GNLP0604R

Showing comments and forms 151 to 180 of 200

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18710

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Sonia Day

Representation:

A140 already a very busy road which will be massively increased by this development making it even more dangerous than it is now.
This will lead to additional traffic pollution.
Countryside will also be affected with nowhere for Swainsthorpe residents to walk and loss of wildlife habitat.
Significant impact on a village with little social infrastructure.

Full text:

A140 already a very busy road which will be massively increased by this development making it even more dangerous than it is now.
This will lead to additional traffic pollution.
Countryside will also be affected with nowhere for Swainsthorpe residents to walk and loss of wildlife habitat.
Significant impact on a village with little social infrastructure.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18718

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Carole Wrigglesworth

Representation:

My concerns are the impact the development will have on noise pollution,additional traffic,visual impact and general disruption to a small village without the infrastructure to cope with such a development.

Full text:

My concerns are the impact the development will have on noise pollution,additional traffic,visual impact and general disruption to a small village without the infrastructure to cope with such a development.

Comment

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18719

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Carole Wrigglesworth

Representation:

My concerns relate to the excess traffic in and around the village, noise and light pollution and the village is too small to support such a large development

Full text:

My concerns relate to the excess traffic in and around the village, noise and light pollution and the village is too small to support such a large development

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18746

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Debra Wade

Representation:

This is not an appropriate area for a commercial building. It would make access to the A140 even more difficult than it is already.

Full text:

This is not an appropriate area for a commercial building. It would make access to the A140 even more difficult than it is already.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18763

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: mrs Christine Melton

Representation:

I fail to understand why this development has got this far, the land is beautiful green agricultural land that has been farmed for many generations. Is there no industrial land available? People of Swainsthorpe live in the countryside to enjoy country life and not to be subjected to major industrial development which will be on an extremely busy road with limited visibility in places. I am all for promoting farming but Ben Burgess are doing themselves a lot of harm by taking up green land on a busy road a totally inappropriate place to relocate. Where is your conscience?

Full text:

I fail to understand why this development has got this far, the land is beautiful green agricultural land that has been farmed for many generations. Is there no industrial land available? People of Swainsthorpe live in the countryside to enjoy country life and not to be subjected to major industrial development which will be on an extremely busy road with limited visibility in places. I am all for promoting farming but Ben Burgess are doing themselves a lot of harm by taking up green land on a busy road a totally inappropriate place to relocate. Where is your conscience?

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18769

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Stuart Callis

Representation:

The JCS 2.12 states that brownfield sites will be used wherever possible.
Why is it not possible in this case ?
Surely it is the point of providing these commercial areas, to allow businesses the freedom to build large unattractive but functional units where they can be as noisy and smelly as they like without affecting anybody else.
This proposal is massive - it covers 11 hectares , it would dwarf the village.
Entrance would undoubtedly be the start and cause of a long queue of idling traffic.
Wilful destruction of beautiful countryside without compelling justification

Full text:

The JCS 2.12 states that brownfield sites will be used wherever possible.
Why is it not possible in this case ? A quick search on Google gives several available large commercial plots for sale or rent in and around Norwich - Sweet Briar Rd, Buxton Rd several sites on the Broadland Business Park take your pick. I'm led to believe there will be a lot of land along the new NDR allocated for purely industrial use and that surely is the point of providing these areas, to allow businesses the freedom to build large unattractive but functional units where they can be as noisy and smelly as they like without affecting anybody else.
2.19 states that smaller villages will have small scale development, appropriate to the scale and needs of the village and its immediate surroundings.
This proposal is massive - it covers 11 hectares , it would dwarf the village so could in no way be deemed either small or appropriate to scale and who in the village needs it ? The surroundings of the village are fields which have offered a lovely view across the Tas valley enriching the lives of the local community and passers by for centuries, what it doesn't lack is a dirty great carbuncle plonked in the middle of it with high metal fences , car parks and machinery.
Access to this site would cause a bottleneck which would stretch out of the village in all directions, especially north bound during the morning rush hour. The A140 is already groaning and with the addition of 1800+ new homes proposed for Long Stratton this is going to get a lot worse, any obstacle, such as an island or roundabout, located at the proposed site entrance would undoubtedly be the start and cause of a long queue of idling traffic.
Wilful destruction of beautiful countryside may sometimes be unavoidable but there should always be a very compelling case to justify such actions with unassailable arguments. I spoke to the representatives from Ben Burgess when they pitched their proposal in the village and was offered none of the above, all I could glean was it suited them, never mind if it ruins the peace and tranquillity, the environment & general wellbeing of the entire community, it suits Ben Burgess and that's all they really care about.
In a nutshell - There is No good reason to build this Here.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18773

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Anne O'Halleron

Representation:

This development is completely inappropriate. The A140 is already struggling with the huge increase in traffic over the past few years. There are blockages most days on this road and development of this site will simply worsen the situation. A development of this site cannot be supported when it will increase congestion and result in more accidents.
The adverse impact on local communities needs to be considered and it should be rejected.

Full text:

This development is completely inappropriate. The A140 is already struggling with the huge increase in traffic over the past few years. There are blockages most days on this road and development of this site will simply worsen the situation. A development of this site cannot be supported when it will increase congestion and result in more accidents.
The adverse impact on local communities needs to be considered and it should be rejected.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18784

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Swainsthorpe Parish Council

Representation:

The Council objects strongly to the proposal of industrial development on a pristine greenfield site not contiguous with any other residential or commercial property and has concerns about:
Loss of amenity, walks and views
Pollution by noise, lights and effluent
Disturbance to village life of 24/7 working
Impact on traffic flow
Impact on the water course and possible surface flooding.

Full text:

The Council had grave concerns. The main points discussed for this site was the concern of generation of extra traffic that it could cause, adding to an already congested junction onto the A140. This would be increased by clients and visitors arriving throughout the day, and at peak periods during the year such as harvest. If the proposed development went ahead on this land, slow speed agricultural vehicles would be driving through the Village, potentially on low loaders which would be even bigger and hazardous than the vehicles it was carrying. The Council objects strongly to the proposal of industrial development on a pristine greenfield site not contiguous with any other residential or commercial property and has concerns about:
Loss of amenity, walks and views
Pollution by noise, lights and effluent
Disturbance to village life of 24/7 working
Impact on traffic flow
Impact on the water course and possible surface flooding.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18787

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Benjamin Callis

Representation:

The last minute flurry of supportive comments would appear to NOT be from local residents - possibly those with a vested interest?

The benefits to Swainsthorpe are exaggerated, I cannot think of any.

The disadvantages - environmental, health and safety risks from even greater congestion on the A140 and pollution from idling traffic, loss of arable land, unnecessary destruction of the countryside.

Ironic that

Ben Burgess chooses to build their new headquarters on productive arable land.

They're perfectly happy to build 25 houses on the same productive arable land.

How does that support farming?

Build new headquarters on brownfield/industrial land.

Full text:

The last minute flurry of supportive comments would appear to NOT be from local residents - possibly those with a vested interest?

The benefits to Swainsthorpe are exaggerated, I cannot think of any.

The disadvantages - environmental, health and safety risks from even greater congestion on the A140 and pollution from idling traffic, loss of arable land, unnecessary destruction of the countryside.

Ironic that

Ben Burgess chooses to build their new headquarters on productive arable land.

They're perfectly happy to build 25 houses on the same productive arable land.

How does that support farming?

Build new headquarters on brownfield/industrial land.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18788

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Jill Haggith

Representation:

I strongly object because of traffic, pollution and inappropriate site.

Full text:

I strongly object to this site because a huge agricultural development will destroy the rural nature of tiny Swainsthorpe. The enormous amount of traffic that will attend this site on a daily basis will cause horrendous traffic congestion on the A140, and subsequently into the village of Swainsthorpe. Being such a big development, and the type of works that will be carried out, is bound to lead to continued disturbance by noise, air pollution and light pollution which will be to the detriment of the daily lives of the residents of Swainsthorpe. The big question is why Swainsthorpe, when there are adequate industrial /retail sites that are identified and approved with much better transport links.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18791

Received: 12/12/2018

Respondent: Mr John Rixon

Representation:

As a regular visitor to Swainsthorpe I am appalled to find that this grossly disproportionate development is being proposed in such an inappropriate place. This tiny community will be swamped by a massive increase in traffic with the associated noise dirt and pollution.The development being proposed is an assault on the green belt and will be a blight on the lives of residents. Agricultural contractors work from early in the morning till late into the night and these large vehicles will have to access the site at times when residents will want to be relaxing and enjoying their garden.

Full text:

As a regular visitor to Swainsthorpe I am appalled to find that this grossly disproportionate development is being proposed in such an inappropriate place. This tiny community will be swamped by a massive increase in traffic with the associated noise dirt and pollution.The development being proposed is an assault on the green belt and will be a blight on the lives of residents. Agricultural contractors work from early in the morning till late into the night and these large vehicles will have to access the site at times when residents will want to be relaxing and enjoying their garden.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18834

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Tim Procter

Representation:

The A140 has already reached saturation point during daytime working hours. There is ample provision for further industrial development in more suitable locations

Full text:

Chief objection relates to the existing saturated state of surrounding infrastructure and in particular the A140 which is routinely congested during day time hours. This congestion is scheduled to deteriorate further wth the construction of 1800 new dwellings in Long Stratton. Some local residents have already stopped using Dunstan Hall as it can often take 20/30 minutes to queue to get back on to the A140. Further development in this area will render journeys into Norwich as impossible at times

This is agricultural land and was acquired as such in the recent past. I am told that the family is well connected with the Norfolk establishment and I very much hope that this association will have no bearing on the outcome of this overly ambitious application

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18842

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mr JP DAY

Representation:

Rep made against: South Norfolk - Swainsthorpe, GNLP0604R
A140 already a very busy road which will be massively increased by this development making it even more dangerous than it is now. This will lead to additional traffic pollution. Countryside will also be affected with nowhere for Swainsthorpe residents to walk and loss of wildlife habitat. Significant impact on a village with little social infrastructure.

Full text:

Rep made against: South Norfolk - Swainsthorpe, GNLP0604R
A140 already a very busy road which will be massively increased by this development making it even more dangerous than it is now. This will lead to additional traffic pollution. Countryside will also be affected with nowhere for Swainsthorpe residents to walk and loss of wildlife habitat. Significant impact on a village with little social infrastructure.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18858

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Sonia Day

Representation:

Section: South Norfolk-Swainsthorpe, GNLP0604R
A140 already a very busy road which will be massively increased by this development making it even more dangerous than it is now.
This will lead to additional traffic pollution.
Countryside will also be affected with nowhere for Swainsthorpe residents to walk and loss of wildlife habitat.
Significant impact on a village with little social infrastructure.

Full text:

Section: South Norfolk-Swainsthorpe, GNLP0604R
A140 already a very busy road which will be massively increased by this development making it even more dangerous than it is now.
This will lead to additional traffic pollution.
Countryside will also be affected with nowhere for Swainsthorpe residents to walk and loss of wildlife habitat.
Significant impact on a village with little social infrastructure.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18859

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Linda Pountain

Representation:

I object to the unnecessary use of a green field site for commercial development when brown field sites are available. I also add my concerns to those of others concerning the impact this proposed development would have on the safety of the A140. I also believe that the idea that the proposed development would enhance non-existent local facilities and provide a significant increase in employment over current levels is fanciful.

Full text:

I object to the unnecessary use of a green field site for commercial development when brown field sites are available. I also add my concerns to those of others concerning the impact this proposed development would have on the safety of the A140. I also believe that the idea that the proposed development would enhance non-existent local facilities and provide a significant increase in employment over current levels is fanciful.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18870

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Jenny Parkinson

Representation:

The A140 is heavily congested at peak commuting hours and traffic remains very heavy outside these hours. Church Road is becoming a dangerous rat run as a result of the increased traffic bought to this area by commercial/residential developments like this. Farmland and valuable wildlife habitats will be lost developing the land. Intolerable levels of noise, light and air pollution will be created both from the site usage and the additional traffic using the A140 to access the site.

Full text:

The A140 is heavily congested at peak commuting hours and traffic remains very heavy outside these hours. Church Road is becoming a dangerous rat run as a result of the increased traffic bought to this area by commercial/residential developments like this. Farmland and valuable wildlife habitats will be lost developing the land. Intolerable levels of noise, light and air pollution will be created both from the site usage and the additional traffic using the A140 to access the site.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18959

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Tracey Bocz

Representation:

Swainsthorpe is a small rural community with limited infrastructure and access to the A140. . Any development within the village or on it's boundary must have regard given to access and ensuring that the village does not become part of a wider industrial development area. Access to the village is already dangerous and noise and light pollution caused by the operation of industrial premises could impact upon the whole area. To site such a large scale industrial premises in this area is ill informed and planned and disregards the impact on the village.

Full text:

Swainsthorpe is a small rural community with limited infrastructure and access to the A140. . Any development within the village or on it's boundary must have regard given to access and ensuring that the village does not become part of a wider industrial development area. Access to the village is already dangerous and noise and light pollution caused by the operation of industrial premises could impact upon the whole area. To site such a large scale industrial premises in this area is ill informed and planned and disregards the impact on the village.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 18987

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Laura Fawke

Representation:

I object to the proposed industrial development of this land. The fields in Swainsthorpe are the wrong location for such a huge site. A development of this scale will be disastrous for the village of Swainsthorpe. The noise, light and air pollution will destroy the small village, and the wildlife will loose much of their delicate habitat. Additionally, access to the site is via a very poor and greatly congested road. I can think of no reason why Swainsthorpe would have been considered for such development when there is more appropriate industrial land already available elsewhere.

Full text:

I object to the proposed industrial development of this land. The fields in Swainsthorpe are the wrong location for such a huge site. A development of this scale will be disastrous for the village of Swainsthorpe. The noise, light and air pollution will destroy the small village, and the wildlife will loose much of their delicate habitat. Additionally, access to the site is via a very poor and greatly congested road. I can think of no reason why Swainsthorpe would have been considered for such development when there is more appropriate industrial land already available elsewhere.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19019

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Martin Thurlow

Representation:

Noise pollution created by noisy tractors. Extra traffic created with no additional in the village to accommodate the surplus of vehicles who will visit the Ben Burgess site. Small access roads through village not ideal for such a large project. Lead to further traffic congestion on the already busy A140. Lastly lead to destroying the landscape / countryside.

Full text:

Noise pollution created by noisy tractors. Extra traffic created with no additional in the village to accommodate the surplus of vehicles who will visit the Ben Burgess site. Small access roads through village not ideal for such a large project. Lead to further traffic congestion on the already busy A140. Lastly lead to destroying the landscape / countryside.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19062

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Gillian Sutton

Representation:

I moved to Swainsthorpe 4 years ago from an overgrown local village. I like the quietness of Swainsthorpe and am objecting to these plans for new developments.

Full text:

I moved to Swainsthorpe 4 years ago from an overgrown local village. I like the quietness of Swainsthorpe and am objecting to these plans for new developments.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19092

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Dr Richard Nielsen

Representation:

This proposed development is entirely unsuitable for the location. The proposed site is the size of the village and wholly inappropriate. Additional traffic from commuters to the site, transporting machinery and the proposed roundabout will lead to delays and accidents. Light and noise pollution from the site will be inevitable and, with 24/7 operation, unacceptable. This will be detrimental to local residents and also wildlife. There are plenty of suitable industrial sites for this development without destroying viable arable land. When it is gone, it's gone. We will always need agricultural land. We don't need an industrial estate in Swainsthorpe.

Full text:

This proposed development is entirely unsuitable for the location. There are plenty of established industrial areas in Norfolk with access to large roads and infrastructures which would be perfect for this development. There is no need for it to be in Swainsthorpe. The proposed site is the size of the village and wholly inappropriate. The A140 is highly congested and often at a standstill as it is, without the additional vehicles commuting to the site and farm machinery being transported. This will lead to delays and accidents. Leaving Swainsthorpe on to the A140 is difficult and dangerous enough presently. The proposed roundabout will further disrupt traffic. Light and noise pollution from the site will be inevitable and, with 24/7 operation, unacceptable. This will be detrimental to local residents and also wildlife. We regularly see bats, kestrels and other birds of prey in our garden and neighboring fields. The development will no doubt have a negative impact on these environmental factors. There are plenty of suitable industrial sites for this development without destroying viable arable land. When it is gone, it's gone. We will always need agricultural land. We don't need an industrial estate in Swainsthorpe.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19109

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs G Thurlow

Representation:

I strongly object to the proposed agricultural site of Ben Burgess being relocated in Swainsthorpe. Will have huge ramifications. There will be heavy plant thundery along lanes causing noise and damage to the small access roads which are already inadequate to accommodate such large machinery. Dangerous to pedestrians and young children which could cause fatalities. A likelihood of theft within the area due to these sites being targeted having a knock on impact to local villages. Furthermore, near a train line is highly impractical. Lastly, pollution and air quality will be affected! Relocation to another site would be much advised.

Full text:

I strongly object to the proposed agricultural site of Ben Burgess being relocated in Swainsthorpe. Will have huge ramifications. There will be heavy plant thundery along lanes causing noise and damage to the small access roads which are already inadequate to accommodate such large machinery. Dangerous to pedestrians and young children which could cause fatalities. A likelihood of theft within the area due to these sites being targeted having a knock on impact to local villages. Furthermore, near a train line is highly impractical. Lastly, pollution and air quality will be affected! Relocation to another site would be much advised.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19112

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Dale Folkard

Representation:

Swainsthorpe is a totally inappropriate location for an industrial site. This site will dwarf this beautiful village cause air,light, noise pollution 24/7 massive impact on the wildlife.The A140 is congested at peak times , and at other times heavy volumes of traffic making access and egress diffiicult and dangerous .Brownfield sites are available for this type of investment, with the infrastructure in place. I'm surprised that a company like Ben Burgess are prepared to destroy beautiful arable land and the residents quality of village life. This land and village should remain for future generations, don't destroy beautiful Swainsthorpe/South Norfolk..

Full text:

Swainsthorpe is a totally inappropriate location for an industrial site. This site will dwarf this beautiful village cause air,light, noise pollution 24/7 massive impact on the wildlife.The A140 is congested at peak times , and at other times heavy volumes of traffic making access and egress diffiicult and dangerous .Brownfield sites are available for this type of investment, with the infrastructure in place. I'm surprised that a company like Ben Burgess are prepared to destroy beautiful arable land and the residents quality of village life. This land and village should remain for future generations, don't destroy beautiful Swainsthorpe/South Norfolk..

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19127

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Miss Joy Wayte

Representation:

I am a family member that regularly visits my parents. We like to visit the area and go for walks and educate our children through the walks we do , spotting wildlife and also gaining excercise at the same time. It is vital for the community that this area is preserved and not spoilt by the suggested planning proposal.

Full text:

I am a family member that regularly visits my parents. We like to visit the area and go for walks and educate our children through the walks we do , spotting wildlife and also gaining excercise at the same time. It is vital for the community that this area is preserved and not spoilt by the suggested planning proposal.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19130

Received: 14/12/2018

Respondent: Dr Tim Rayner

Representation:

Sacrificing agricultural land for purposes that can be provided for adequately through other means goes against current sustainability imperatives. Declining food security and increased competition over resources in an era of worsening impacts from climate change are critical strategic trends. Simply put, now is not the time to be re-designating productive agricultural land (in effect irreversibly) for purposes that I believe can be provided through designated brownfield/industrial sites. Though small in national terms, this proposal needs to be viewed as part of a larger scale, incremental trend in land use that exposes society to significant future risks.

Full text:

Sacrificing agricultural land for purposes that can be provided for adequately through other means (i.e. on brownfield sites) goes against twenty-first century sustainability imperatives. Governments around the world, including our own, acknowledge declining food security and increased competition over resources in an era of worsening impacts from climate change as critical strategic trends (Ministry of Defence 2018). Authoritative bodies such as the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, in its report on the Sustainable Use of Soils, have warned that:
'A continuation for a further 100 years at the average rate of transfer to urban uses between 1945 and 1990 would come close to doubling the urban area of England and reduce the area of land cultivated or used for pasture by perhaps as much as a sixth. That would represent a significant reduction in the UK's capacity to produce food' (RCEP 1996, para 2.23).

Simply put, now is not the time to be re-designating productive agricultural land (presumably in effect irreversibly) for purposes that I believe have already been provided for elsewhere (through designated industrial sites). Though small in national terms, this proposal needs to be viewed as part of a larger scale, incremental trend in land use that exposes society to significant future risks. I write in a personal capacity, as an academic based at the University of East Anglia, affiliated to the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. I also have parents-in-law living in the village, so that I am a frequent visitor.

References:
Ministry of Defence (2018). Global Strategic Trends: The Future Starts Today. 6th Edition.
Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (1996). Sustainable Use of Soils. 19th Report. London: HMSO.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19132

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Ben Thurlow

Representation:

I strongly object to the relocation of the Ben Burgess site. Tractors articulated lorries, low loaders, combine harvesters and all large agricultural machinery will thundering through the small country lanes which are not safe for such a small village. This is extremely dangerous for the safety of all people (children, elderly, pedestrians and cyclists) The decision to accept this proposal could cause serious injuries or fatalities! Dangerous conditions for motorists through mud deposited and subsequent pollution caused by these large diesel vehicles. Crime / burglaries could increase due to site and surroundings community being targeted!

Full text:

I strongly object to the relocation of the Ben Burgess site. Tractors articulated lorries, low loaders, combine harvesters and all large agricultural machinery will thundering through the small country lanes which are not safe for such a small village. This is extremely dangerous for the safety of all people (children, elderly, pedestrians and cyclists) The decision to accept this proposal could cause serious injuries or fatalities! Dangerous conditions for motorists through mud deposited and subsequent pollution caused by these large diesel vehicles. Crime / burglaries could increase due to site and surroundings community being targeted!

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19133

Received: 13/12/2018

Respondent: Mr Phillip Folkard

Representation:

I strongly Object, This should be kept as it is. I am a frequent visitor to the area, bringing my kids to visit their grandparents. They enjoy the walks to the area, exploring the natural beauty, wildlife this site gives. It makes no sense to destroy this.

Full text:

I strongly Object, This should be kept as it is. I am a frequent visitor to the area, bringing my kids to visit their grandparents. They enjoy the walks to the area, exploring the natural beauty, wildlife this site gives. It makes no sense to destroy this.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19148

Received: 14/12/2018

Respondent: Miss Maya Holdsworth

Representation:

This is arable land and has recently been purchased as such. Permission should not be granted for building on this land as it is not a brownfield site.
The development is not an investment in farming, but the destruction farming land, as it is the transfer of a business headquarters from an existing site to a large arable field.
This same development company is proposing to build 25 houses on more of the farmland they have recently purchased in Swainsthorpe. There must be legal implications to buying up greenfield sites and being allowed to ruin them.
It brings no benefits.

Full text:

I strongly object to this development. This is arable land and has recently been purchased as such. Permission should not be granted for building on this land as it is not a brownfield site. Sudden last-minute support for the project from people living in South Norfolk, does not reflect the views of people living in Swainsthorpe. The development is clearly not an investment in farming in the area, but the destruction farming land, as it is the transfer of offices, workshops and salesroom etc. from an existing site to a large arable field. This same development company is also proposing to build 25 residential properties on more of the farmland they have recently purchased in Swainsthorpe, which clearly shows that they are not in the business of supporting farming. There must be legal implications to buying up greenfield sites and being allowed to ruin them.
There are no benefits to the local community from this development. Most of the employees will be moving from the existing headquarters, and any new employees would just as easily be able to travel to an existing brownfield site, as they would travel to Swainsthorpe.
This development will reduce the quality of life of local residents, by destroying the local countryside.

Object

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19150

Received: 14/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Gail Wilson

Representation:

Huge impact on wildlife, character of village.
Loss of such a large area of productive arable land,
The views of the village from the A140 will be gone.
Fields are prone to flooding, loss of a natural flood plain is concerning.
Light, noise and air pollution.
Damage to the water table, lots of natural springs in close proximity that would become polluted.
Air quality will be severely effected by the increase of vehicles.
A140 a notorious road for accidents will be under extra strain.
Quality of villagers lives.
Our village and surrounding area is not suitable for this proposal

Full text:

Huge impact on wildlife, character of village.
Loss of such a large area of productive arable land,
The views of the village from the A140 will be gone.
Fields are prone to flooding, loss of a natural flood plain is concerning.
Light, noise and air pollution.
Damage to the water table, lots of natural springs in close proximity that would become polluted.
Air quality will be severely effected by the increase of vehicles.
A140 a notorious road for accidents will be under extra strain.
Quality of villagers lives.
Our village and surrounding area is not suitable for this proposal

Comment

New, Revised and Small Sites

Representation ID: 19151

Received: 14/12/2018

Respondent: Mrs Gail Wilson

Representation:

Will there be a need for agricultural machinery? All the green fields are being taken up for development, thought to just point it out for those who support the proposal haven't noticed! ;-/

Full text:

Will there be a need for agricultural machinery? All the green fields are being taken up for development, thought to just point it out for those who support the proposal haven't noticed! ;-/