GNLP2121

This proposal would detrimentally change the fundamental nature of the rural village of Wortwell, more than doubling it in size. There is already insufficient local infrastructure to support this; in particular a medical practice that is struggling to meet demand in off-peak seasons, a single dental practice that doesn't meet local demand at all, and local schools that are increasingly over-subscribed.
Local employment is sparse, and there is limited local shopping (none in the village) meaning that villagers already have to travel - there would consequently be further increases in congestion and pollution.
Low Road is a narrow, winding country lane, unsuitable for an increase in traffic, and the High Rd already is used as a 'rat run' by vehicles between the A143 and Halesworth and no effective calming measures; increasing traffic on this road would clearly lead to a corresponding increase in the risk to children and wildlife.

This developement will destroy a rural village which has NO amenities for few current residents, i had trouble getting my children into a local school we do not have the facilities to cater for such extreme volume of housing. Infrastructure, sewerage can not cope with the houses in the village now. wortwell has been well designed around the small single passing roads in many areas it has to offer and would not be able to cater with high volume. The wildlife which is on the land, has this been concidered?
It is not a practical location for a hidious developement

I am in support of Wortwell Parish Council strong objections to this development stated in their letter to yourselves dated 30th November 2018.
I have resided in this village for a number of years, and consider it to be a place of character and natural local beauty support fauna and flora, and wildlife. Building of the proposed site would change this irrevocably. I believe our village should be preserved and protected to support it's natural character and beauty and relative tranquility. There would be a drastic increase in traffic on the narrow High Road which runs through Wortwell
Furthermore, as part of the charm of the village there is just a pub, garage, and nearby historic Redenhall church. As a result we are reliant on the market town of Harleston, for amenities. This town is already stretched in terms of infrastructure, in particular the doctors surgery. Harleston is currently being expanded with housing, but there has been no increase in Doctors, Dentists or Schools.
Therefore, any additional development in Wortwell would further add to the demand.
In conclusion, I thank you for the opportunity to voice my concerns regarding the proposed development GNLP2121, and hope you will take them into consideration.

I wish to strongly object against the proposal in Wortwell.
Without a car it is almost impossible to get to work as we have a very poor bus service.The large site could have 300 odd houses on it which would mean an extra 600 cars going through the village.
We have no shops or other amenities in the village.Harleston is the nearest town some 3 miles away.Bungay is 5 miles away and hasn't got a bank anymore and in inadequate postoffice.
Access onto the busy A143 trunk road from Wortwell(Homersfield end)is already dangerous and in addition the Flixton Road is used as a bypass for lorries to Halesworth as they cannot drive through Bungay.
Land drainage into the Waveney Valley has always been a problem.Housing West of Low Road would cause more flooding issues.
The development would total destroy the character of this lovely quiet village
in the Waveney Valley, an area of outstanding beauty.

I object to the proposed planning development GNLP2121, supporting the objections of the Wortwell Parish Council,for the following reasons mostly linked with the fact the services in the local community are not sufficient to cope with the number of people living in the houses proposed, having already not been able to cope with the increased demand of new housing in the local area specifically in Harleston:
* There is no local school with Harleston education already overstretched and the small facilities of Mendham Primary with more pupils than ever in its history. If there is to be affordable housing for people with families. schools will be required.
* The nearest medical and dental services are in Harleston. Already it takes two days for the phone to be answered to make a doctor's appointment in the one doctor's surgery with new GPs unable to be attracted to the area. Arriving in 2001 there were no NHS dentist vacancies in Harleston - the Bungay dentist I registered with has also now transferred to Halesworth.
* In 2000 the local shop was shut down now requiring travel to Harleston for nearest facilities.
* Bus services through High Road are so limited that they do not enable people to use them to travel to school or work. As a head teacher who had to travel to Norfolk and to Ipswich I was unable to get to work on public services despite a temporary medical condition that prevented me driving.
* The few employment opportunities in the close local area mean travel to Bury St Edmunds, Norwich and Ipswich for work would require the use of a car on the roads preventing the attainment of green targets set. Since 2001 I tried to car share but found there were not suitable car shares.
* The blind bends and width of Low Road in travelling to the Sancroft estate require one of the drivers at most points to be at a standstill in order to pass safely
- this would be well nigh impossible with the increased traffic from the new housing planned.
* In the years since 2001 this stretch of Low Road has to been flooded during heavy rain and after snow being not only a problem to traffic but to nearby housing.
* Low Road is used by walkers, joggers, dog walkers, cyclists for leisure and racing, horse riders, antique and modem farm vehicles all the time. Increased traffic will not only provide danger, to all these people especially where the pavement finishes but also prevent those activities which enable people to keep in good health and out of GPs!
* Low Road goes through a site of scientific interest, with many walks with views of unspoilt countryside that attract tourists to the area, using the local caravan site and B and B, enabling three local pubs to keep viable. The increase in traffic and change in character to the village will make it a less attractive destination, thus affecting the local economy.
* Wortwell Parish Council have plans already to develop housing sufficien t for local need.

I am writing this letter to air my views on this matter of additional housing in Wortwell. The problems it would cause would be overwhelming to say the least.
There is the problems of traffic going through the village. Its already ridiculous as they use the village to cut through to save going through the bypass. Police are working on this now with the council but to no avail at present.
There are problems to get to see a doctor as they have very few dentists in Harleston wont take on any new patients.
Schools are overcrowded, buses rarely run to suit schools or working people (Etc),
Access would be really difficult as they would cut through Wortwell Village again.
Car parking to certain areas would be a problem. Drainage problems. There's a lot of flat land on certain parts of wortwell and we have flooding at certain times of the year with heavy rainfall.
The land would be ruined we have a pretty village and flood rural spaces for wildlife and walks etc. it would become a concrete jungle. I have personally lived in the same house in Wortwell for over (51) years and brought my family up in a peaceful location (we do no need to meet the need for certain housing but wortwell for more reasons then I could list is not suitable for this project. There are a lot of derelict housesin all places around the country (& cities) etc. that could save time and money if they could be restored instead of looking on eye sore.

There is a lot more suitable places to build around than Wortwell. The whole character of Wortwell would be ruined. Water run off could also affect houses that would be at a lower level then new builds. People would have no privacy at the back of existing properties.

I would please seriously reconsider your plans try to see the bigger picture please.

I am at a loss to know who is responsible for setting up this scheme I've never heard anything about it before now - was it dreamt up by some baldrick type in a back room - a totally undemocratic process.
Wortwell should never be thought as a part of Norwich Plan - it is a Waveney village and more akin to Waveney towns of Diss, Harleston, Bungay, Beccles and Lowestoft where the roads run to east to west, there being to direct route out of village to Norwich. Those having to make journeys to Norwich because that's where the hospital, train station or airport etc. are, experiencing increasingly difficult travel problems either by car and especially by public transport.
The idea that a small village could become overspill housing for Norwich is ludicrous - never overload any system it will not work.

For the planning of using the land in between High Road and Low Road. For a possible building of 360 houses, will be over doubling the size of the village.
We do not have the infrastructure such as doctors services, employment or shops or even a post office in the village, also could cause flooding in the Low Road, we would like to keep it as a village. Surely they would be Traffic Problems.

My husband and I have lived in xxxxx, Wortwell for 48 years, whilst we are not opposed to new builds that are in keeping with this area, we strongly object to large numbers e.g. a housing estate that would destroy the character of our village.

I am most concerned about the proposed development in Wortwell of agricultural land. This is because of the impact on the village and the roads leading to such a development.

A Parish Council meeting was held on the 26th November and public participation time was allocated to discuss the above proposal. The meeting was attended by 53 villagers and a further 48 villagers, unable to attend, had lodged objections with the spokesperson.
This represents 20.13% of the population of the village. The largest turnout ever for a meeting of this nature in this village.
Two councillors declared a pecuniary interest, a quorum of councillors remained and the Council passed unanimously that, the Parish Council, acting as representatives of the village, would support the views of the residents and lodge an objection on their behalf.
(note: This is the view of the separate legal entity known as Wortwell Parish Council - the views of individual councillors are not taken into account for the purpose of this paper)
Individual villagers present at the meeting have been encouraged to make full use of the democratic process and make their own views known, whatever they are, by commenting on the GNLP website. For those unable to access internet then they are encouraged to lodge their comments in writing to the GNLP team.
A high percentage of the village were either not able to attend or remain unaware of the proposal. Again in the interest of supporting a democratic process and ensuring that all views are transparent and open, the council approved a communication process:
The council proposed and unanimously approved that this consultation response document will be posted into every letterbox encouraging all villagers to make use of the same democratic process outlined above. One would expect that there will be members of the village both for and against the proposal, but we wish to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to express their views.

. THE PROPOSED SITE: - GNLP2121
GNLP Regulation 18 Consultation - sites submitted during Reg 18 stage dated 15/6/2018 reference 1 :19,381 Ordnance survey 100019340

3. DOCUMENTS REFERENCED (not an exclusive list)
1. Greater Norwich Local Plan Site Proposals document (Submitting comments on sites)

SECTION 2.10
We are seeking your views on the sites that have already been submitted. Any comments submitted at this stage will help refine the assessment for sites in order to propose final allocations. As well as identifying any barriers to developing the sites (e.g. flood risk, service capacffy, potential access to the site etc.) and raising concerns about the impact that development might have (e.g. environmental and heritage impacts), it would also be useful to know if there are any local benefits that could be achieved through development.

2. Interim Sustainability Appraisal of the Greater Norwich Local Plan for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk

Sustainability Baseline
Sections 2.1 to 2.3.12 refers


3. Wortwell Parish Council Internal Policy - planning process

4. Wortwell Parish Council Response:
As a council we hereby lodge a council objection to this site development on the following grounds:
The proposed development sits outside the Village boundary for building and development. Currently there are 270 properties in Wortwell.
* The proposed site of 13.75 hectares, using the accepted formula of 30 houses per hectare x number of hectares, would be equivalent to 412.5 houses.
This represents an increase of 1.53 times the current housing.
A swamping of new build over the existing buildings would change the entire character of the village.
On a ratio of 1 to every 100 residents we could expect to absorb up to 4/5 affordable housing units over the coming decade
The character of the village is rural, agricultural, generally older properties with an affordable housing estate of 6 properties built within the last decade.
On a ratio of 1 to every 100 residents we could expect to absorb up to 4/5 affordable housing units over the coming decade. This proposal far exceeds this projection and represents a ratio of 85:1 on that figure.
In accordance with their own internal guidelines, Wortwell Parish Council adheres only to the relevant planning considerations and the following list, though not exhaustive, represents considerations that we have made in reviewing this proposal: (we will be happy to expand on these if required to do so)
o Planning history of the village
o National planning policies and guidance
o Local planning policies and guidance
o Highway safety issues
o Traffic generation
o Car parking provisions
o Local drainage issues
o Local flooding issues - impact of 'water run off' onto houses located at a lower level than the proposed site.
o Location as a rural village sited on the Waveney Valley on the borders between Suffolk and Norfolk, an area of outstanding beauty, walks and freedom of movement.
o Over dominance of a modern housing estate against the backdrop of a village with housing dating back, in some cases, to before the 17th Century.
o Loss of important local spaces.
o Impact on the environment, ecology flora and fauna
o impact on local and wider infrastructure
A further consideration is the amount of new building already meeting market needs in our immediate surrounding area (radius 12 miles) with Long Stratton, Harleston and Fressingfield all looking to undertake major house building in their localities. All of this will put major pressure on the existing infrastructure and resources.
Wortwell Parish Council would like to place on record that the following matters HAVE NOT been taken into consideration as they are not deemed to be relevant material planning considerations.
o Reduction in property values as a result of this proposal
o Loss of private view over land
o Boundary and access disputes, covenants and other private property matters
o Questioning the motives or morals or future plans or personal reasons of the landowner
o Commercial competition.
5. Infrastructure:
Wortwell Parish Council have additional concerns about the infrastructure, supporting services and location. Specifically:
(a) There are very few services within the village boundary or immediate location.
(i) A limited bus service that is not fit for purpose for normal working or school hours.
(ii) No school
(iii) No village shop
(iv) A dominant two road system meeting at a crossroads on a blind bend in the middle of the village.
(v) We have an ongoing issue with speeding and antisocial driving behaviours where the village is used already as a 'rat run' to avoid through traffic having to go out onto the bypass. We are actively managing this in co-operation with the police, but an increase in traffic from within the village would be considered dangerous.
(b) Medical and Dental services are already overstretched in the local town of Harleston to the point that no-one expects to get a doctor's appointment and the practice is deemed to be one of the worst performing practices in the country due to lack of GP's
(c) Education services are stretched in the local town of Harleston
(d) Employment opportunities in the surrounding area are very low and there are no large employers in the immediate or surrounding area. The nearest meaningful employment would most likely be found in Ipswich, Bury St Edmunds and Norwich itself. A radius of between 20-30 miles in each direction.
(e) Public transport services - Note: Norwich is looking to represent itself as a leading light in being the Greenest City in the country. The increased level of road vehicles travelling for work on roads up to and into the city from this rural location (or to other larger towns) would not support the environmental targets or vision that they have set themselves.
(a) There are no trains or meaningful bus services from this area that could meet the demand through public transport. But even if new services were provided, these would be clogging up local road networks with buses ferrying people distances of more than 20 miles in each direction, probably on a daily basis.

6 Summary:
Wortwell Parish Council is not opposed to new builds in the village and supports and encourages the development of sympathetic housing in the area. We are also sensitive to the needs that have to be juggled when dealing with a tiny population in a small rural village surrounded by:
* flood plains,
* the Waveney Valley,
* grazing marshes and
* the fine church at the top of the hill in Redenhall.
All of this means that the people are reluctant to see this changed in character beyond recognition when there must be far more suitable and accessible sites around the county.

It is our duty as a council to represent the needs of our exiting residents who rely on the Parish Council to represent their concerns. There is a strong and overwhelming rejection by the local residents to this proposal.
It is also a statutory duty of the council to manage, monitor and regulate the types of building and development that are approved within this rural community.
7 Conclusion:
Taking all of the above into account Wortwell Parish Council would urge the developers of the GNLP to look elsewhere for their development needs to be met.
I would like to conclude by referencing your own document ISA sections 2.3.9; 2.3.1 O and 2.3.12 and the highlighted points therein which we feel are relevant to the decision.
2.3.9. Greater Notwich is a predominantly rural area with the urbanised city of Notwich and its suburbs at its centre. There is a diversity of landscape types across Greater Norwich, signified by the five nationally defined landscape character areas that are present.
2.3.10. Particular landscape sensitivities in the area jnclude: the Broads, which lie along the eastern edges of Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk; rivet valleys and their setting; gaps bi::lwcen settlements* the landscape setting of, and undeveloped approaches to Norwich; and, several historic parks and gardens, ancient woodlands, the settings of listed buildings and remnant heath/ands.
2.3.12. The Environment Agency classifies the Norwich and the Broads Water Resource Zone
(WRZ), in which Greater Norwich lies, as an area of Serious Water Stress. Anglian Water's Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) plans significant investment in the Norwich and the Broads WRZ to ensure that the water supply and demand balance is maintained. The disposal of waste water in a manner that maintains water quality will continue to be an issue as Greater Norwich grows. Pollution from waste water is one of the key basis 1 1anagement issues for the Broadland Rivers Catchment along with diffuse pollution from the rural area and physical modification of lakes and rivers. 1
On a final positive note, Wortwell Parish Council is sensitive to the need to provide new housing to meet the growing demand for homes whilst recognising that in a rural community the demand is considerably lower than in urban areas nearer to Norwich. We already have a lively and focussed development programme and do not have a shortage of housing to meet the local demands. We just cannot support a development on this size.

I was unable to attend the meeting on 26th November regarding the above proposal. I would however like to add my voice to the objections. I understand the need for more housing to be developed but the proposal to build 412.5 houses seems to be quite incongruous. Wortwell would be quite unable to cope with such a influx of properties and the damage to the environment would be unimaginable.
It would also be pertinent to say medical and dental practices in Harleston are very stretched at present and existing schools which are coping at present would be quite unable to cope with the sort of influx such a development would bring.

I would like to communicate my severe reservation on the above proposal for the large mixed development site on the outskirts of Wortwell village. I have been a resident of the village for the past 7 years and like most of the other villages enjoy the rural character of the village. I acknowledge that new build is essential and I would welcome controlled and sympathetic affordable housing to be introduced into the village. Unfortunately, the above proposals would potentially allow a vast new housing development which would swamp the village, increasing the number of houses by more than double. This would not be sustainable on a number of levels, including pressure on rural roads, and inadequate local resources and transport facilities. It would entirely change the character of the village which would not be acceptable to the majority of the existing residents.
I note that there are a number of other proposed sites for the village, which I feel would be much more acceptable; allowing a better integration into the Village community and infrastructure. Wortwell could not realistically support a development that size of 2121.
In conclusion, I totally support the views expressed in the document created by the parish council and sent to the GNLP

I object to the proposed development of GNLP2121 because I believe it will have a detrimental impact on the beautiful landscape and the wildlife that exists within. It is not in the interest of the local community to put further stain on the infrastructure and facilities of this rural Waveney Valley village.

The proposed building area it is not in the inerest of the existing polupation of Wortwell.
There is insuffient infrastructure (doctors/dentist/shops/transport links/) to cope with the proposed increase in population
The site is reported to be a level site which it is not. Surface water runoff during increasingly extreme weather events is likely to cause floodingof property at lower levels.
There is insufficient employment in the area to sustain such an increase in population tyerefore it would be more practical to build the required properties closer to the source of employment.

Increasing the size of the village by more than double it's present buildings and it's population, without the infrastructure, roads and amenenities to cope, ie. Schooling, shops, general practitioners, dentists
increase in traffic on minor roads
Dealing with waste, sewage, surface water drainage, storm water (the site is on a downward slope from High Road toward properties on Low Road)

I moved to this area to escape the destruction of the beautiful south coast.
The proposed development would destroy the character and rare community spirit that prevails here.It would be an environmental disaster affecting the wildlife and the agricultural feel of the village.The Road system , drainage and local infrastructure would not cope, the area is also outside of the village development boundary.
The Waveney Valley is a beautiful area and is increasingly being recognised as such, it would be foolish to destroy such an area and one that the local council seems soon keen to promote.

I am most concerned about this proposed development on a number of points.
1. The flood risk to the lower lying properties some of which date back several hundred of years. I live on the Low Road and witness yearly the amount of run off from the hill running into the Waveney Valley. You only have to look at the damage caused by the water running down Cuckoo Lane and Mendham Hill to see the amount of run off of surface water. Should a development of this size on the top of the hill proceed it would most certainly flood the lower lying properties on Low Road.
2. Lack of medical, dental & schooling in the area - particularly the local doctors, this practice is already deemed to be one of the worse on the country and one that does not seem able to attract GPs, It is nigh on impossible to be able to get a doctors appointment now and there is substantial building being carried out in Harleston and surrounding areas at the present time.

3. There is no immediate large employers in the area and residents would have to travel to the large cities to obtain employment. We do not have any frame work of public transport in this area.

4. Part of this site has already been turned down for planning recently and the access to both the roads are not suitable, especially onto the Low Road which would access on a blind bend.

5. The amount of homes that would be built on this site would treble the size of the village, we moved here to be in a small village of individual, mature properties. At present we only have two very small estates and I feel that a large development would change the look of our village and take away valuable agricultural land and wildlife habitat in the Waveney Valley. A footpath runs along the edge of this field and the views from this path and the wellbeing of walkers would be serious effected.


I therefore strongly object to this site being used for development.

We would hereby lodge our objections to development of the above referenced site.
1) Site area of 13-75 hectares would enable up to 400 additional properties, more than doubling the size of the village- this is not acceptable.
2) Current infrastructure would not be able to support such a large development. E.g. no school, no village shop, substandard bus service
3) Road system in village cannot cater for the expected traffic increase, already causing problems with excessive speeding and by being used as a 'rat run'
4) Expected problems to existing housing with impact of water run off
5) The character of the village would be changed completely with dominance of modern housing estate.
6) It is understood other small parcels of land may be subjected to possible development that may provide a minimal and more acceptable amount of housing.

I would like to formally put on record my objections to the proposed mixed development in Wortwell. Firstly there is no infrastructure for a further 412 houses.
Secondly the transport links are virtually non-existant and parking at a premium. The speed with which vehicles travel a long like High road is unacceptable and positively dangerous. I take my life in my hands in trying to exit my drive way in the car as cars and lorries come round the blind bend at anything up to 50mph. Entering the drive is just as dangerous and with the increased amount of traffic that would ensue would make entering and exiting nigh on impossible.
Thirdly my late husband I have experience the insidious expansion of a small village in Essex to the size of a small town. We finally moved to Wortwell because of the expansion and I want to remain in the village and to have to move again due to the above unacceptable plan.

Finally the Waveney Valley is a beautiful area and should remain so preserving also the wonderful wildlife we have here.

This development would swamp the village, destroy the ambience of a beautiful area and pose great risk of run-off flooding to the Low Road areas.

Wortwell is a village of just over 200 dwellings. It has two principal roads - High Road and Low Road which converge at a dangerous bend immediately outside the Village pub - The Wortwell Bell. The only other commercial business is Goodswen's Garage which is a successful family owned enterprise. Medical services are in Harleston (2.5 miles away) where 3 doctors are based. Residents who require medical advice are advised to 'phone in during the morning and leave details of the problem with the receptionist who then arranges for a doctor to call back and the doctor will then arrange an appointment time. This arrangement relies on the patient having access to a car as bus services are few and far between. The doctors are grossly overworked and the system seems to be at breaking point.

Public transport is not good. One route rune from Diss to Bungay and Beccles and is infrequent and not at regular intervals. The second route is from Harleston via many villages to Norwich. Getting to the Norwich & Norfolk Hospital is very difficult.

To built all these additional houses will totally swamp the few services we have and make life intolerable.

I object to GNLP2121 for the following reasons.
1 - Wortwell is a small village, this development would destroy its charm.
2 - The local infrastructure would not be able to cope, doctors, dentists, roads & schools etc.
3 - The development would put additional strain on the existing land drainage.
4 - The lack of employment in the local area would mean long car journeys, hence more pollution & traffic on already congested roads.
5 - Restricted & spoiled views from the existing houses.
6 - Devaluation of existing properties.
Surely a development of this size would be far better sited nearer to a main town or city that has the infrastructure to cope.

I object to GNLP2121 for the following reasons.
1 - Wortwell is a small village, this development would destroy its charm.
2 - The local infrastructure would not be able to cope, doctors, dentists, roads & schools etc.
3 - The development would put additional strain on the existing land drainage.
4 - The lack of employment in the local area would mean long car journeys, hence more pollution & traffic on already congested roads.
5 - Restricted & spoiled views from the existing houses.
6 - Devaluation of existing properties.
Surely a development of this size would be far better sited nearer to a main town or city that has the infrastructure to cope.

We object to this development due to the following:
The roads in Wortwell are narrow on the Low Road and although two way on the High Road would not support much of an increase in traffic. The rise in traffic would also increase the dangers to local users of the pavements and roadways eg, walkers, cyclists, horse riders and families. There is already a problem with speeding along the High Road and the Low Road even though 30mph speed limits are in situ. There is an issue of enforcement of these speed limits. Moreover, the roadways are not maintained sufficiently to accommodate an increase in traffic flow.

Wortwell already experiences flooding from the river Waveney for the properties along Low Road and parts of the High Road. If this huge development were to be given the go ahead, the location of this development on sloping land would make the issue of flooding worse. How would the area cope with all the rain water run off? As flooding is already a problem and many of the houses on the Low Road are 16th and 17th century Listed properties it is huge shame to jeopardise these properties further.

The local area of Harleston does not have the doctors surgeries or schools to support a huge increase in the population of Wortwell and the amenities which people would require. There is also not a large local supermarket. Moreover, the local area can not provide employment to huge numbers of people and therefore people would need to work in the wider community. Again this brings us back to the issue of increasing traffic in the local area. The bus routes in this rural area would not support local people to access the wider community for employment purposes.

This is a conservation area with natural beauty. A development such as this would impact the beauty of the area and effect the wildlife living here.

Wortwell is a village with a strong community feel - this would be lost if the population is doubled! People choosing to live in Wortwell already have done so due to the rural feel, peace, quiet and tranquility.

Proposing this development for Wortwell is not sustainable or practical.

Objections:- sustainability of such large development in this rural area. No employment. Insufficient doctors, schools, dentists and other local amenities. Poor public transport. Massive increase in transport as all dwellings will need their own cars and in many cases there will be 2 or even 3. Services, especially drainage, will need extensive investment probably negating the profitability of building. There will be a danger of negatively affecting existing properties especially in Low Rd. where they sited in a lower position. Such a large development will be detrimental to the existing tourist businesses in the village where quiet country locations are the attraction. Wortwell is small, friendly and has an excellent community spirit in an area of outstanding natural beauty, such a development will change the dynamics of the village and decrease the quality of life of the current inhabitants.

I object to the GNLP2121 site proposal and fully endorse the reasons for the objection raised by Wortwell Parish Council on behalf of our village dated 30/11/18.
I have experience of the difficulty finding employment anywhere close to Wortwell. I now work in west Norwich, a daily round trip of 52 miles. Going north on the A140 involves a dangerous right turn across the traffic. The alternative is to join the already long B1332 tailback at Poringland to get to the Norwich bypass. Coming home the A140 can be used to avoid Poringland as far as Tasburgh, but then after Hempnall the route south reduces to narrow winding lanes through Topcroft and Alburgh. It is already hazardous enough with wildlife and oncoming traffic, especially in winter. Thankfully at present there is only limited commuter traffic travelling north out of Wortwell. The inevitable increased traffic if this proposal were adopted would invite accidents and substantially more wildlife casualties.
I will soon be retired and look forward to the rural peace and quiet that characterises Wortwell. The Waveney Valley is a nationally recognised heritage destination not least because it doesn't suffer from swathes of high density new build.
After working in the North West I was shocked coming back to the region at the difficulty getting an initial appointment with a doctor in Harleston while having to go to work on the same day. The multiple smaller developments already proposed in Wortwell represent a significant but tolerable erosion of the historical and rural setting. Please do not take GNLP2121 any further.

The proposed development site sits outside the Wortwell village
boundary for building development .
. The detrimental impact on a) the environment, ecology and fauna;
b) the local and wider infrastructure.
Specific comments regards the impact on the local and wider infrastructure include the following concerns:-
. ALL of the responses from Wortwell Parish Council,(5 -Infrastructure), (see attached), with particular concerns with regard to:-
further potential for accidents at the blind corner at the junction
of the crossroads .
. the existing amount of speeding traffic past my house already makes exiting the driveway an often hazardous activity, and any further increase in traffic could exacerbate this problem.
I therefore lodge the above comments as objections to the above site being used for development.

The proposed development site sits outside the Wortwell village
boundary for building development .
. The detrimental impact on a) the environment, ecology and fauna;
b) the local and wider infrastructure.
Specific comments regards the impact on the local and wider infrastructure include the following concerns:-
. ALL of the responses from Wortwell Parish Council,(5 -Infrastructure), (see attached), with particular concerns with regard to:-
further potential for accidents at the blind corner at the junction
of the crossroads .
. the existing amount of speeding traffic past my house already makes exiting the driveway an often hazardous activity, and any further increase in traffic could exacerbate this problem.
I therefore lodge the above comments as objections to the above site being used for development.

We chose to live in Wortwell because it's a lovely rural village. If we had wanted to live in a town with large housing developments we would have gone somewhere else. We love this little village - there's no school, no shop, no doctor, no dentist, but there IS an abundance of peace, wide open spaces and a community spirit. A develpoment on this scale would destroy all of this, would destroy Wortwell. Other people have pointed out the logistical problems, access, flooding, etc., so I don't feel I need to go over all of that again. But what I am asking, no BEGGING, is please don't allow this to take our village from us. PLEASE!