Site Proposals document
Search representations
Results for Mulbarton Parish Council search
New searchComment
Site Proposals document
GNLP0426
Representation ID: 19732
Received: 12/12/2018
Respondent: Mulbarton Parish Council
This does not reflect the current loadings on the B1113 - see Mulbarton comments.
Please find attached comments from Mulbarton Parish Council on all of the proposed site allocations for the area in and around Mulbarton. We have provided comments against each of the individual sites. We disagree with the proposed site allocations and the underlying assumptions.
Our general view is in line with the comments provided by CPRE Norfolk, which you will be familiar with. Your earlier letter of 29th October 2018 stated that "growth will be carefully planned to ensure it is located in the most appropriate locations and will be supported by appropriate and timely infrastructure provision". We disagree that the proposed site allocations and individual site assessments follow this approach.
See attached file.
Object
Site Proposals document
GNLP0315
Representation ID: 19733
Received: 12/12/2018
Respondent: Mulbarton Parish Council
We dispute the RAG assessment which we does not accurately reflect the constraints and impacts of developing this site
The unclassified roads serving the site are inadequate to serve the proposed development. Development on this site would give rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety.
Limited access to area due to single track road, which has width of 2.8 metres, has a weight limit of 7.5 T and has dwellings either side. Access to either B1113 or A140 poor and both roads running at capacity levels without the extra housing at Long Stratton, Hempnall and Swainsthorpe. See latest CPRE comments re above and particularly section 4.
If 30 per hectare, then 3,900 houses
Please find attached comments from Mulbarton Parish Council on all of the proposed site allocations for the area in and around Mulbarton. We have provided comments against each of the individual sites. We disagree with the proposed site allocations and the underlying assumptions.
Our general view is in line with the comments provided by CPRE Norfolk, which you will be familiar with. Your earlier letter of 29th October 2018 stated that "growth will be carefully planned to ensure it is located in the most appropriate locations and will be supported by appropriate and timely infrastructure provision". We disagree that the proposed site allocations and individual site assessments follow this approach.
See attached file.
Comment
Site Proposals document
GNLP0299
Representation ID: 19734
Received: 12/12/2018
Respondent: Mulbarton Parish Council
Self-build plot
Please find attached comments from Mulbarton Parish Council on all of the proposed site allocations for the area in and around Mulbarton. We have provided comments against each of the individual sites. We disagree with the proposed site allocations and the underlying assumptions.
Our general view is in line with the comments provided by CPRE Norfolk, which you will be familiar with. Your earlier letter of 29th October 2018 stated that "growth will be carefully planned to ensure it is located in the most appropriate locations and will be supported by appropriate and timely infrastructure provision". We disagree that the proposed site allocations and individual site assessments follow this approach.
See attached file.
Object
Site Proposals document
GNLP0195
Representation ID: 19735
Received: 12/12/2018
Respondent: Mulbarton Parish Council
Land proposed by SNC: north end of Meadows. No access to south of plot. North access/egress not to
Highways standards. No access to existing infrastructure.
The unclassified roads serving the site are inadequate to serve the proposed development. Development on this site would give rise to conditions detrimental to highway safety.
We dispute the RAG assessment which we does not accurately reflect the constraints and impacts of developing this site
Please find attached comments from Mulbarton Parish Council on all of the proposed site allocations for the area in and around Mulbarton. We have provided comments against each of the individual sites. We disagree with the proposed site allocations and the underlying assumptions.
Our general view is in line with the comments provided by CPRE Norfolk, which you will be familiar with. Your earlier letter of 29th October 2018 stated that "growth will be carefully planned to ensure it is located in the most appropriate locations and will be supported by appropriate and timely infrastructure provision". We disagree that the proposed site allocations and individual site assessments follow this approach.
See attached file.
Object
Site Proposals document
GNLP0496
Representation ID: 19736
Received: 12/12/2018
Respondent: Mulbarton Parish Council
Lanpro / Paddock Farm. If 30 per hectare, then 770 houses
We dispute the RAG assessment which we does not accurately reflect the constraints and impacts of developing this site.
We are of the opinion that the unclassified roads will cause extra vehicular traffic to an already at capacity unclassified road.
Planning application 2018/0872 already submitted -Original 170 houses for eastern section of overall plot.
Please find attached comments from Mulbarton Parish Council on all of the proposed site allocations for the area in and around Mulbarton. We have provided comments against each of the individual sites. We disagree with the proposed site allocations and the underlying assumptions.
Our general view is in line with the comments provided by CPRE Norfolk, which you will be familiar with. Your earlier letter of 29th October 2018 stated that "growth will be carefully planned to ensure it is located in the most appropriate locations and will be supported by appropriate and timely infrastructure provision". We disagree that the proposed site allocations and individual site assessments follow this approach.
See attached file.
