GNLP0541

Chedgrave PC Considered this matter 1st March 2018. Cllrs referred to feedback from residents during the Parish Plan consultation which is broadly in favour of small scale development as long as: Houses are not all together, There are mixed types of property, There is mixed tenure for rental, There is mixed ownership, Housing density is as per the village at the moment.Parishioners showed some interest in retail development.

While generally in favour of appropriately sensitive development there must be concerns about road access to/from the site to/from Pits Lane - both during construction and afterwards, when occupied. If this is allowed it will make an already small and at times congested single file lane even more so. There are large numbers of pedestrians and dog walkers who use this lane which has no sidewalk/pavement.
If road access is restricted to Hardley Road during both construction and occupation, this will go some way to addressing this point.
In addition , given the nature of surrounding housing and the rural setting, high density housing would not be appropriate. This would mean restricting any development to a few well/generously landscaped and positioned houses.

I understand that a large part of the land is a conservation area and should not be built on. Pits lane is a charming area uniquely situated with period properties.To alter this area in anyway would spoil the charm of this part of the village.The lane is part of Wherrymans way walk and is well used. I understand that planing consent for just one bungalow on this land was turned down many years back on the grounds that access to Pits lane was unsuitable, Likewise access unto Hardley Road (which is single file traffic in places) would also be unsuitable.

This site is close to a grade one listed church and Pits Park which are accessed from nearby roads. Wherrymans Way runs through the area which is used by many dog walkers and visitors. The route is characterised by river walks, wildlife and small scale development. Hardley Road offers links to local facilities including allotments. However inappropriate use of vehicles at speed in the area blight pedestrian and park facilities, which could soon be unlit. Five to eight houses represents over development and could also exacerbate existing problems, thus forming the reasons for objection. Other sites are more suitable.

This is outside the development boundary and therefore should not be considered. The roads in Chedgrave are already getting too busy for a village of this size. On a normal morning between 7-8am, you can be waiting to get out onto the A146 for up to 15 minutes (on average, 5-7 minutes but this increases the closer to 8am you get). This is the same for the George Lane junction in Loddon. The junctions from the industrial estate road and High Bungay Road are too dangerous to attempt during rush hour, due to lack of visibility, so we already get a lot of the traffic from Loddon and that has significantly worsened since the building of the new estates near the industrial estate, on High Bungay Road and George Lane, not to mention all the new estates in Beccles, which also use the A146 in the mornings. There is also a huge problem with speeding, particularly on Norwich Road. The Parish Council have tried to get the 30mph limit moved to encompass the entrance to Big Back Lane but it has been refused, therefore, people will be able to drive passed some of the suggested sites at up to 60mph, this would not be safe for pedestrians, particularly children.

I am writing on behalf of the three residents at our home in Pits Lane. We object to the proposed development site at Hardley Road/Pits Lane on the basis that it will have a negative impact upon the landscape and the historic environment. The area has a particular character and is adjacent to a Conservation Area and historic church. The addition of more housing would be a detrimental and disproportionate step, given that it would only provide a small number of homes. There are also issue with access to Hardley Road, which is narrow and is surprisingly busy - not a constant stream of traffic but it is rare to walk the short distance to the Chedgrave Common lane without several vehicles passing you.

The other two sites proposed in Chedgrave may have a lesser impact and be more suitable for development. They will also provide a greater number of homes than this site.

We would add that population increase in Chedgrave/Loddon adds weight to the already critical requirement for roundabouts to access the A146.

The elevated topography of the site would result in buildings of a scale inappropriate to a rural setting. Access on to the highway ( particularly Pits Lane) would be unsafe and such a development would result in unacceptable levels of additional traffic. The site also sits partly in a Conservation Area which should remain undeveloped as a natural ground ( more suitable to its current use as a small holding or similar)
There are other sites in Loddon which are far more suitable for housing, which could fulfil the required apparent local need and which sit closer to service centres.

I live nearby but don't border the land, however access from Pits Lane is not suitable for any more traffic than this single track lane already accommodates as well as it forming part of the Wherrymans Way footpath with heavy tourist and local walkers..not to mention a childrens play area at the Pits which borders it.
The Grade 1 Church opposite and surrounding area is a conservation area bordering directly on to the Broads.
I'm not sure as to what type of property is suited for this land as it is mostly sloped and any two storey dwellings would look completely out of character especially as the houses on Pits Lane opposite the site are at a much lower level and the properties on Hardley Rd are bungalows.
Access from Hardley Rd is also unsuitable as it is narrow and the crossroads with Pit Lane is already compromised by very poor visibility and fast traffic entering the village.

The high elevation of this site would have an overbearing visual impact on the original housing in the area and the views from the church. The site is also adjacent to the children's play area and part of the conservation area.

Pits Lane is a single carriageway lane and Hardley Road is narrow in places - both would be unsuitable for an increased volume of traffic.

Looking at the overall local plan there are other more suitable sites available.

The site is elevated over the adjacent part of the conservation area and. as English Heritage has previously noted, development on it would would be harmful to the rest of the conservation area and nearby Grade 1 listed church. Development would further expand the village into the Chet Valley which previous local plans have considered inappropriate. The roads adjoining the site are narrow providing poor access, and access to the A146 would be through more of Chedgrave's narrow roads. Any site considered for Loddon/Chedgrave should have ready access to the A146 avoiding the centres of both Chedgrave and Loddon.

No more development of Loddon/ Chedgrave. They have already been subjected to an obscene amount of development.

AS a person born in Chedgrave and also who hopes to live close to this proposed site, it is clear that this site is not a viable site for development, strategically or conservation wise. The already documented reasons for this still very much stand. My first objection is from the conservation view. There are two maps in circulation with the proposed dwellings, one shows the Conservation boundary to be up to the edge of pits lane, only including the road and not the proposed land. The other Map shows, that the conservation area is the road and a large strip of the land proposed. This cannot be allowed to be developed on or what is the point of 'Conservation area's'. The proposed buildings are extremely close to the Victorian cottages and Chedgrave church. Having visited the site a few times it is clear that the roads are not suitable for creating entrances to an estate. Hardley Road is virtually one cars width in places and Pits Lane is a tiny byroad,certainly a cars width wide, which has constant dog walkers, holiday makers and families walking from the play area to the river and vice versa. A little further down the lane, also a conservation area, are deer, Owls,Herons, Swans and a whole host of wildlife which spill over to the outlying areas.It is bad enough the newer buildings were allowed to be built previously down there, without now adding more modern, unsympathetic buildings on the entrance to our Summer Industry in Loddon, the Holiday makers who use Pits Lane all summer, to access there Hire boat or visit the village and Loddon. This area if it is developed at all should be for more sought after allotments, or added to part of the walk down to the river.Please keep this area as it is, the edge of the village with only a few lone houses between Chedgrave and Hardley. Please do not build further and spoil this natural extension to the River. I would also hazard a guess that should this area be excavated for archaeology, giving the history of the area, and the close proximity to the church that there may be items of historical interest.Please reconsider building on this site.Thank you

We wish to provide the attached information to further assist with the site suitability assessment for the Hardley Road / Pits Lane GNLP0541.

The current GNLP site assessment GNLP0541 notes a number of site constraints (refer attached copy of the GNLP0541 suitability assessment), we have reviewed the points raised and note the following for your consideration :
- Not particularly well related to services, We note the local convenience store & other local shops , bus stop etc are located approximately 200M from the site and are within easy walking distance along an existing public footpath. Refer PL011B.
- Not particularly sympathetic to the character of the village. The site is effectively an infill "brown field" site which is surrounded on 3 sides by existing houses and by a commercial site on the 4th side so if developed would integrate well with the existing built form of the village and tidy up an unused piece of brown field land. Developing this site would not extend the village into the open countryside.
- Potential access constraints The site could be readily accessed from Hardley Rd which is a 4.8M wide carriageway and has a 30MPH speed limit. We note good visibility is available in both directions from the proposed Hardley Rd site access.
- Road capacity & footpath provision not suitable We note that Hardley Rd is a standard width road at 4.8M with no apparent abnormal capacity issues, it doesn't feel a busy road due to the surrounding rural area & low density housing. There is also a public footpath on Hardley Rd which starts at the corner of Hardley Rd & Pits Lane (adjacent to the site) and provides pedestrian access to the local shops & services etc which are located approximately 200M to the West of the site.
- Risk of surface water flooding. We are not aware of any local surface water flooding issues associated with the site. The site is also located well outside the local flood plain and has a very low risk of flooding on the Environment agencies flood maps , refer attached PL013.
- Close proximity to the Broads, We note that the site is well outside the flood risk areas associated with the Broads. We feel the proximity to the Broads is a benefit to the site as it provides good access to recreational opportunities such as boating, dog walking etc.
- Partly in a conservation area and proximity to a Listed building . Following a detailed site analysis of the surrounding conservation area we feel the site has the potential to provide a residential development which could enhance the character & setting of the adjacent conservation area through careful & thoughtful design. If required the proposed new dwellings could be single storey to minimise the impact on long distance views to and from the nearby listed building.
- Within 3000M of a SSSI Hardley Flood. The Hardley Flood area is located approximately 1500M to the South East of the site. As part of the planning process an ecology site assessment would be undertaken by a suitably qualified Ecologist to assess any potential impacts on the Hardley Flood SSSI. If any were noted then mitigation measures would be undertaken as part of the site development.

We hope the attached information assists with further work on the GNLP site suitability assessment for the Hardley Rd, Pits Lane site and please call if you have any queries.

GNLP0041 - Wroxham Football Club 20 dwellings
Where would the current football club go? This might also visually impact on the Broads landscape and the existing Wroxham Conservation Area - early discussion about this would be welcomed. This site is also within the Wroxham Conservation Area.

* Salhouse
GNLP0157 - Tourism Use
This appears to be partly in the Broads area. Would welcome early discussions on this.
Likely to be too late to allocate anything in the Broads Local Plan. Other than Tourism
Use, no other details provided. What is this for? This is also partly within the Salhouse
Conservation Area.
* Acle
GNLP1049 - residential development
This is right up to the border with the Broads. Would welcome early discussions on
this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark
skies. Could have significant visual impact.
GNLP0007 - 12 dwellings
This is near the border with the Broads. Would welcome early discussions on this.
Would be extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies.
Early discussions welcomed also on GNLP 0384.
* Postwick
GNLP0370 - 75 and 115 dwellings and primary school
This is right up to the border with the Broads. Would welcome early discussions on
this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark
skies. Could have significant visual impact. Could have significant visual impact.
* Whittingham area
GNLP0360 - Deal Ground site - Residential led mixed use redevelopment to include
employment, retail community uses, potential primary education provision and local
greenspace and biodiversity areas.
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads.
Redevelopment of site could give rise to new opportunities for pedestrian/cycleway
bridge over River Yare. The creation of this new connected access to Whitlingham and
the Broads National Park from the centre of Norwich would highlight the River
Wensum Strategy aspirations along with those of the Broads Local Access Forum.
Could have significant visual impact.
* Norwich
GNLP1011 - protect as sports centre in community use.
Support
GNLP0409 - Deallocation of Policy CC17b and the area of CC17a.
Please can you expand on what this means please? Why is this being de-allocated?
GNLP0068 - Residential-led mixed use development for an undetermined number of
dwellings (Despite its small size the site could support a high density development and
is thus considered suitable for the land availability assessment.)
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
NB/SM/rpt/020318/Page 5 of 7/200218
affect the Broads.
There may be access issues if development was agreed at this location. The River
Wensum Strategy has identified this site as a potential continuation "link" of the
Riverside Walk and any development here would need to consider this in their
proposals. Could have significant visual impact. Issues around continued canalisation of
the river.
GNLP0401 - Residential-led mixed use development for approx. 400 dwellings with
retail and/or other appropriate city centre uses at ground floor level.
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads.
Redevelopment of site could give rise to new opportunities for access to River
Wensum for small craft and canoes along with pedestrian access to the waterside.
Could have significant visual impact. Issues around continued canalisation of the river.
* Surlingham
GNLP0374 - Residential development
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Potential
for visual impact on the Broads landscape
* Rockland St Mary
GNLP0531 - 200 dwellings
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads. Potential for significant visual impact on the Broads landscape.
* Cantley
GNLP0281 - Demolition of existing dwellings and residential redevelopment for approx.
20 homes with new entry road from Peregrine close
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads. Potential amenity issues associated with Cantley Sugar Beet Factory
(business already in existence). Potential for high visual impact over open marsh
landscape.
* Haddiscoe
GNLP0455 - Employment, storage and distribution uses.
This is near our border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be extending
the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Potential for visual
impact on the Broads landscape. Also GNLP 0414 More limited potential for visual
impact but early discussions on this would also be welcomed.
* Gillingham
GNLP0274 - Residential development of an unspecified number.
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Potential
for visual impact on the Broads land scape.
* Geldeston
GNLP1004 - resi 4-5 dwellings
NB/SM/rpt/020318/Page 6 of 7/200218
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies. Darkest
area of the Broads. More limited potential for visual impact. Located within the
Geldeston Conservation area.
* Kirby Cane
GNLP0303 - 11 dwellings
GNLP0304 - 15 dwellings
GNLP0305 - 32 dwellings
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. Dark skies.
* Chedgrave
GNLP0541 - 5-8 dwellings
This is right up to the border with the Broads and of a large scale. Would welcome
early discussions on this. Would be extending the built up area in a way that could
affect the Broads. Potential for visual impact on the Broads landscape.
* Loddon
GNLP0313 - 68 dwellings
This is near the Broads border. Would welcome early discussions on this. Would be
extending the built up area in a way that could affect the Broads. More limited
potential for visual impact.