GNLP0191R

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 123

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 16844

Received: 29/10/2018

Respondent: Mr robert mills

Representation:

This remains a completely inappropriate site for development. Access on to Church Road would be difficult and unsafe. Church Road is narrow and barely able to cope with the volume of traffic that already uses it. This edge of the village has seen no new development for many years. New development would be not be in keeping with the nature of the village and would needlessly destroy more greenbelt.

Full text:

This remains a completely inappropriate site for development. Access on to Church Road would be difficult and unsafe. Church Road is narrow and barely able to cope with the volume of traffic that already uses it. This edge of the village has seen no new development for many years. New development would be not be in keeping with the nature of the village and would needlessly destroy more greenbelt.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 16875

Received: 01/11/2018

Respondent: mrs kay mills

Representation:

I cannot believe that Mr Nicholas Gowing is even contemplating building houses on this beautiful, green field site which has an array of wildlife and unspoilt countryside. Not only would this look extremely unsightly against many older properties of the village but access onto Church Road is in my view highly dangerous with cars quite often unable to pass each other, The road also has a blind bend, visibility towards the centre of the village is very limited also. Cars speed over the railway and often pick up speed where I suspect the access will be.

Full text:

I cannot believe that Mr Nicholas Gowing is even contemplating building houses on this beautiful, green field site which has an array of wildlife and unspoilt countryside. Not only would this look extremely unsightly against many older properties of the village but access onto Church Road is in my view highly dangerous with cars quite often unable to pass each other, The road also has a blind bend, visibility towards the centre of the village is very limited also. Cars speed over the railway and often pick up speed where I suspect the access will be.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 16895

Received: 13/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs Elaine Parkinson

Representation:

Unsound proposal due to not meeting your own criteria (listed in text).
No village infrastructure - distance from the 2 amenities i.e. bus stop and public house.
Amount of traffic on a country road and accessing the A140.
Sandwiched between a railway line and high voltage pylons make it unsafe for babies and children.

Full text:

Revisions linking the two original sites together adds nothing to support this application. 20 houses cannot be described as 'infill'. This development would mean approx 40 more cars (2 cars per house) and 320 movements per day undertaking normal daily living. The local road network cannot sustain this amount of traffic, particularly access to the A140. If this estate is added to the other proposals it will mean 60 houses in Swainsthorpe! This cannot be described as "small scale development appropriate to the needs of the village and its immediate surroundings". It does not meet your 4 key requirements for a "service village" or the "6 services from a menu of 12 which must include an accessible primary school" The much quoted amenities namely a bus stop and public house is not anywhere near the centre of the village and for this development would mean walking on a busy country road with no pavement. Sandwiched between the railway line and high voltage pylons makes this an unsound proposal.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 16899

Received: 04/11/2018

Respondent: mrs sheila cree

Representation:

Access would be across common land. 20 houses cannot be considered as 'infill' Most of the proposed development appears to be outside the village envelope. The village infrastructure does not support such a development.

Full text:

Access would be across common land. 20 houses cannot be considered as 'infill' Most of the proposed development appears to be outside the village envelope. The village infrastructure does not support such a development.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 16942

Received: 05/11/2018

Respondent: Mr robert mills

Representation:

This application remains completely unsuitable for this site. Access onto Church Road, which is a narrow country lane, would be dangerous. There has been no development in this part of the village for many years. A new development as planned would adversely affect the character of the village. There are no amenities in the village to serve a larger population. Access on to the A140 to leave the village would also become more difficult at an already dangerous junction. The proposed site is an area of beautiful green fields which should not be spoilt by a new housing development.

Full text:

This application remains completely unsuitable for this site. Access onto Church Road, which is a narrow country lane, would be dangerous. There has been no development in this part of the village for many years. A new development as planned would adversely affect the character of the village. There are no amenities in the village to serve a larger population. Access on to the A140 to leave the village would also become more difficult at an already dangerous junction. The proposed site is an area of beautiful green fields which should not be spoilt by a new housing development.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17036

Received: 13/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs Katie Toms

Representation:

More traffic would put pedestrians at risk (no pavement, minimal street lighting, evidence of speeding traffic on Church Road from recent survey). Greater numbers of cars likely to lead to more traffic accidents to the east of the proposed site in an already congested junction with an A road (A140)

Full text:

Inadequate infrastructure to support more houses in this village. Church Road is narrow and in parts twisting . On some stretches (east of the church) there is no pavement (and no scope to provide one because of proximity of property to the road). There is minimal street lighting and cars travel along this road fast (as evidenced by recent speedwatch results). This can be very hazardous for walkers. Access from Church Road on to the A140 in the mornings and vice versa in the evenings in very difficult. Cars travelling north towards Norwich pass at speeds in excess of 50mph and there is a bend south of Church Road which makes visibility poor. It is hard to pull out safely. There are frequent accidents. More traffic resulting from the building of more houses will compound the already significant traffic problems

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17082

Received: 15/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs Tracey Bocz

Representation:

This site is unsuitable for development due to inadequate access and egress for a large number of homes. This is currently countryside which is valuable for floodwater drainage and any development could have implications for flooding to adjoining properties and land. There also remains concerns with increasing the volume of traffic both using the existing road and also the level crossing. The infrastructure of the village cannot sustain additional traffoc and residents that such a large development brings.

Full text:

This site is unsuitable for development due to inadequate access and egress for a large number of homes. This is currently countryside which is valuable for floodwater drainage and any development could have implications for flooding to adjoining properties and land. There also remains concerns with increasing the volume of traffic both using the existing road and also the level crossing. The infrastructure of the village cannot sustain additional traffoc and residents that such a large development brings.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17101

Received: 16/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs Glynis Frost

Representation:

The village of Swainsthorpe has always come under "other villages", since there is nothing here except a church and a pub. Church Road is a minor road with barely room to pass a large vehicle and only intermittent provision for pedestrians. The bus stops on the A140 cannot be reached safely by foot.
This number of dwellings would produce far more traffic than can be safe on such a road.

Full text:

The village of Swainsthorpe has always come under "other villages", since there is nothing here except a church and a pub. Church Road is a minor road with barely room to pass a large vehicle and only intermittent provision for pedestrians. The bus stops on the A140 cannot be reached safely by foot.
This number of dwellings would produce far more traffic than can be safe on such a road.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17107

Received: 16/11/2018

Respondent: Suzanna Long

Representation:

This proposal remains inappropriate for the site - disproportionate number of proposed houses for the size of the village which has limited amenities to support this amount of additional residents. Access onto church road will be difficult to achieve and it is already a dangerous minor road which people use as a 'rat run'. There is no pavement and limited lighting. The proposal will also be detrimental to the historic and rural setting of the village, ruining existing views through to the Grade II* listed church.

Full text:

This proposal remains inappropriate for the site - disproportionate number of proposed houses for the size of the village which has limited amenities to support this amount of additional residents. Access onto church road will be difficult to achieve and it is already a dangerous minor road which people use as a 'rat run'. There is no pavement and limited lighting. The proposal will also be detrimental to the historic and rural setting of the village, ruining existing views through to the Grade II* listed church.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17110

Received: 17/11/2018

Respondent: Mr ian paton

Representation:

Building on this site is unacceptable. Although labelled as one site this proposal is two sites divided by a narrow lane. Proposal takes little account of access between the two sites, which would have a detrimental impact on the environment.

Surrounding roads are inadequate; there are no schools, shops, surgery or realistic transport services. It will destroy agricultural land, destroy wildlife habitats, damage natural drainage systems and over populate a small historic village already bereft of resources.

Traffic to/from site would increase danger to nearby level crossing, pollute the village centre and increase congestion exiting Church Road onto the A140.

Full text:

Building on this site is totally unacceptable. Although labelled and mapped as one site this proposal is two separate sites divided by a small private access lane. The proposal takes little account of access between the two sites, which in itself would have a detrimental impact on the local environment.

Surrounding roads are inadequate; there are no schools, no shops, no surgery and no realistic transport services. It will destroy agricultural land, destroy wildlife habitats, damage natural drainage systems and over populate a small historic village already bereft of resources.

Additional traffic to and from this site would increase danger at the nearby level crossing, pollute the village centre and increase congestion exiting Church Road onto the A140, a junction already dangerous to negotiate.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17121

Received: 24/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Robin Parkinson

Representation:

This is not a single site but two fields bisected by a farm track.The site is set on the western edge of a service village. The scale of the proposal cannot be described as infill.The site is hemmed in by the main train line to the east and power lines to the west.Access/egress is a major problem as is additional traffic using Church Road.Environmental problems include:loss of agricultural land, damage to wildlife and wildlife corridors.The site is in proximity to the ancient and listed village church.Ameliorating surface water problems would risk damage to existing ditches and ponds risking ecological damage.

Full text:

This proposal is both impractical and unsuitable and out of scale with the character of this rural village - is certainly not 'infill' The site itself is described as a single site but is in fact two fields separated by a farm track and hemmed in by power lines less than 100 metres to the western edge of the site and by the main London / Norwich train line immediately to the eastern boundary of the site. There are also power lines which run overhead to the eastern part of the site.

There is significant issues relating to access and egress to the site, the track which is proposed currently serves farm traffic and two properties, the track bisects the garden of one of these properties and given its current width would be wholly insufficient to support the traffic generated by 20 dwellings and service/delivery vehicles. The proposal would also interfere with existing rights of way.

The proposal for 25 houses would generate in excess of 100 traffic movements per day onto a c class road approximately 100 metres from a level crossing and add to the already standing traffic at the Church Road junction with the A140.

This is agricultural land and would be a loss of amenity and resource if converted to residential use. The eastern edge of the site would be within the 400 metre exclusion zone set out in Para. 4.1 of the HELAA report in relation to the ancient village church and the village green
The site has significant surface water issues, requiring significant ground work for drainage which would interfere with the existing ditches and ponds with risk to wildlife and to ecology. A development of this scale cannot be described as 'infill' it would put strain on the existing limited services and would result in additional light and noise pollution and be an encroachment on the village's character.

The proposal is questionable in terms of financial viability since the site work necessary given the size and anticipated GVD (given the proximity to the railway and the power lines)would indicate that its viability would be marginal (Para 5.13 of HELAA)

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17124

Received: 17/11/2018

Respondent: Mark Holdsworth

Representation:

We should aim to improve quality of life, to protect the environment, reduce pollution and control and manage development. More than anything else, we should the respect for our environment and our neighbours. Swainsthorpe is a hamlet by nature. Changing its nature will sicken me and those who came here to live in a quiet small area. Why turn this place into a busy town like environment when there are many built up areas already where others have chosen to live. The action to build on these small areas like Swainsthorpe will forever damage them and damage Norfolk.

Full text:

We should aim to improve quality of life, to protect the environment, reduce pollution and control and manage development. More than anything else, we should the respect for our environment and our neighbours. Swainsthorpe is a hamlet by nature. Changing its nature will sicken me and those who came here to live in a quiet small area. Why turn this place into a busy town like environment when there are many built up areas already where others have chosen to live. The action to build on these small areas like Swainsthorpe will forever damage them and damage Norfolk.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17140

Received: 18/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Roger Pugh

Representation:

GNLP0191R. The only access and egress to this split site is by an agricultural single vehicle width track which joins unclassified Church Road Swainsthorpe. There are major topographical constraints to increasing the width of this track. The construction of houses on this site would add additional vehicle movements through the village and congestion at the A140 junction.

Full text:

GNLP0191R. The only access and egress to this split site is by an agricultural single vehicle width track which joins unclassified Church Road Swainsthorpe. There are major topographical constraints to increasing the width of this track. The construction of houses on this site would add additional vehicle movements through the village and congestion at the A140 junction.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17148

Received: 18/11/2018

Respondent: mr paul bowyer

Representation:

This site is not fit for this development, due to access which is only through Church road and is already dangerous due to high volume of traffic. Street Lighting and other amenities are poor and the village would not be able to sustain a development of this size.

Full text:

This site is not fit for this development, due to access which is only through Church road and is already dangerous due to high volume of traffic. Street Lighting and other amenities are poor and the village would not be able to sustain a development of this size.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17149

Received: 18/11/2018

Respondent: mr paul bowyer

Representation:

This site is not fit for this development, due to access which is only through Church road and is already dangerous due to high volume of traffic. Street Lighting and other amenities are poor and the village would not be able to sustain a development of this size.

Full text:

This site is not fit for this development, due to access which is only through Church road and is already dangerous due to high volume of traffic. Street Lighting and other amenities are poor and the village would not be able to sustain a development of this size.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17156

Received: 18/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Paul Webster

Representation:

This cannot be classified as 'infill' development, as identified in the JCS.
It would be out of character for the rest of the village. I would have concerns over access onto Church Road and thereby onto the A140.
Any access looks like it would have to go across Common Land.

There are not any amenities within the village to support further development.

Wholly inappropriate.

Full text:

This cannot be classified as 'infill' development, as identified in the JCS.
It would be out of character for the rest of the village. I would have concerns over access onto Church Road and thereby onto the A140.
Any access looks like it would have to go across Common Land.

There are not any amenities within the village to support further development.

Wholly inappropriate.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17178

Received: 19/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs Linda Pugh

Representation:

GNLP0191R Very limited access to this site by agricultural single vehicle track. The track joins Church Road Swainsthorpe an unclassified road. Icreased width of the track is constrained. Additional vehicle movements through the village to the A140 junction which would add to congestion.

Full text:

GNLP0191R Very limited access to this site by agricultural single vehicle track. The track joins Church Road Swainsthorpe an unclassified road. Icreased width of the track is constrained. Additional vehicle movements through the village to the A140 junction which would add to congestion.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17180

Received: 19/11/2018

Respondent: Mr John Craft

Representation:

Too large a development for the village. Access is onto a 'C' road just a hundred yards from a level crossing, which is closed at least 4 times an hour. The number of vehicle movements from private cars, delivery vehicles and utility requirements would create severe traffic problems. With no local shops or services, all movements would have to be made by private car. At present, the A140 is busy at most times during the working day, and the extra traffic generated would mean getting onto the main road would be even more difficult.

Full text:

Too large a development for the village. Access is onto a 'C' road just a hundred yards from a level crossing, which is closed at least 4 times an hour. The number of vehicle movements from private cars, delivery vehicles and utility requirements would create severe traffic problems. With no local shops or services, all movements would have to be made by private car. At present, the A140 is busy at most times during the working day, and the extra traffic generated would mean getting onto the main road would be even more difficult.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17184

Received: 19/11/2018

Respondent: MR Carl Williamson

Representation:


Full text:

I'm objecting to this proposal:

TRAFFIC CHAOS - Extra traffic passing through village onto and from A140, causing the A140 to be even more dangerous then already is .
Sharp bends on Church Road and some area's of no paths will make these vehicles passing through very dangerous.
Access to Church Road will be dangerous , due to de-graded speed, 60 down to 30.
POLLUTION - There will be added Noise pollution (cars motorbikes)

LOSS OF COUNTRYSIDE -

DISRUPTION - The site proposed has no services , electric , water , sewage , which will cause disruption for the rest of the village while being installed.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17188

Received: 19/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Robert Graver

Representation:

Swainsthorpe is designated as "other villages" in existing local plans and deemed suitable for small scale infill development only. This proposed development is too large for the village comprising 20 properties that would exit onto a narrow and already busy road. Swainsthorpe already has overloaded infrastructure and few amenities (only a pub on the main A140)and no local employment. This development could be the start of an urban sprawl that could overwhelm the village and change it's character forever.

Full text:

Swainsthorpe is designated as "other villages" in existing local plans and deemed suitable for small scale infill development only. This proposed development is too large for the village comprising 20 properties that would exit onto a narrow and already busy road. Swainsthorpe already has overloaded infrastructure and few amenities (only a pub on the main A140)and no local employment. This development could be the start of an urban sprawl that could overwhelm the village and change it's character forever.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17189

Received: 19/11/2018

Respondent: MR ANTHONY TALBY

Representation:

Church Road is already used as a rat run to the A140/ By pass and the additional traffic from the proposed 20 house plus traffic from 25 houses from Church View
will only increase the amount of traffic along an inadequate and dangerous road,
All of this traffic will cause tail back and holdups at the A140 junction.
This junction is currently inadequate and dangerous for both right and left turning.

Full text:

Church Road is already used as a rat run to the A140/ By pass and the additional traffic from the proposed 20 house plus traffic from 25 houses from Church View
will only increase the amount of traffic along an inadequate and dangerous road,
All of this traffic will cause tail back and holdups at the A140 junction.
This junction is currently inadequate and dangerous for both right and left turning.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17201

Received: 19/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs Ann Chandler

Representation:

This site is completely unsuitable to build 20 houses. The access onto Church Road is dangerous as it is narrow, has no footpath or street lights. The village has no amenities and only one bus stop, half a mile away on the A140. There is no public transport to the Doctors surgery,primary school or shops in the closest village of Mulbarton. Indeed these facilities are already under pressure from excessive house building within that village.
In addition to all the above, it would mean yet more unnecessary destruction of a green field farming area.

Full text:

This site is completely unsuitable to build 20 houses. The access onto Church Road is dangerous as it is narrow, has no footpath or street lights. The village has no amenities and only one bus stop, half a mile away on the A140. There is no public transport to the Doctors surgery,primary school or shops in the closest village of Mulbarton. Indeed these facilities are already under pressure from excessive house building within that village.
In addition to all the above, it would mean yet more unnecessary destruction of a green field farming area.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17250

Received: 21/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Darren Webster

Representation:

No consideration has been given to how residents living in the proposed new houses would access these without damaging significantly the area. More vehicles using Church Road would put additional pressure on the junction with the A140 which is already very dangerous due to poor visibility in both directions. Church road is already used as a rat run onto the A140 for vehicles coming from Mulbarton and any junction with Church road coming from the new development would exaccerbate the problem of speeding cars along this road.

Full text:

No consideration has been given to how residents living in the proposed new houses would access these without damaging significantly the area. More vehicles using Church Road would put additional pressure on the junction with the A140 which is already very dangerous due to poor visibility in both directions. Church road is already used as a rat run onto the A140 for vehicles coming from Mulbarton and any junction with Church road coming from the new development would exaccerbate the problem of speeding cars along this road.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17252

Received: 21/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Chandler

Representation:

This agricultural land between High Speed rail line and high voltage power lines is highly unsuitable for residential development. Access to the site would be via a narrow country road already well used by the village to access shops doctors surgery schools at Mulbarton. This development would add to that flow as there are no facilities in Swainsthorpe and no foot paths, bus services to the nearest serviced village. This application would degrade the current limited facilities of the village and destroy yet more agricultural land.It is unsustainable and wrong.

Full text:

This agricultural land between High Speed rail line and high voltage power lines is highly unsuitable for residential development. Access to the site would be via a narrow country road already well used by the village to access shops doctors surgery schools at Mulbarton. This development would add to that flow as there are no facilities in Swainsthorpe and no foot paths, bus services to the nearest serviced village. This application would degrade the current limited facilities of the village and destroy yet more agricultural land.It is unsustainable and wrong.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17259

Received: 21/11/2018

Respondent: miss annette cooper

Representation:

Swainsthorpe is designated as "other villages" in existing local plans and deemed suitable for small scale infill development only. This proposed development is too large for the village comprising 20 properties that would require a new exit onto a narrow and already busy road. Swainsthorpe already has overloaded infrastructure and few amenities (only a pub on the main A140)and no local employment. This development could be the start of an urban sprawl that could overwhelm the village and change it's character forever.

Full text:

Swainsthorpe is designated as "other villages" in existing local plans and deemed suitable for small scale infill development only. This proposed development is too large for the village comprising 20 properties that would require a new exit onto a narrow and already busy road. Swainsthorpe already has overloaded infrastructure and few amenities (only a pub on the main A140)and no local employment. This development could be the start of an urban sprawl that could overwhelm the village and change it's character forever.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17284

Received: 22/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs susan Peters Corbett

Representation:

20 houses would generate 40 cars, if they were to have access onto church road via the current foot path, then they would pose a danger to traffic and pedestrians.
South Norfolk District Council made us move our hedge back 12 feet in order to improve visibility for the users of Church road so how can the plan contemplate siting 20 houses here all using this access?. . We, personaly would lose the lovely view we have over the fields( the proposed site for the 20 houses) which is one of the reasons for us buying this house.

Full text:

Swainsthorpe is too small to support further dwellings, it has no facilities and does not even have continuous pavement through the village. The 20 houses would block the wonderful view over the farm land towards Norwich that our house currently enjoys and was indeed a big reason for us choosing to live where we do. 20 more houses means 40 more cars, the foot path next to our house( not 6 feet away) would become a road, and access on to church road would be very dangerous on this bend. Indeed South Norfolk District Council made us move our hedge back 12 feet in order to improve visibility for the users of Church road, and this proposal would have access to church road at that very pinch point where visibility is worse. Swainsthorpe has no school, drs or shops and building 20 dwellings here would increase pressure on the services in Multbarton ,where classes sizes are growing and it is increasingly difficult to get a drs appointmet. Are there proposals to enlarge the surgery and local schools in line with this plan? These fields and their foot paths provide recreation for all the walkers and dog owners in Swainsthorpe, and developing this land would reduce the opporoutities for walking in Swainshtorpe, it is much safer to walk on the fields where there is no traffic that on Chruch road in the village because of the lack of pavements.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17331

Received: 22/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Keith Randell

Representation:

I strongly object to more houses being built at the above location.
Access onto the main A140 has become very difficult at the Church Road/A140 Junction. Traffic is also very heavy on the A140 contributing to pollution.
This would also increase the amount of vehicles using the small railway crossing in the village making this road/rail interface very dangerous.

Full text:

I strongly object to more houses being built at the above location.
Access onto the main A140 has become very difficult at the Church Road/A140 Junction. Traffic is also very heavy on the A140 contributing to pollution.
This would also increase the amount of vehicles using the small railway crossing in the village making this road/rail interface very dangerous.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17334

Received: 22/11/2018

Respondent: Mrs sarah webster

Representation:

Having read the joint core strategy, Swainsthorpe has been identified as an 'Other' village which deems it suitable for infill development ONLY.
Swainsthorpe has no amenities, no school, no shop, no doctors surgery, all of this putting more traffic on an already congested, busy and accident prone A140. A development of 20 houses would be inappropriate for the village. Traffic is already using the village as a cut through from the A140. A development with access out onto a bend from a single track will only cause more risks to those travelling through the village on foot and by car.

Full text:

Having read the joint core strategy, Swainsthorpe has been identified as an 'Other' village which deems it suitable for infill development ONLY.
Swainsthorpe has no amenities, no school, no shop, no doctors surgery, all of this putting more traffic on an already congested, busy and accident prone A140. A development of 20 houses would be inappropriate for the village. Traffic is already using the village as a cut through from the A140. A development with access out onto a bend from a single track will only cause more risks to those travelling through the village on foot and by car.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17340

Received: 23/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Paul Frost

Representation:

The village being designated for limited in-fill only, this is an excessive number of houses. The access is on to Church Road, a minor road with no pavement at this point and close to a level crossing. There is no infrastructure to support this number of dwellings. The only access to church road is via a private road or a new access would be needed just as the derestricted speed section of Church Road ends.

Full text:

The village being designated for limited in-fill only, this is an excessive number of houses. The access is on to Church Road, a minor road with no pavement at this point and close to a level crossing. There is no infrastructure to support this number of dwellings. The only access to church road is via a private road or a new access would be needed just as the derestricted speed section of Church Road ends.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 17351

Received: 23/11/2018

Respondent: Mr Ian Garstka

Representation:

Access to and from Swainsthorpe onto the A140 is already extremely hazardous due to bad visibility in both directions.
Church Road is narrow with inadequate footpaths and lighting, so access to and from the new development would be a tad foolhardy, especially as the speed limit is rarely observed by cars using it as a rat run too and from Mulbarton.
Also Swainsthorpe has no amenities to cope with extra housing from both Church Road and Church View, so why destroy perfectly good agricultural land.

Full text:

Access to and from Swainsthorpe onto the A140 is already extremely hazardous due to bad visibility in both directions.
Church Road is narrow with inadequate footpaths and lighting, so access to and from the new development would be a tad foolhardy, especially as the speed limit is rarely observed by cars using it as a rat run too and from Mulbarton.
Also Swainsthorpe has no amenities to cope with extra housing from both Church Road and Church View, so why destroy perfectly good agricultural land.