GNLP2127

Showing comments and forms 1 to 6 of 6

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17138

Received: 18/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs Yvonne Kemp

Representation:

Impact of development in remainder of linked villages not yet known. Sizable developments within Poringland and on the entry to Poringland/Framingham Earl and developments in Framingham Earl/Framingham Pigot. All development information only considers current structure of villages, and says it can support more residents - however does not include those in progress at present.
Also documentation shows access to bus routes, which has now been cancelled and easy distance to schools, which are already over subscribed. Roads are narrow country lanes, not suitable for heavy traffic and already under considerable more traffic than a few years ago.

Full text:

Impact of development in remainder of linked villages not yet known. Sizable developments within Poringland and on the entry to Poringland/Framingham Earl and developments in Framingham Earl/Framingham Pigot. All development information only considers current structure of villages, and says it can support more residents - however does not include those in progress at present.
Also documentation shows access to bus routes, which has now been cancelled and easy distance to schools, which are already over subscribed. Roads are narrow country lanes, not suitable for heavy traffic and already under considerable more traffic than a few years ago.

Comment

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17285

Received: 22/11/2018

Respondent: South Norfolk Council

Representation:

some low to medium surface water flood risk through the centre of the site.
No foul sewer available

Full text:

some low to medium surface water flood risk through the centre of the site.
No foul sewer available

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17893

Received: 29/11/2018

Respondent: John Henson

Representation:

I have commented upon this sites neighbour GNLP 0003 and have noted its isolation from established settlements and its access along a severely substandard Burgate Lane and is therefore NOT SUSTAINABLE

Full text:

Regulation 18 sites being offered in and around Poringland:

Poringland needs time to consolidate and absorb anything up to 1400 homes and their inhabitants. That being my submission, I should maintain the development boundary for a significant time and then ensure that developments are integrated and permeable with the rest of the village - otherwise I end up with what are no more than atomised, gated communities with a consequent effect upon community resilience and cohesion.

Most of these sites tend to merge Poringland with surrounding villages. There are major governance issues associated with this trend and should be addressed by the Local authority with some urgency. If Poringland is to be treated to 'con-urbanisation' then there should be a public inquiry about it as the surrounding villages will be physically absorbed but not contributing to the overall precept, leaving Poringland residents to carry the fiscal burden alone.

GNLP2093 Land to the south of Caistor Lane
This land has no natural or planned connection with the settlement of Poringland except through a substandard junction on the B1332. It will be 'semidetached' with no planned or existing connection to either Caistor which offers no facilities or to Poringland serving only to expand the village area with no environmental or community gain. The drainage would be dependent upon system installed by David Wilson Homes and is part of the Poringland Sustainable Drainage scope. Therefore it would need to positively drained to seIr or it would otherwise pose a flooding risk to Highlands and other properties in the area. This site would certainly be exclusively dependent upon car for travel to work and school. It offers no planning or social opportunities to the village - it would be semi-detached from the village and be nothing more than a dormitory. It is UNSUSTAINABLE.

GNLP2094 land abutting 2093 to North of Stoke Road
A development on this site would follow that of David Wilson Homes to the east which has had to pile the footings of the homes nearest to this site due to the underlying failure of the land to support buildings. . As part of the Poringland Sustainable Drainage area, drainage of surface water would not be possible unless by drainage to surface water seIrs and it will add significantly to the flow rates of surface water to Boundary Way a known flood risk area. It is Ill off regular bus routes and would be car dependent for travel to work and school. It offers no planning or social opportunities to the village - it would be semi-detached from the village and be nothing more than a dormitory. It is UNSUSTAINABLE

GNLP2124 land to south of Poringland Road and Boundary Way
This area is detached for the urban area of Poringland and has a reducing bus service in the area. It will need to be drained according to the Poringland Sustainable Drainage Scheme and will add to the known flood risk area of Boundary Way. It will in no way be linked or provide a continuous flow from the existing - it will be only connected to the village by busy highways. It offers no planning or social opportunities to the village - it would be semi-detached from the village and be nothing more than a dormitory. NOT SUSTAINABLE

GNLP2127 Land off Burgate Lane towards Alpington
I have commented upon this sites neighbour GNLP 0003 and have noted its isolation from established settlements and its access along a severely substandard Burgate Lane and is therefore NOT SUSTAINABLE

GNLP2153 Land off Burgate Lane (Gladman's proposal) - being discussed under appeal:
Outside the development land boundary
Access along severely substandard lane
Severe effect on Gull Lane - substandard single track lane with springs emerging in the surface
Detached from village and so dependent upon car use
Limited safe access to schools
No drainage survey completed but subject to Poringland sustainable Drainage Scheme.
Drainage route highly likely to be into the headwaters of the Chet
UNSUSTAINABLE

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18036

Received: 07/12/2018

Respondent: Framingham Earl Parish Council

Representation:

To summarise the residents and Framingham Earl Parish Council have grave concerns with regards to access, safety, increases in traffic and isolation from local services.

Full text:

This site causes grave concerns to the residents and Framingham Earl Parish Council. This site is totally outside the building boundary of Framingham Earl. The site is too isolated from local services like the shops, doctors and schools. It is stated in the GNLP that access to schools "should be within 2 miles of SAFE walking facilities". This is clearly not the case for this site. It can be over 2 miles to get to the B1332 using Burgate Lane and Hall Road, certainly not safe walking distance for anyone, let alone people with children walking to school along narrow windy unpaved lanes and having to do it 4 times a day. Therefore those journeys would be made by car adding yet more traffic to these narrow lanes. These are all narrow single track lanes totally unsuited and unable to cope with any further increases in traffic. There is no safe cycle route or pavements as the site is on a very narrow rural lane, near a blind bend.

Framingham Earl Parish Council - 07/12/18

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18347

Received: 10/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Caroline Hayes

Representation:

This site is too far from either Poringland or Alpington schools for children to walk to. The road is already a rat run between the villages and it is not suitable for development.

Full text:

This site is too far from either Poringland or Alpington schools for children to walk to. The road is already a rat run between the villages and it is not suitable for development.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19302

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: G Newman

Representation:

Local Planning Authorities need to acknowledge now that they are always going to be playing 'catch up' with Government policy imposing higher and higher house building targets.
Meeting one Government Department's policy and targets on housing without due consideration being given to the detrimental impact on the provision of the associated services provided by other Government Departments e.g. the NHS, Education and Transportation is totally illogical. It is local communities that suffer as a result of the lack of any strategic 'joined up' thinking at Central and Local Government level.

See attachment for site comments

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments: