support

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 16743

Received: 22/03/2018

Respondent: Brown & Co

Representation:

A number of technical issues are identified in the HELAA as potential constraints on development, and these are addressed:
Highway access - Buckenham Lane can be widened if necessary [see full text]
Access to services - Ste is within 400m of primary school and village hall; rail station is a further 300m. Shop is within 100m of site. Several bus services run through Lingwood. It is acknowledged site is in rural location, requiring car for main shopping/leisure trips.
Landscape - loss of openness but contained. Development in keeping with village. [see full text for flood, utilities, delivery]

Full text:

1. The land is subject to a Promotion Agreement with ESCO Developments Ltd who are being advised by Brown & Co alongside Savills on behalf of the landowners. The following comments are submitted in support of the suggested allocation of the land at Buckenham Lane (ref GNDP0296) for housing.
2. It is noted that the site is classified as being suitable for housing development in the Council's Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) 2017. However, a number of technical issues are identified as potential constraints on development, and these issues are addressed below.
Highway access
3. Access to the site is available directly off both Buckenham Lane and Buckenham Road. It is acknowledged that Buckenham Lane is narrow and can be widened, if necessary, as both sides of Buckenham Lane are in the same land ownership and can be widened to accept an element of the development from an access on the western side. Buckenham Road is wide enough to accept traffic that would be associated with the proposed site and both roads are within the 30 mph speed limit of the village. Both access points would be constructed in accordance with relevant highway standards. Suitable provision would also be made for pedestrian movement along Buckenham Road and Buckenham Lane to connect with Norwich Road and the rest of the footpath network in the village.
4. It is noted that Norwich Road provides a direct link to the village centre and is constructed to a good standard, providing for two -way traffic. and benefitting from street lighting. The road is subject to 30mph speed limit. The existing junction of Norwich Road/Buckenham Road is suitable to be this access route. The existing highway verges on both Buckenham Lane and Buckenham Road currently provide safe refuge for pedestrians and would in the future facilitate the construction of any necessary new footway links.
Access to services
5. Lingwood is identified in the current Joint Core Strategy as a Service Village and has a newly built Primary Academy, a new village hall, shops and a public house. The site is within 400 metres of the Primary Academy and village hall. In addition, the railway station is a further 300 metres along Station Road. The village store is within 100 metres of the site being sited on the south side of Norwich Road very close to the site and the Lingwood Chippy opposite. We believe, therefore, the location of services in the village, would be readily accessible from it on foot or by bicycle to the proposed site.
6. A number of bus services operate on weekdays and Saturdays through the village, providing links to Norwich, Great Yarmouth and Wroxham. There are bus services running from Norwich Road, service 15A (to Wymondham operated by first bus), 74 (Little Plumstead - Blofield - Brundall - Lingwood - Great Yarmouth operated by Ourhire), 292 (Cantley - Brundall - Wroxham operated by Ourhire). The nearest bus station is located approximately 5 minutes walk from the site.
7. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal development would benefit from good access to local services, and would accord with local and national planning policies which indicate that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Given their accessibility, existing local businesses and services would be likely to derive support from the development due to the addition to the local economy of the spending power of new residents. In these respects, the proposal would support the social and economic dimensions of sustainability as defined in the NPPF.
8. It is acknowledged that the site is in a rural location, residents of the proposed development would be reliant to a degree on car travel for their main shopping and leisure trips. However, a number of sustainable transport options would nonetheless be available to access local services, including walking, cycling and public transport (i.e. train and bus).
Significant Landscapes
9. The land proposed for development comprises an open field located on the southern edge of the village, but is well-contained visually by existing housing to the north and west and by established boundary hedges and trees. From Norwich Road, views of the proposed houses would be limited to views along the eastern boundary along Buckenham Road and to the west via Buckenham Lane. Consequently, whilst the proposal would inevitably result in a loss of openness, its impact on the landscape setting of the village and the character of the area generally would be contained with a visual gap being maintained between Lingwood and Strumpshaw. There are no specific landscape designations in the immediate area of the site. The land is generally flat in character with countryside hedges and individual mature trees. The proposal would be consistent in form with surrounding developments, keeping with the residential property on either side of the road.
10. The established pattern of development in the vicinity is mixed, but is made up predominantly of detached and semi-detached houses and bungalows set in good sizes plots. Historically, development has extended to the north of Norwich Road towards the railway station and beyond. The proposed development would mirror previous development in the village which has occurred between the principal roads running north and south off Norwich Road.
11. The proposal would be consistent in form with these developments and so would not appear out of place. The density of development envisaged of around 30DPH would also be compatible with its surroundings and would enable the relatively spacious character of the area to be maintained.
Utilities Infrastructure
12. We do not believe there is any fundamental impediment to the delivery of the site through any constraints relating to utilities infrastructure. The increase in capacity can be built into the new development.
Flooding
13. The site falls with Flood Risk Zone 1 (low risk). Further technical work, including a site-specific flood risk assessment, is being commissioned to demonstrate that the proposed development would not be a risk of flooding or be likely to result in an increased flood risk elsewhere in the locality. This will submitted in support of the proposed development as soon as possible.
Delivery of development
14. No significant infrastructure constraints have been identified to date which would be likely to delay or impede the development of the site for housing. The site is in a single ownership and no further land is needed to enable the land to be brought forward for development. The land is currently available for development and so, subject to approval being given, could delivery housing in the short term.
15. The proposed development would make a positive contribution to the supply of high quality housing in the area and could facilitate improvements to the local utilities capacity. The proposal would also add to the range of housing sites available in the locality, providing flexibility and a wider choice of development opportunities to the market, and thus strengthening the local supply of housing land. By providing sufficient land of the right type in the right place to support growth the development would address the economic dimension of sustainable development, as defined in the NPPF.

Support

Site Proposals document

Representation ID: 19679

Received: 14/12/2018

Respondent: Brown & Co

Representation:

Please find attached additional information for GNLP reference GNLP0296, site to the west of Buckenham Road, Lingwood, relating to the Regulation 18 Consultation. Additionally please find attached separately the Appendices (initial site plan & aerial plan).

See attachment, submitted during Stage B consultation

Full text:

Please find attached additional information for GNLP reference GNLP0296, site to the west of Buckenham Road, Lingwood, relating to the Regulation 18 Consultation. Additionally please find attached separately the Appendices (initial site plan & aerial plan).

See attachments

Attachments: