GNLP2080

There is currently an application for 8 dwellings on this site which has been refused and is under appeal. This plan increases the number of dwellings to 42. There is no mention of installation of mains surface water drainage is to be to a pond and then into a ditch system to be re instigated. The land here is impermeable and clay and the field is higher than premises and housing further down the lane and laundry lane. The land slopes towards these areas and many of the properties have no / poor damp course so any additional water retained will have an adverse effect. Further the area is not adapted to cope with the increased traffic this will bring coupled with the vans and lorries accessing the businesses down Laundry Lane.

Building these houses on this field would create flooding, we live behind the field, have issues with flooding due to hard clay soil. The field slopes down to our property , if built on, would create more water running down to our land and flooding us even more. In 2017 planning was for 8 property's. (4 bungalows , 4 houses). Then it got refused. Now it's 40 odd property's that being built, what with that and Bennett's a few yards up the road building another 40 odd houses, the country roads can't cope with the increase in traffic, The doctors, schools are only small and are struggling already.. Roads getting out of village on to the A47 is a nightmare,

There will be a huge amount of increased traffic passing my property.

This proposal will increase the flooding risk of my property significantly.

I am concerned about pedestrian safety on the single track lane and it looks like pedestrian safety is coming second here.

This field has a drainage problem the water runs down towards the lower part of the field which slopes down towards the Laundry Lane end. The road infrastructure is in no way suitable for extra traffic and certainly not for this number of properties. Access from Blofield Corner Road is totally unsuitable and dangerous ie it is a single track. Turning high grade agricultural land into housing means this land is lost for ever.

The proposed site is outside of the permitted development/settlement area for Blofield Heath. There is already allocated land within Blofield Heath which has been approved for substantial housing development. Access to the proposed site is very poor and potentially dangerous due to the increased traffic which would be created from such a development. Pedestrian safety is cause for concern. There are currently surface water drainage and flooding issues with the proposed site therefore building 40+ homes would cause even further problems.

This site is inappropriate for development on, first and foremost due to the access. Blofield Corner Road narrows considerably this end, and the resulting increased traffic particularly round the Z bends will make it very dangerous for the many pedestrians and dog walkers - Let alone the fact that Dawsons Lane itself is a single track. There is no street lighting and no pavements - hence serious pedestrian risk already. The field is high grade agricultural land and should be retained as such - increased housing in the village if necessary should take place nearer the centre and in areas with wider roads.
There are drainage issues with surface water already in the area and the loss of land will make this worse. There is a lack of mains water pressure in the area, and additional dwellings will make this worse. Also a lack of mobile signal and broadband which increasing users will make even worse. There are already major difficulties in upgrading to faster broadband - we have been on a waiting list for fibre for over 4 years - there is just no capacity for new housing.

We object to this proposal.
This proposal should be seen in the context that planning permission was refused in March for part of this site for only 8 houses. This is currently under appeal.
The developer has a financial interest as an option to purchase and so we are a little confused as to the declaration on question 3a that the proposer has no financial interest.
The claim that this development is sustainable is strongly contested.
Planning permission was refused on the western aspect in 2001 and rejected at appeal and specified harm to the character of the area.
The location is outside the local settlement limit.
The access is along a single track private lane which is neither in the ownership nor individual control of the development site owner.
The development would create 320 additional vehicle movements a day along a single track with very poor visibility onto Dawson's Lane and Blofield Corner Road.
The dwelling number is greatly in excess of the 5 dwellings for a private access lane determined by Norfolk County Council for greenfield sites.
Highway safety is not achievable along Dawson's Lane and the very narrow portion of Blofield Corner Road this development would join. There is no pedestrian access and no street lighting due to dark skies policy.
Refuse collection lorries have to reverse into Dawsons Lane as no turning circle and this development will exacerbate this issue.
The site itself may be low flood risk but the immediate surrounding areas have high surface water flood risk as determined by the environment agency.
There is no mains sewage or water along Dawson's Lane. Both of these essential utilities are under great pressure at this end of the village and there are already 36 house 100yards to the East granted planning permission.
There is no gas along this private track.
The costs to sort highway widening of Blofield Corner Road, bringing the whole length of the private access track unto adoptive standards and keeping all surface water on site and creating safe foul drainage means this site is not viable.
Local shop, primary school and bus stops more than half a mile away.
Poor road to A47 from Blofield Heath (Woodbastwick Road).
Single lane highway west along Blofield Corner Road towards the Broadland Northway.

Appeal reference APP/k2610/w/18/3205832.application number 20172032.i live on the corner of the field xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,i have now found on this other website a proposal for 42 houses on Dawsons lane,you really are mad if you think blofield corner road,a small single lane leading down to Little Plumstead is going to cope.you already have agreed to Bennet homes building 36 new properties on this road.you then turn down the eight proposed houses on Dawson's lane,as outside the settlement area and now allowed the appeal to this,which is bad enough,as this would be down a single unprecedented lane and building on good farmland,but not good building land,as this field gets saturated in heavy rain,so eight hard standing properties would make this even worse and as for 42 properties would create nothing but huge problems as the site slopes a lot from Dawson's lane down to Laundry lane,this area is already a high risk to surface water flooding as shown on Environmental agency surface water flood risk maps also what plans are there for foul waste,the huge impact of traffic.health and safety to pedestrians who love to walk the area enjoying the beautiful country side,the cycle clubs and horses that go past.the wildlife that we get from the field coming into the garden,would all be gone for good.nothing good would come from this only the builder and land owner making money,who else benefits,I do not have a problem with building new houses,but in a suitable and safe environment.please come and view site,I would be more than happy to meet a planning officer to discuss

After much thought and consideration Blofield Parish Council would like to make the following response to the proposals contained in the Greater Norwich Local Plan New, Revised and Small Sites consultation : -
Blofield and neighbouring parishes have already seen a large number of developments built or approved. The local infrastructure cannot cope with what is happening now and the council has specific concerns about:
* The capacity of the access to the A47 (Cucumber Lane roundabout). The existing planning consents have taken forecast flows to the limit of the capacity.
* The provision of essential local services including healthcare and schools. The existing developments have overloaded the services and there is no capacity to cope with the impact of the housing which is being built let alone the significant additional houses that have planning permission. There are no credible proposals to improve the situation.
* The capacity of the Postwick Hub if large housing developments occur in the locality: were these housing proposals factored into the traffic flow forecasts when the junction was designed? We already have tailbacks onto the A47 from the slip road that are as bad as before the improvements to the 'hub'; significant additional flows through that junction as a result of housing growth and the NDR won't improve the problem.
* Loss of Grade 1 or 2 agricultural land at a time when there is concern post-Brexit about food security.
* The ability of the water supply and treatment infrastructure to service the proposed housing developments in and near the parishes.
The current Local Plan allocated 'about' 50 houses to Blofield itself and 'about' 25 to Blofield Heath giving the parish of Blofield growth of, say, 75 - 100. The actual growth under the current Local Plan will be about 500 houses - which is 500% of the planned number, casts serious doubt on the utility and effectiveness of Local Plans, and is crippling local services.
Given the extent of development experienced under the current Local Plan the Parish Council opposes all the proposed sites within the parish put forward in the GNLP New, Revised and Small Sites consultation: the parish needs time to absorb the current developments and for the infrastructure issues to be addressed by bodies such as NCC.

I am objecting to this application as a resident who lives on Blofield Corner Road on the grounds of traffic, safety of pedestrians, surface water drainage provision, mains water pressure, misrepresentation on the building application plan of road space/design and housing type.

Referring to Blofield Parish Neighbourhood Plan (BPNP)
TRA1 local traffic: "Particular regard should be made to road safety, the needs of pedestrians and cyclists, parking provision and mitigating congestion"; when adjoining Blofield Corner Road from the proposed site and turning right to Little Plumstead within a few hundred yards this becomes a single track road with blind bends and with driveways being used as pull in spaces. There are no footpaths but this road is used by dog walkers and families walking/cycling in the countryside. From the development this would be the most direct route to the new Northern Destributor Road. As a result the increased vehicle movements would make this a dangerous section of road with no options to improve.

TRA3. as already stated walking and cycling would be affected on Blofield Corner Road. Additionally on the proposed plan it indicates the currently unadopted farm track (Dawsons Lane) will have footpaths either side of the road way, this is not physically possible even with the proposed increased width at the entrance due to adjoining properties, this means pedestrians including the disabled will have to use the single track roadway which i suggest is not appropriate under disability rights legislation on a new development.

ENV3: "Future development should not cause or contribute to the problem of flooding or drainage issues, or pollution." This site is adjacent to Borton Road indicated in BPNP as a flooding risk and in the Environment Agency flood risk map. Walking this track in the winter there is always standing water. The plan has no evidence of managing the current flood risk or the increased surface water caused by building on agricultural land. If the ditch further down the lane gets blocked I have witnessed flooding on the track, addjoining fields and by the pumping station at Blofield Corner.

There is already a water pressure issue in the area and this application does not make it clear how this will be addressed for the increased usage.

As already indicated the representation on the planning map for the entrance road indicates 2 footpaths and a single track road, this is not possible. It is also drawn showing this is smaller than the proposed estate roads within the development. Emergency service vechles would have issues accessing the estate and potentially getting to the houses. The application also states a mixture of affordable and market housing but the design shows all detached properties except two adjoinging by their garages this indicates they are not affordable.

Finally as this site is outside of the settlement limit there are more approapriate sites on the maim Woodbastwick Road that has better access and less safety issues and it is for that reason I hope you can uphold this objection.