GNLP0055

Concerning the proposals for Barnham Broom and this plan - 0055, I object for the following reasons:

1. The increase in traffic through the village, which already causes near miss collisions, especially at the school, will cause be even more dangerous.

2. The very nature of Barnham Broom as a village will be much eroded giving rise to it as a 'townscape'.

3. Spur Lane is a narrow access which often, in the face of on-comming traffic, causes one to swerve onto the dirt side banks to avoid collision.

A very much reduced number of dwellings is essential for this plan.

M R Nairn

The land proposed for an unspecified number of houses on GNLP0055 has been open farmland. It is a site used by barn owls and other birds of prey and has specific significance for all wild life. The road it is adjacent to- Spur Road, is not a proper road. It is always under pressure -the surface is terrible it flooded in 2017-2018 due to the insufficient drainage and bad upkeep of ditches.The hedgerow along the road was ripped out in 2017 exacerbating the problem and meant the recent snow fall ended up with the road being blocked for days due to the lack of hedgerow to protect the road. The deaths of barn owls and other raptors has increased due to the lack of hedges preventing the birds from flying low into the heavy haulage lorries that use Spur Rd to access other routes. The sewage system in the village was built solely for the number of houses that existed in the village up to 20 years ago. New build is already impacting on this system with some areas of the village being adversely affected- particularly since the hotel was expanded at the golf club. The power supply to the village is under a great deal of strain and in 2018 we had power cuts across the entire village that lasted for a number of days. Power cuts are a regular occurrence throughout the year- regardless of weather conditions. The school is already oversubscribed and parking on the roads causes enormous problems for the residents adjacent to the school. The village does not have the infra structure to support a large development- and this site- with an 'unspecified' number- comparing it to others in the village could have over 100 houses on it. This represents a 50% growth of the existing village. I know the village is looking into developing a neighbourhood plan and is taking steps to achieve this. I am aware new houses in the village are inevitable over the years- this proposal however is far too vague and represents a threat to the very nature of the village. Once we have had a consultation and decided what we agree to have as a village as part of a neighbourhood plan I have no option other than to object to this proposal in the strongest possible terms.

An 'unspecified' number of houses here together with GNLP0324,GNLP0196, GNLP0174 and the existing development already in progress at BARN 1 could increase the size of Barnham Broom by 50% as there are 232 houses existing already. With the increase in vehicles and people this would have a huge negative impact on the nature of a Norfolk rural village in a rural setting.

Spur road is the main entry into the village for people travelling from Norwich. It is not wide enough for two vehicles to pass along most of it's length meaning the verges are already cut up.Introducing additional vehicles from this development of potentially 50 dwelling will compound the issue.
The northern end of the road always has standing water in wet weather and last year was closed for several days due to flooding. The highways department spent some time clearing drainage channels and ditches directly adjacent to the proposed site to rectify the situation. Without adequate provision for the loss of natural drainage on the site road flooding could be an issue.
Mains sewer built about 30 years ago was not intended to include the golf club which linked in a few years later. With all the proposed new sites together with small developments over the interim years and currently bankside in Bell Road is likely to seriously overload the system

Inadequate infrastructure including sewage and drainage. Spur Road is narrow, with no footpath, in poor condition and not suitable for increased traffic flow. Barnham Broom school has no capacity. Further development in this area will be a threat to birds and wildlife.

The infrastructure of the village is not currently sufficiently developed to support further housing development. Increased traffic on narrow village roads will always be a problem. There are issues concerning an increased need for sewage treatment, the lack of adequate broadband and the capacity of the village primary school. Local roads are subject to flooding, road surfaces are deteriorating and not being repaired. This current lack of maintenance to the local built environment does not inspire confidence that there will be any further investment in services sufficient to support this development.

The village doesn't have the infrastructure to cope with this level of development. I would rather gradual low level development in keeping with the current housing - filling along Norwich Road etc. Also please provide some low cost, good quality housing for young buyers.

Inadequate infrastructure including sewage and drainage. Spur Road is narrow & not suitable for extra traffic it also has flooding issues. Bend on Norwich Road near to site could pose a problem.
Village school I believe is full to capacity and cars parked outside the school already cause a problem without adding extra traffic through the village.

The Parish Council have discussed these proposals at length as well as hold a well attended meeting with the village residents. The consensus is to object the site proposed as like with other sites, the same issues are relevant. The village does not currently have sufficient infrastructure, with some poor roads and pavements, limited foot paths and drainage issues. The capacity of the school and limited Broadband is also worth highlighting as well as the significant impact on the environment. We already have a new development being built just off Bell Road which we agreed to as we are aware the village must flourish to an extent. If large developments are built residents are greatly concerned the look, feel and rural nature of the village will change. Routes through the village are already used as a, 'rat run' especially by lorries and more development will further strain the current infrastructure. Councillors agreed that smaller developments could potentially be considered, such as for 5-15 houses only.

Barnham Broom is unsuitable for a development of this size, it will completely change the feeling of this small village and visually alter the countryside and wildlife habitat. Spur Road is a thin country road not suitable for more traffic as cars can barley pass and is in an appalling condition of repair and floods regularly. Norwich Road is winding at this point and will also be unsafe if this development is built. There are problems with water drainage and the sewers in the village and we also have a big problem with car parking from the school.

I wholly object to the current proposition of building so many more new houses in Barnham Broom. There are many reasons for my objections and I will try to cover them all. This applies to GNLP 0174, 0196, 0324 and 0055.

First of all I would like to point out that your information on the current amenities in Barnham Broom is wrong. There is no garage. We have been living in Barnham Broom for over 17 years and there has not been a garage in that time. It was demolished quite a while before we moved in. This error on the planners' part will have had an impact on their view of the suitability of building in this area. Please ensure that this error is noted and corrected!

The character and present form of the village makes it just that: a village. The proposed number of houses will have a serious impact on this. Those who live here enjoy a small village atmosphere - that is why they live here.

The current infrastructure will not support the number of people the proposed new houses will accommodate. The school is already at full capacity and the small shop and Post Office has limited opening hours. There is no provision for a larger store but, if this had been proposed, I would be against that too, as it would destroy the livelihood of the village store owners.

No thought has been given to the local community, who already have to deal with a lot of through-traffic congesting the narrow lanes. The surface of the lanes is constantly churned up by the constant flow of rat-run traffic (A47 to Wymondham cut-through) which results in the edges of the surface breaking away and large potholes at junctions. This is already a major problem and a danger to the current level of traffic. The speed at which potholes are repaired is dismally slow. Whilst talking of speed, motorists using these lanes as a cut-through speed through the village with no regard to the 30MPH speed limit, causing a potential risk to life and limb - especially to small children and older members of the community.

The bus service is insufficient to serve a larger community.

As a village, we all experience frequent power outages throughout the year. Adding so many new dwellings will increase the load on the local power network.

The Broadband coverage is dire in this area, despite have Fibre Optic available. Adding over 50% more Broadband users to this small community may render the service unusable. In this day and age, many people rely heavily on good Internet connections both for business and pleasure.

The building of many more new houses, in addition to those that are currently under construction, will have a negative impact on local wildlife, especially with the loss of hedgerows which a lot of animals rely upon for nesting and ground-cover. There are also some rare plants that grow in this area - a type of rare orchid, for certain, but there may be more.

There is an existing problem with localised flooding in various spots in the village due to lack of drains and natural drainage caused by the saturation of the heavy clay earth we have. This would be exacerbated by the addition of more ground covered by buildings or roads. The water table is very high and it is difficult and expensive to find solid ground to build upon. I know this from experience, because we had to put in piles down to over 6 metres to find solid ground to support our conservatory. I read the report on RoFfSW (Risk of Flooding from Surface Water) but it does not mention the proposed building areas and the risk of the run-off impacting the established housing.

There is the potential impact of surface and ground water on my house and my immediate neighbours' properties. This is in relation to GNLP 0196 and 0174 specifically, as this is the end of the village in which I live. These two plots sit adjacent to "Barn1" which is currently under construction.

My neighbours and I live downhill from these two sites on Mill Road. We already experience heavy run-off from the fields, as I am sure do several properties along the lower portion of Hillside. There are two surface water drains that run from Hillside itself and its properties across my garden to a large concrete cylinder in the middle of my patio (with a manhole cover) and from there, through the rest of my property out to Mill Road. This is often full with nowhere but our patio for the excess water to go. If more land up the hill is covered with houses and impervious surfaces, we will all be impacted by their run-off as well.

The small privately owned field to the rear of my property, between these proposed sites and my garden, is 5 feet higher than my land and has been moving steadily downhill for some time. We are currently in the very expensive process of erecting a retaining wall in an effort to halt this, having removed between 15 and 20 tons of earth that had collapsed into the garden. Unfortunately, we are being hampered by the fact that any holes dug fill with water as we go. Again I repeat that, should the site 0196 and, to a lesser extent, 0174 be built upon, the impact of surface water we already cope with would be increased substantially; this is totally unacceptable.

There are a couple of paragraphs in the huge number of documents I have read which I feel are pertinent to this subject:

"All new developers should aim to minimise areas of impermeable ground to reduce surface water runoff. Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) should be used on all new development." This is all very well, but I have read negative reports on SuDS, so this too is worrying.

"Planners should be aware of local conditions and surface water and their strategy should demonstrate that adequate protection is given to properties and infrastructure on AND off the site."

The planners have obviously not visited the area - this is truly a "Desk Top" plan! The people who live here are horrified at the proposed ruthless "back filling" of these two sites, both of which have serious access issues.

To maintain the form and character of the village but keep it as a village, some linear building has been completed in recent years. Some small linear development, in keeping with the overall personality of the area, may be acceptable; however, the back-filling over many hectares of land is utterly objectionable.

The number of buildings should be specified. Not acceptable. This is a tiny village which shouldn't be developed.

Together with GNLP0174/GNLP0324/GNLP0196 and the 26 houses already under construction at the BARN1 site, the rural nature of this Yare Valley Village would be destroyed. It would more than double in size and become a small townscape instead of the historical rural setting it is now. It would be better to allow an infill of smaller houses (for young people and seniors wanting to downsize but stay in the village) to be built linearly along the verge of Norwich Rd between the newish four low cost and the barn conversions, thus joining up the two "halves" of the village and creating more cohesion, rather than several separate enclaves of estates.