GNLP0559R

This comment submitted on behalf of Forncett Parish Council
There seems to be no opportunity to make a general comment on all sites within the Parish of Forncett (St Peter, including Forncett End, and St Mary) so this comment is applicable to all sites - those originally submitted and 'new' sites Autumn 2018.
Forncett Parish Council has decided not to make comments on individual sites, but would wish to make the following points:
We feel our settlements are 'borderline' Service Villages with no doctor, post office, general store etc. and mediocre transport links. We do not rule out modest future development but this should be in keeping with our village situation and surroundings and on a scale which is commensurate with the limited facilities available. Of major concern is that many of our roads are single track with few passing places - which struggle to cope with the level of traffic at the moment. Further extensive (or even moderate) development requiring access on these roads would be problematic.

Building on this site is not acceptable on the following grounds :- lack of facilities, poor transport links, spoiling the residential amenities of neighbours,very poor access and narrow local roads, destruction of natural habitats and a listed building already occupying the site.

This site is on a narrow rural lane. Considerations include:- Proximity of listed building. Poor access and any alterations to facilitate access would have a negative effect on the character of the neighbourhood. Adverse effect on the residential amenity of neighbours. Lack of services.

The proposed site for development directly borders our property to the East.
The building of several new dwellings on the land would cause a significant change to the nature and character of this part of the village, and would directly impact on us with additional noise and potentially light-pollution both during and after construction.
Perhaps the most significant change would be caused by the required vehicular access to the proposed properties. The surrounding roads are small - tiny in fact - and totally unsuited to regular use by construction traffic and additional domestic vehicular use.
It is worth noting also that local infrastructure (or absence thereof) - schooling, parking,roadways,drainage - is poorly suited to additional development.

The proposed site for development borders our property.
The building of several houses would impact greatly and change the nature and character of the area. The building of new houses would create noise and light-pollution both during and after construction.
Throughout the building process, residents living within the area would be adversely affected by the roadworks required to the proposed properties. The surrounding roads are very narrow and unsuitable for use by construction traffic and additional domestic vehicular use.
The local infrastructure - schooling, parking,roadways,drainage - is not suited to additional development

I object to the development of this site on the following grounds:
1. The changes to the existing access in order to enable development would be detrimental to the visual amenity of the area.
2. The site has very poor access. The access is from a quiet narrow country lane with close neighbouring properties. The extra traffic generated by the extra dwellings on the site would have a huge impact on these neighbouring properties. It should be noted that the plant nursery business has not operated for at least the last 10 years. During this time the flow of traffic down Cheneys Lane has greatly increased.
3. It will significantly impact on the nature and character of this part of the village.
4. The main dwelling on the site is I believe Grade 2 listed. The proposed development would have an adverse effect on that building.
5. There is a lack of supply from the mains for both sewerage and gas.
6. The site is a long way from public transport.

1.The site is adjacent to a single track rural lane with no footpath. Any increased traffic flow or access would have a detrimental impact on the neighbourhood.
2.The plant nursery business has not operated for at least 10 years. The development would therefor lead to an increase in vehicle movements.
3.Access to the site is next to a listed building. Part of its beautiful gardens will be destroyed to create the access.
4. There's no mains gas, sewerage or public transport.
5. The development is detrimental to the character of the neighbourhood,the listed building,and adjacent properties.

We object to houses being built on Cheneys Lane, Spices Lane and Low Road in Forncett St Mary, the roads are busy as people use it to cut through from Long Stratton to Wymondham as there aren't many passing places only gateways it is a single file road. We have no facilities in the Forncetts only an over crowded school.

GNLP0559R

I support this proposal. The site is well away from the Tas Valley and adjacent to a row of houses (ex-LA, I believe).


GNLP2028

I strongly object to this proposal. The site is on the side of Low Road closest to the River Tas, which is a site of considerable natural beauty and which, at the moment, is only adversely affected by a few post war bungalows which were approved for agricultural occupancy.

Houses on the proposed site will seriously impact on the Tas Valley, on St. Mary's Church (Grade 1), and other properties on the east side of Low Road which were well sited by our forebears so as to blend in with the topography just above the flood plain.

If there is a centre to the Forncetts it is the area of St. Peter's Church and the Primary School. This is where, in my opinion, any new development should take place.