GNLP0457

With new NDR work and imminent completion, we have seen increased traffic flow along The Street. Traffic does not generally observe the speed limits set and there is currently no path on which pedestrians can walk safely. We have known of two recent incidents were pedestrians have been hit. I, myself, walk to keep fit daily and have no option but to walk along The Street. With more dwellings proposed, besides increased traffic, further burden on our GP surgery, water and sewage, and school population will also become evident. Where we live is none-estate and we conservation should be protected. Wildlife (eg deers, pheasants) are regularly seen crossing The Street and need protection. The Strret is not well lit, and with increased traffic, I fear lives will be at risk. Please re-think your plans.

1) Ringland Road is already very busy and not suitable for purpose.
2) The local schools are already over subscribed in Taverham
3) It is very hard already to get an appointment at the doctors, and this will add more pressure to the existing surgery

I object to the proposed development as this will impact on the already overloaded doctors surgeries, infant, primary and high schools, and on Beech Avenue/Ringland Road being used as a rat run from the Fakenham Road, Fir Covert Road through to the Southern Bypass. There is also vehicles using this road for access to Taverham Hall School and Langley Prep School. The road can be extremely congested and dangerous at certain times of the day and proposing further development would have a great impact.

The section of road between Beech Av and Sandy Lane, known as Ringland Rd/The Street is 'unclassified' There are no footpaths and although some sections are subject to 20mph speed restriction, there are no phsyical traffic calming measures in place to slow traffic.This road is used as a 'Rat run'btn A1067 Fakenham RD and access to A47 Costessey. Untill the final link of the NDR between A1067 Fakenham Rd and A47 is open and significant traffic calming measure are installed within The Street/Ringland Rd,no further developments should be approved in this area.Future development traffic would impact severely on 3 schools.

As a Taverham resident for over 45 years the traffic situation has got progressively worse over a number of years. As it is now you can't get in and out of Beech Avenue so further properties and developments would only lead to more traffic which would mean that you can't get out of Beech Avenue onto the Fakenham Road. Already a very busy road which at certain times of the day can't cope with the volume of traffic and is used as a rat-run between the NDR and the Southern Bypass!

Prior to these proposals, Taverham was one of the most desirable postcodes to reside and is a quiet village.As affordable housing will be included, existing house prices would decrease substantially.

This with the extra traffic on our quiet country roads will make them into rat runs with congestion. Beech Avenue gets extremely busy especially with the High School. Again there will be more pressure on this school as it's the only one in Taverham.

I am concerned about the existing wildlife we have here, as more habitats would be sacrificed. Also the added levels of pollution this development would increase

Ringland Road, leading onto The Street, is already inadequate for the volume of traffic, especially as most drivers disregard the 20mph speed limit. This road has no footpaths but is used regularly by pedestrians, including children walking to and from school. Without traffic calming measures being taken, i.e speed humps or chicanes the extra volume of traffic that would be caused by this proposed development is unacceptable. The death of a pedestrian would be a very real likelihood.

I object to this development as it will put our village under further strain. I currently have to wait up to nearly 2 months to get a routine doctors appointment due to our only doctors surgery being completely over subscribed with patients. Trying to get an emergency appointment is also proving difficult, which is very concerning!

Furthermore, our local schools are full to breaking point; there are currently 3 infant schools which feed into our only Junior school, which in turn feeds into our only High school. Taverham only has one high school, so how will it be able to deal with the extra intake from the proposed new primary school? Do I have to fear that my child will not get a proper education due to ridiculous class sizes and lack of facilities?

Taverham is already over developed for the small village it is and traffic, congestion and pollution are horrendous for the size of this village. The local roads are completely unsuitable for heavy traffic and cannot cope with the current flow, let alone with the increased traffic that will arise as a direct result from your proposals.

Taverham cannot cope with more residents. Taverham junior school has torn up its playground to build more classrooms. 250 houses will mean at least 375 more cars, likely making one or more return journeys a day. The traffic jams on Beech Av will be terrible and consequently, drivers will travel down The street to avoid the queues. The traffic already use the street to get to / from the NDR . The street is a rat run , with narrow roads, no pavements and it is extremely dangerous for pedestrians. We desperately need road traffic calming measures and foot paths.

Our roads, schools & doctors surgeries can barely cope with the amount of people now. Has anyone actually tried to use Beech avenue at peak time lately? We DO NOT NEED any more cars and residents in this area.

The road junctions at each end of Beech Avenue, Taverham are not suitable to cope with the increase in traffic that would be produced from proposed development. The number of vehicles using this road has already increased due to the expansion of Taverham Hall School (with Langley). At peak times cars are queued the length of Beech Avenue. There is a definite health and safety risk with frustrated drivers pulling out at the busy junctions.
Any future housing developments in this area would require work be carried out to the Beecg Avenue road junctions i.e. roundabouts or traffic lights. Consideration should also be taken to the safety of school children crossing an increasing busy road.

The positioning of this potential development is not suitable due to the current infrastructure. It would lead out on to an already difficult junction - almost blind corner approaching from Ringland Road, and the already busy, rat run, un-pathed roads would not be able to cope with the additional vehicles exiting this development on a daily basis.

The junction of Beech Avenue and Ringland Road is already extremely busy and dangerous. The High School is situated on Beech Avenue, and the Junior School just down the road. The NDR has already added to rat-running traffic on Beech Avenue and Sandy Lane. This is already dangerous for the numerous children walking to and from school and would be made even worse by yet more dwellings and associated traffic. Areas of natural beauty would be affected, and services in Taverham are struggling as it is.

Beech avenue will not take more volume of traffic!!! It's bad enough as it is!! I sometimes cue15/20 mins just to get onto fakenham. Road . We don't need more houses!! Ringland road & Taverham road would also be affected. I'd rather see green areas trees & wildlife not more small housing estates. We just don't need it!!!

Would prejudice a no development policy along the NDR. A key objective of the NDR was to free traffic on the radial roads to and from the City and allow the sustainable transport measures in the NDR DCO. Further, the NDR DCO measures to reduce traffic on Ringland Road would be prejudiced.

The environment and infrastructure one area will not support this development.

We would like to register our objections and concerns on the following Call for Sites: GNLP0270, GNLP0062, GNLP0159, GNLP0457. Our main concerns are with the massive overdevelopment of Drayton and Taverham which reflects on traffic flow, education, healthcare and quality of life in addition to heightened pollution worries.

We would like to point out Taverham Road in Drayton is being used as a ratrun to reach the Longwater Lane retail park where Sainsburys is located. This is an extremely narrow road with extremely narrow pavements and it is very difficult to navigate both as a pedestrian and as a motorist. Furthermore Drayton High Road is inadequate for the present flow of traffic without the influx of massive new developments. Road junctions in Drayton village are extremely hazardous.

We feel that the proposal for "Call for Sites" although a legal requirement, should be considered very carefully in Drayton and Taverham because of the impact to the environment and existing residents. We trust these comments will be useful to your future deliberations.

I object in principle to any development being permitted on the following sites, for reasons of damage to the local landscape, loss of open green space, damage to wildlife habitat and further intrusion into and despoilation of the countryside in / around the existing settlements:-

0290
2027 (which appears to be the woodland 'garden' at the top of the hill running perpendicular to Fakenham Road? If so, whoever owns this ought to be ashamed of promoting it for development)
0457
0159
0062
2051
2012
0465
2106 (which is a 3.3 hectare site south of Taverham Rd, which was once a nursery but has been derelict for at least 50 years. The site is on chalk just below topsoil level and as such is likely to be of botanical interest. The fact that natural succession has been taking place over this site for so long means that it will almost certainly have acquired a large and diverse flora and fauna. Full ecological surveys must be carried out here. In addition to general ecological surveys, specific surveys for reptiles, amphibians and bats should be undertaken. The site is of great value as undisturbed green open space and should be preserved as such.

0284 (Old Costessey, 'Mann's' field - must be retained as green open space.
0206 (land adjoining) also must be retained as green open space
2004 - this seems to be part of the Tud marshes and shouldn't even be remotely considered for any kind of development, as shouldn't any of the rest of the Tud marshes (either on / adjacent to the golf course or between Longwater Lane and Townhouse Road).