GNLP0232

Low Street is a single track road with no passing places and parking on the street. Drainage/sewage systems cannot cope with current usage. Field becomes waterlogged and floods the existing road and houses. Hares, newts, toads, barn owls, buzzards and red kites live and hunt on the field. Roe deer from Kimberley Hall often graze on the field and use it as a track between wooded areas. Larks nest on the field. Low Street has no pavements or street lights so any extra traffic would make it even more dangerous for people to walk along the road.

Low Street is not suitable for further development as the street is regularly flooded with water which flows onto nearby properties which will be made worse by building more houses.
It is also a very narrow road without footpaths which can be used by HGV's and other large vehicles making it dangerous for walkers and difficult for other road users to pass. These problems will be made worse by more development.

Loss of historic hedgerow and wildlife haven, defines boundary between open fields and housing.
Loss of vital drainage ditch and raised embankment on south-side catches run-off from fields.
Low St and properties flood on a regular basis.
Single width carriageway, no passing places, no highway drainage.
No public footpath.
No safe walking route to school.
Inadequate infrastructure, regular power cuts.
No foul or surface water sewer.
Not in keeping with historic low level cottages and listed property.
Low lying properties over looked by properties on raised ground to south.
Windmill devalued as a centre point and attraction.

My objections to the proposed site are as follows:
1.Drainage - Low Street floods regularly due to run of from the fields.
2. The houses on the street opposite the proposed development have already suffered flooding this year.
3. Low Street is single width carriageway with no passing places.
4. No public footpath exists on Low Street.
5. No safe walking route to school at the other end of the village.
6. We have no facilities i.e. shop.
7. The electricity infrastructure is poor - we have regular power cuts.
8. No gas in the village which would therefore put greater demand on the electricity supply.
9. Broadband speeds are abysmal.
10. Landline quality is poor.
11.Loss of views across the countryside.
12. Windmill would become lost in the amount of housing proposed, this would then lead to a drop in visitor numbers.
13.Loss of focal point in village if Windmill can't be seen due to the amount of housing.
14.The development is out of keeping with the village. It's a village for a reason.
15.Loss of hedgerow and wildlife haven on Low Street at the boundary between fields and roads.
16. Loss of the drainage ditch, which catches the run-off from the fields.

The main points of objection are the narrow road and the lack of drainage, Low Street and Wicklewood do not have the infrastructure available to sustain any further housing developments.

Low Street is a single-track road with no passing places and parking on the street. Drainage/sewage systems cannot cope with current usage. Field becomes waterlogged and floods the existing road and houses. Local wildlife uses the field as a track between wooded area. Low Street has no pavements or street lights, so any extra traffic would make it even more dangerous for people to walk along the road. No safe walking route to the local school or local bus stop which would become more dangerous with additional traffic. Increased demand on local electricity. Extra load on currently inadequate and inconsistent broadband. Development not in keeping with the historic 250-year old low-level cottages to the North and out of keeping with the village in general. Loss of historic views across to the windmill & loss of open views across the countryside.

Low Street is a single track road - overfaced already with current residential dwellings and a large business dwelling. There is no pavement - walkers and horseriders' safety is already compromised. Aside of safety concerns, the land constantly floods- January 2018 modelled many residents' fears in this respect when flooding in North side properties became a reality. No mains gas exists, broadband is poor. Utilities are stretched. More houses would do little but stress the current infrastructure of this part of Wicklewood that is already under duress.

Main concerns are Low Street being a very narrow, winded road with no lights or paving for pedestrians as it is. From the area outlined and no actual drawing plans or rough idea of the actual proposed plan it is hard to imagine how traffic is supposed to flow safely in and around the proposed area without putting pedestrians and cyclists at risk. A good example of favourable planning is the current Windmill development which has created at least a stretch of pavement for safe walking. Also neighbours have noted that water logging has started to occur for the first time in almost 30 years since the Windmill development has started, which is yet to be completed. Total effect of this to risk of surface flooding has therefore not been assessed and can't be assessed until months after the Windmill development has been completed.
I'm also wondering if anyone has assessed the capability to cope with a moderate increment in polulation size of the already oversubscribed primary school?
Furthermore the original submission document from 07/07/2016 states under the section 5b uses for Recreation & Leisure as well as public open space. Again, this is a very broad term in addition to an „undetermined number of dwellings". Without a clear strategy how to tackle above issues and a more precise idea of the actual proposal is, I'm afraid I will have to object this for now and would be keen to see if potential developers have taken these issues into account and could shed more light onto the matter.

As a resident of low street in wicklewood for 3 years, I am in disbelief that this site would even be considered for large scale development. Low street is a single track road with no passing places and is prone to flooding. The loss of the field views will be devastating for not only us, but the whole village as the fields in front are popular with local dog walkers and houses an abundance of wildlife.
From a geological point of view, the water that runs off the field currently means that our back garden is very boggy most of the year. Then front garden fares better, but only because it is south facing and gets sunlight, which is another issue. As we are at the bottom of the valley, the properties proposed would eliminate light and encroach the privacy of our property. Structural problems with existing housing is also an issue. Our property is built on a raft foundation, so is sensitive to ground changes.
For wicklewood as a village, it concerns me that the infrastructure surrounding the village isnt in place to support this development. Crownthorpe road is very narrow in places and has heavy HGV movements on a daily basis from Longs farm. As the public transport to and from the village is an hourly (and very unreliable) bus service, along with no public footpaths and unsuitable and unsafe roads for cycling on, It will need to be presumed that occupents of the new properties will be reliant on cars. Assuming 2 cars per household, this not only places a strain on the roads, but also the environment.
School places are also an issue and I doubt the local primary school would be able to cater for the developments and will lead to further car usage.
It will also mean that a clear view of our historic windmill will be lost from most angles.
Wicklewood has also already taken on a small scale development which was proportionate to the size of the village.

I object to the proposal to build on the southern part of this plot. It would effectively be backfill to those houses on the High Street and the houses would be built next to the windmill which is a listed building.

I am a resident on Low Street, which this site would back onto. I have lived here for 13 yrs, one of the reasons I moved here was for the countryside. I over look fields and wildlife and don't want that to change to a sea of houses.
Our village is not adequate for such a large development. We have no shop, no street lights and no pavements, and access to such a narrow single lane road would prove difficult. We have had water logged gardens all winter with ditches being filled in and and flooded roads.
With the recent snow it has proved how isolated this village can get and we would as a community would not cope with all the extra houses. This is a beautiful village, please don't spoil it!!!

There are many factors why this site in Wicklewood would not be suitable for a new development of housing.
Low Street in Wicklewood floods on a regular basis. This year the road was flooded to a point where it was virtually impossible for cars to pass through. The water overflows into the low-lying properties on the north side of Low Street. The houses on the north side of the street have suffered flooding as a direct result of water flowing from the fields to the south side which are on a significantly higher level. There is a raised bank adjacent to the road on the south side of Low Street which forms the vital drainage ditch which generally helps to prevent flooding off the fields, however the farmland is considerably raised and land drainage discharges into this ditch and occasionally the ditch is not sufficient to prevent flooding.
Many parts of Low Street are of single width (one car wide) with no passing places and no highway drainage. This makes the road totally inadequate for increased traffic.
There is no public footpath along Low Street and therefore no safe walking route to the school and to the bus stop at the other end of the village.
There are no village facilities such as shops or a post office.

There is also inadequate infrastructure including electricity supply and we have regular power cuts. There is no gas supply therefore there will always be a greater demand on our electricity.
At present our Broadband is inadequate and inconsistent.

A new development would without doubt be out of keeping with the village and the small scale low-rise properties along the North side of Low Street and in particular not in keeping with the historic 250-year-old low level cottages to the North.
Because of the natural and physical features of the area and the properties on the north side of Low Street these houses and cottages would be overlooked by the new development and this would have a considerable impact on the lives of the residents.

Another important factor would be the loss of historic hedgerows which provides habitat for all kinds of species of wildlife.

The historic views across to the windmill have long been a significant part of Low Street in Wicklewood. It will be devastating to see Wicklewood Windmill an important tourist attraction, which is a focal point in the village lost amongst a modern housing estate. The open views across the countryside is what we treasure and a housing development would not be in keeping with our village.




The village of Wicklewood

please leave our village as a village! I have several reasons as to why I object to any more housing stock being built. there is a lot of histroic hedgerow and important wildlife haven on the south of Low Street,vital drainage ditchs to stop low street flooding,{which it does often} no gas supply hence potential greater demand on electricity which cant keep up with the demand on its service resulting in regular power cuts. all so District Councillors have there building plots allocated for the next 5 years,hence no need to expand. if you would like any more reasons to why I object, i can be reached through my email

Lack of suitable drainage; no village facilities; narrow road; no public footpath; flooding; electricity infrastructure not large enough to sustain development - we have regular power cuts; broadband speeds are abysmal; landline quality poor; loss of views; Windmill would become lost in the development; loss of focal point in the village if Windmill can't be seem; development out of keeping with the village; loss of hedgerow and wildlife haven at the boundary between agricultural fields and houses; loss of drainage ditch which catches the run-off from the fields.

Low Street is a narrow single track road without any designated meeting places for cars. We are currently having to pull over into peoples' drives and it would not be suitable for any more traffic and most definitely not for any construction traffic to enter Low Street from either end. The proposed farm land for building along the road is at least 1 meter higher than the road surface and the very low level dwellings on the other side of the road. Many of these sit right on the road side. Any development along this stretch would simply tower over the current dwellings and be far too close to the current dwellings, many of them over a couple of hundred years old. The field also quickly slopes upward even further. Flood water is already a problem running off this higher level field onto the road with several occasions this year of substantial amounts of water running off the road into peoples' drives and gardens. There is a drainage ditch along the road which is essential to prevent flooding on a very regular basis that cannot be lost as there are no highway drains along the road. There is also an old hedge row teeming with birdlife along this road. The Windmill is a real viewpoint defining this village and seen across the fields. This iconic landmark would be lost if the development went ahead. Electricity supply is already struggling with frequent power cuts and slow broadband connections. No available foul sewer mains on the south side. No gas supply. Wicklewood school is already struggling with the current demand.

I object on the following grounds:
1. Over development of a village environment
2. Loss of farming land which has been in constant use to this point
3. Increase in traffic and consequently noise. Single track road is already inadequate for existing use
4. Lack of detail on proposal concerning foul drainage, rainwater drainage, overlook and vehicle access arrangements
5. Not 'in-line' development
6. Loss of views and village 'feel', would be more like an urban housing estate
7. Outside existing planning boundary - which must have been put there for a reason in the first place
8. A previous proposal for just the inline development along Low St was rejected some years ago - presumably the reasons for that still exist.

This area of the village has a single track road, unsafe for walkers as well as traffic, especially dangerous if used by lorries/heavy machinary. Additional traffic would add to the dangers for current residents. There are no street lights, footpaths or suitable accessibility.
The area already has poor infrastructure: School and nursery are full, no shops, no gas provisions to properties, poor broadband, regular power cuts, poor drainage and regular flooding.
Environmentally this area is full of wildlife. Many birds, including birds of prey, deer, small & large wild mammals all live and breed there. The views to current residents are outstanding- the windmill, fields and hedgerows create an unspoilt haven.
High street has already had (and still has) additional housing being built, and the village could not support further housing successfully.

The local infrastructure can barely support the current community let alone add more. The primary school is over subscribed and there are no local shops which will cause an increase in the level of traffic on narrow roads with no passing places. Add to this the high risk of flooding along Low street and it is not a sensible idea to further develop this.

I have lived in the village for 34 years. One of the reasons I moved here in the first place was because it IS a village, not a town or part of 'Greater Norwich' This type of development rides roughshod over the aspirations of ALL people who live in a village. I accept the need for more housing, but I believe this site is totally unsuitable due to poor vehicular access, loss of privacy, peace and the destruction of flora and fauna and more to the point, the subtle but sure destruction of what it means to be a Norfolk village. The first option should always be to develop under utilised spaces within towns and cities and more particularly the VAST amount of space available around the outskirts of Norwich - if you want more housing for 'Greater Norwich' .. put it near Norwich - it's obvious !

Dear Sir

These comments are made in response to the sites identified in the GNLP site proposals document. The comments relate to the proposed sites identified within Wicklewood and their assessment in the Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (HELAA).

Although Wicklewood has selective village status services within walking distance are limited and in terms of its proximity to a wider range of service and public transport greater reliance on the use of private vehicles is required on a day to day basis.

The number of applications taken forward to HELAA in Wicklewood is 5 but with clear caveats that there are a number of constraints on each of the sites and that the initial highway assessment has indicated that the road network is unsuitable and incapable of accommodating additional development.

One of the largest sites is GNLP0232 is Low Street : there are a number of concerns about this which are not currently reflected in the site assessment and should be considered before any decision is taken about which sites progress through to GNLP.

a) at 2.84 ha the site is disproportionate to the village. Although no number of proposed houses has been giving the size would suggest a significant number.

b) the part of the site which is identified in the HELAA as being better located to the built form along Low Street would mean any development would not be in an identical form as the existing properties as the land has significant change in level to the land on the north side and would become the dominant part of the road dwarfing the original properties.

c) any development facing or accessed via Low Street will largely be onto a single carriageway which doesn't benefit from any footpaths. Walking or cycling to the limited services within the Village is unlikely due to safety implications and increased number of vehicles. There is no street lighting in Low Street or indeed most of the village.

d) Low Street has been the subject of flooding over a long period of time and further development will only add to this problem. A number of properties along the part of the proposed site have already been damaged due to water running off the field and poor drainage systems in place.

e) the visual impact of approaching the village from the east would be significantly changed especially in relation to Wicklewood Windmill which is one of the most iconic features of the village which benefits from a Grade 11 Listing.

Wicklewood being a selective village should be considered for more limited growth which is proportionate to the services and capacity of the local road network. Currently there are a number of large sites within Wicklewood which if taken forward would not support the wider spatiall strategy currently emerging for the GNLP and would likely have significant impacts on the village. Specifically in relation to site GNLP0232 there are a number of specific constraints and issues which would impact on the suitability of the site development which have not yet been considered by the HELAA. These should be fully assessed and considered as part of any decision as to whether or not the site should be taken forward.

Submitted for your attention and consideration.

Bare essentials of this proposal have not been thought through. The proposed site/lay of the land is not suitable due to the risk of flooding which an existing concern for residents. The struggling infrastructure does not support any additional development and would unnecessarily and adversely impact the heritage of the windmill, the countryside views and local wildlife. Local roads barely cater for current demand. Development would put people (including children) at risk on narrow roads without pavements and lighting. These risks, the additional and disproportionate strain on infrastructure far outweigh any perceived benefit of even a small scale development.

My family have been coming here for many years, we visit for the beautiful country views and wonderful walks.
To see a new housing being built in an area where there are historic property's that date back to 1850 would be a great shame, there is no possible way that new builds would be able to be kept in keeping with other buildings which are 150 years old.
New build housing would destroy the incredible wildlife, and in a whole it would not be classed as beautiful countryside anymore.

Many times we have come to wicklewood for holidays and short breaks, with it being such a small village it's a very quiet & peaceful area.
Having new houses will take away the country views that everyone loves so much, not to mention destroying wildlife. It's dangerous for those who take country walks, the roads are very narrow and it would not be possible to fit two cars down let alone large lorries which would be needed to carry out the building work. This would put pedestrians in danger, even more so for residents who walk these roads on a daily basis.

My Partner Denise Thurlow and I wish to object to this proposed development on the following grounds-
1. The loss of the vital drainage ditch on the south side that catches run off from the fields are higher than low street. Low street already floods regularly, over flowing onto the properties on the north side. If we were to loose the ditch, my concern is that the surface run off water would come across low street and run down our drive, causing our home to flood.
2. If properties were to be built opposite our home, because of the raised embankment and height difference, our home would be significantly overlooked
and we would be deprived of the open views across the countryside.
3.Low Street is a single carriageway with no footpath for pedestrians and no passing places. This already causes problems and risks for children walking to the school bus stop on High Street, parents with prams, dog walkers and for any large vehicles trying to navigate Low Street.
4 We have no village facilities such as a shop.The school is a small village school, without the capacity to accommodate a huge increase in pupil numbers

5. The infrastructure such as electricity supply is already inadequate. We already have regular power cuts. There is no mains gas supply, so this development would place an additional demand up the electricity supply.
6. The Broadband supply is totally inadequate and the landline phone connection is very poor.
7. The size and type of this development is not in keeping with the rest of the village.
8. I am concerned about the access required by contractors during the construction. Low street is a single track road and is not able to cope wi

Wicklewood has very little local employment, the School is full and oversubscribed, there are no shops, Doctors Surgeries so we all have to use the roads which in the case of Low Road is only just adequate in places for the existing housing. It would create a large backfill to the High street and be very much to the detriment of existing housing backing on to the proposed area.

Myself and my young family live on High street, our garden backs onto the proposed site. I also note that on the plans it appears that a section of our garden is marked off! As though this will included in the site! No thankyou, we will not be selling off our garden for more houses! One of the main reasons we purchased our house, was because of its large garden, we enjoy playing football, bbq's etc within it. Wicklewood is a very quiet picturesque village, the development of more properties will impinge on the natural beauty and its wildlife. Barn owls, muntjac deer and Roe Deer to name but a few! To build more properties will take away their natural habitat. The site is also off a single track road and will cause disruption and damage to low street. Impacting on the residents. The village does not have the infrastructure to sustain a population increase. The nursery and school are also oversubscribed abs cannot accommodate more pupils. The spectacular views of the windmill will be spoilt with a development. Also those lands are susceptible to flooding, drainage is poor in the village and further housing will impinge upon the already poor drainage. Putting home owners at risk of flooding. Power cuts and poor broadband are also a common occurrence within the village. It is for the above reasons that I object to the development.

Site Ref No GNLP0232 LOW STREET, WICKLEWOOD
SITE: North facing slope of an arable field bounded by a hedge and ditch on the South side of Low Street Wicklewood.
DRAINAGE Surface water drains down the slope often flooding a slightly flatter area behind the hedge before flowing into the ditch. There are also land drains taking water into the ditch.
DITCH/FLOODING This ditch has a habit ,in really wet weather, of overflowing onto the road, flooding both that and the drives and gardens of the properties opposite. This winter it has happened on 3 separate occasions.
ROAD: The road is basically single track throughout, with some very sharp bends especially towards the High Street end and again where it joins green Lane, Crownthorpe. There is no highway drainage in front of the site and there is no footpath or passing places the length of Low Street. The school children walk down the middle of the road. It is in fact a country lane!!
SEWER The main sewer for the houses opposite the site runs through their back gardens. There is no mains sewer down that part of the road.
In my opinion this is a totally unsuitable site for housing development. The ditch would be incapable of taking the extra surface water created and the flooding would increase to completely unacceptable levels. Therefore a entirely new drainage system would have to be constructed, the whole length of Low Street. The road would be unable to cope with all the extra traffic (drive ways are currently used as passing places, with the inevitable breakdown of verges) and a completely new sewage system would need be created.
In addition the site comprises good agriculture land and the hedge acts as a wildlife haven. This site should not be developed .