GNLP0535

I do not believe that this would be a good place to build. The plot has only single track access from Church lane which is itself only single carriageway. The road is already very busy with traffic travelling to and from the industrial units at the near the proposed point of access. Additional traffic would cause significant disruption in the village. The development would also be backfill and would significantly alter the nature and appearance of that part of the village and have a significant impact on those people abutting it.

I am writing to oppose the proposed development site GNLP0535 situated to the south of Church Lane for the following reasons.
The site is accessed off a single track road with limited passing points which is used by walkers, cyclists and families on the way to school. The additional properties will increase the volume of traffic increasing the risk to those using the road.
Repeated developments of this size within the village without addressing the need to improve and enhance the facilities and services in conjuction with the developments is going increase the pressures on the facilities.
By permitting developments outside the existing development boundary the benefit of the boundary is lost and a precedent is set for re-drawing the boundaries simply to permit development. Changes to development boundaries should only be undertaken once all other options have been exhausted and in discussion with the residents of village.
The development will also have an effect on the value and more importantly, our enjoyment of, our home. One of the main reasons we chose our home was due to the view across fields from the rear of the house; a view we thought was protected by the development boundary. Any development of this site would destroy that view.

Living in a village is a choice of lifestyle. In other words people choose not to live in an area which is over developed. For high density housing the small market towns in Norfolk are better suited. In Wicklewood there is a Primary School, a church and a pub. The Primary school is already struggling with the intake and the significant parking on the road at drop off and collection is already dangerous for both pedestrians and road users. The internal roads around the village are largely single file traffic with farm machinery constantly on the road. The village certainly doesn't have the infrastructure to cope with any significant housing development. I don't have an issue for a handful (eg 6) new houses to add to the 18 homes or so which have been built/being built on the High Street, but for large developments there are clearly better served places in South Norfolk.

The school in Wicklewood is already full and oversubscribed. The Hackford Road outside the front of the school is particularly dangerous with parents parking along the road on the blind corner. Church Lane has a dangerous bend at the bottom near the Church and further up is only one car wide. Further building in the village would mean more traffic along both roads and its only a matter of time before there is an accident. Wicklewood is a small village, and building more houses is just turning it into suburbia.

Access and Transport: It is assumed that Wicklewood has been identified as a "service village" to support the promotion of "the Cambridge / Norwich Tech Corridor growth initiative" and "Norwich Research Park, Wymondham / Hethel, Longwater and the Food Enterprise Zone". However access and road quality in and around Wicklewood in all directions is poor and congested at peak times due in part to the narrowness of the lanes. More specifically access to the site, Church Lane, is a narrow high banked single lane road with no pavement. The lane is already highly used and dangerous for pedestrians, particular during school drop and collection times. Public transport to and from the village is limited.

Environment: This is a greenfield site. National policy dictates that brownfield should be developed as a priority over greenfield. It is important to keep areas of green within villages so that they retain their character and it is a concern that environmental considerations will be ignored as developments such as this are considered so small scale and low impact. Overtime these continued small developments will increase traffic and affect wildlife and the local environment, becoming increasingly unsustainable. More specifically the hedgerows around this proposed plot help to sustain a variety of wildlife and are part of the character of the village.

Infrastructure: Increased housing will put increased pressure on an already stretched local infrastructure. The School is full and the size and condition of the building and parking is inadequate for the number of pupils. There is no medical facilities in the village and things such as power cuts, flooding and poor broadband speed are clearly not designed to support an increased population.

Community: It is unclear how these new houses will support a "thriving rural economy". Development on this site will deliver homes but not jobs and is therefore not good for the immediate local economy. Larger sites have the potential to offer more in terms of environmental sustainability, community infrastructure and employment. Again it is difficult to see how this small scale development improves Wicklewood as a community, it just makes it bigger.

Consultation: Finally I have only just discovered that these proposals had been put forward at all and this was by word of mouth. All my immediate neighbours and most other villagers I have spoken to were also ignorant of these proposals. If this document is truly meant to act as a vehicle of consultation then more effort should be made to disseminate these plans throughout the communities that they are allegedly supposed to be serving.

The same applies to this proposal as Low road, School full, no shops, no doctors need to travel for everything. This particular proposal will increase traffic on Church Lane, possibly with 18 houses perhaps 30 more vehicles plus delivery, more walkers, children, dog walkers etc. no footpath. No official passing places. The narrow nature of the lane was recently one reason a planning application was refused off Church lane by The Highways Authority. Plus huge backfill changing the entire nature of this part of the village.

It is not safe for extra traffic to use this road given it being a single width road with no paths for pedestrians. The village has minimal services and trying to extend the housing any further would stretch this too far. It is unsafe for the road of Church Lane but also surrounding roads. As well as disturbing the residents of the village already. I object to this planning as a resident of this road and village.