GNLP0215
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 19921
Received: 12/02/2020
Respondent: Upton with Fishley Parish Council
(Changed from object to support as Parish Council are actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable)
Strumpshaw Parish Council objects to GNLP0215. Strumpshaw Neighbourhood Plan, which runs until 2026, aims to resist development of housing outside the present areas of housing. The site is outside the Neighbourhood Plan settlement limit. The village has no shop, no school and limited public transport. The Parish Council therefore supports the description of the site as being "unreasonable".
Strumpshaw Parish Council objects to GNLP0215. Strumpshaw Neighbourhood Plan, which runs until 2026, aims to resist development of housing outside the present areas of housing. The site is outside the Neighbourhood Plan settlement limit. The village has no shop, no school and limited public transport. The Parish Council therefore supports the description of the site as being "unreasonable".
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20226
Received: 02/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Christopher Entwistle
There is a lack of local facilities, localised surface water builds up in this area (close to the Huntsman pub) tight turning angle just several meters from the possible development, increased traffic on unsuitable narrow roads for day to day activity and added journeys as there is a lack of local amenities eg shops, doctors etc. (Needing to achieve carbon neutral by 2050) lack of pavements for safe walking. Also risk of increased traffic accidents. Removal of hedgerows and trees to allow access for vehicles and people especially at entrance point to new development. Accessing A47 already busy and slow.
There is a lack of local facilities, localised surface water builds up in this area (close to the Huntsman pub) tight turning angle just several meters from the possible development, increased traffic on unsuitable narrow roads for day to day activity and added journeys as there is a lack of local amenities eg shops, doctors etc. (Needing to achieve carbon neutral by 2050) lack of pavements for safe walking. Also risk of increased traffic accidents. Removal of hedgerows and trees to allow access for vehicles and people especially at entrance point to new development. Accessing A47 already busy and slow.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20250
Received: 03/03/2020
Respondent: Miss Jenny Cockburn
This site is in an area that provides a high contribution towards the landscapes character and openness of the area. New residents would have to drive to shops, and to take their children to school which increases the reliance on the private car. This is not consistent with national law to become carbon neutral by 2050.
This is not conducive to keeping Brundall and Strumpshaw seperate.
The village has experienced growth during recent years so more preferable locations for development should be considered.
This site is in an area that provides a high contribution towards the landscapes character and openness of the area. New residents would have to drive to shops, and to take their children to school which increases the reliance on the private car. This is not consistent with national law to become carbon neutral by 2050.
This is not conducive to keeping Brundall and Strumpshaw seperate.
The village has experienced growth during recent years so more preferable locations for development should be considered.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20280
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mrs Kara Pull
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
Respect neighbourhood plan and rural character of the village. Take sensible decisions to use better sites and areas suited to mass development. Do not add to the traffic issues/too busy already country roads. Generally when building new houses ensure its law that big trees are planted to establish development. Rather than just concrete concrete concrete
We voted on a neighbourhood plan which should be respected not overruled. Struunpshaw is meant to be a country village large developments ruin this. There are plenty of bigger places that lend itself to housing estates not the leafy tranquil quiet small village of strumpshaw. The roads are country lanes there are few amenities or school play areas etc. Traffic is already bad esp down Hemblington road as a rat run and drivers are too fast around the country lanes which have little pull in places. Public transport is poor. The rural character has already been compromised by the Oakland’s and mill meadow the houses are fine however no attempt is made to plant trees and make them look established and replace the nature that was lost. Why do all small villages have to be developed when there is better quality land in larger places with plenty of roads services and amenities?!
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20284
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Michael Jay
I would like to object to building on this land because it is not in keeping with the small village rural character of strumpshaw. I feel the roads and access to these sites in strumpshaw are not suitable to be safely used by the large increase in construction and residential traffic that would be created.
I would like to object to building on this land because it is not in keeping with the small village rural character of strumpshaw. I feel the roads and access to these sites in strumpshaw are not suitable to be safely used by the large increase in construction and residential traffic that would be created.
Comment
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20291
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Jeremy Mills
I support the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds:
It goes against the adopted neighbourhood plan
This development would not be sustainable due to lack of transport, infrastructure, schools or amenities and shops
There are more preferable locations for development outside the village
There would also be significant impact on the form and character of the existing village
Due to increased building in neighbouring villages it is impossible to get out onto the A47 or into Thorpe due to poorly designed Postwick Hub with queues onto the dual carriageway at present!
I support the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds:
It goes against the adopted neighbourhood plan
This development would not be sustainable due to lack of transport, infrastructure, schools or amenities and shops
There are more preferable locations for development outside the village
There would also be significant impact on the form and character of the existing village
Due to increased building in neighbouring villages it is impossible to get out onto the A47 or into Thorpe due to poorly designed Postwick Hub with queues onto the dual carriageway at present!
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20295
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Jeremy Mills
I support the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds:
It goes against the adopted neighbourhood plan
This development would not be sustainable due to lack of transport, infrastructure, schools or amenities and shops
There are more preferable locations for development outside the village
There would also be significant impact on the form and character of the existing village
Roads are not suitable to increased traffic
Ancient hedgerows
Result would be a dramatic impact on the form and character of the rural landscape
I support the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds:
It goes against the adopted neighbourhood plan
This development would not be sustainable due to lack of transport, infrastructure, schools or amenities and shops
There are more preferable locations for development outside the village
There would also be significant impact on the form and character of the existing village
Roads are not suitable to increased traffic
Ancient hedgerows
Result would be a dramatic impact on the form and character of the rural landscape
Comment
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20308
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mr David Mark Hopkins
Strumpshaw does not have any services or facilities to deal with further increase in residential dwellings.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessing a road that will be made significantly busier by the proposed A47 changes.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing form and rural character of the area and impact well being.
Strumpshaw does not have any services or facilities to deal with further increase in residential dwellings.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessing a road that will be made significantly busier by the proposed A47 changes.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing form and rural character of the area and impact well being.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20310
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Simon Rump
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
I support the planning officer's decision to deem the site unreasonable and object to any future development on the following grounds:-
The site is rural and provides contribution to landscape character and openness of the area. Any development would result in impact to existing residents well being.
Strumpshaw does not have the services or infrastructure to support further development, shops, schools, roads. Particular issues with sewage capacity and flooding.
There is no continuous footpath to local amenities.
The site is within close proximity to a landfill site. Risk of contamination.
I support the planning officer's decision to deem the site unreasonable and object to any future development on the following grounds:-
The site is rural and provides contribution to landscape character and openness of the area. Any development would result in impact to existing residents well being.
Strumpshaw does not have the services or infrastructure to support further development, shops, schools, roads. Particular issues with sewage capacity and flooding.
There is no continuous footpath to local amenities.
The site is within close proximity to a landfill site. Risk of contamination.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20315
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Dr Ann Lahiff
I am supporting the planning officers' decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds: a) the site itelf is very large. Development in any form, would change the form and character of the village of Strumpshaw; b) it is contrary to the Strumpshaw Neighbourhood plan which aims to protect the rural character and openness of the area; c) it would distroy habitat and hedgerows; d) it would increase traffic on a very busy road e) it would promote the use and reliance on cars - public transport is negligible in this area: one bus per hour!
I am supporting the planning officers' decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds: a) the site itelf is very large. Development in any form, would change the form and character of the village of Strumpshaw; b) it is contrary to the Strumpshaw Neighbourhood plan which aims to protect the rural character and openness of the area; c) it would distroy habitat and hedgerows; d) it would increase traffic on a very busy road e) it would promote the use and reliance on cars - public transport is negligible in this area: one bus per hour!
Comment
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20321
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mrs Deborah Hopkins
Strumpshaw does not have any services or facilities to deal with further increase in residential dwellings.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessing a road that will be made significantly busier by the proposed A47 changes.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing form and rural character of the area and impact well being.
Strumpshaw does not have any services or facilities to deal with further increase in residential dwellings.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessing a road that will be made significantly busier by the proposed A47 changes.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing form and rural character of the area and impact well being.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20324
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mr william Burroughs
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
STRUMPSHAW does not have services & facilities no school no shops new residents would have to drive to the facilities the existing roads are narrow with restricted width There are no street lights not a complete footpath the main sewer is under sized and over flows from manholes when we have heavy rain resulting in flooding To provide all required would impact on character of the rural landscape
STRUMPSHAW does not have services & facilities no school no shops new residents would have to drive to the facilities the existing roads are narrow with restricted width There are no street lights not a complete footpath the main sewer is under sized and over flows from manholes when we have heavy rain resulting in flooding To provide all required would impact on character of the rural landscape
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20334
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Martyn Lovett
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
I am supporting the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on grounds of traffic, lack of local facilities and infrastructure, the village is at its limit in terms of housing and it will lose its identity as a village if it continues to expand any further. There has already been a lot of new housing in and around the village.
I am supporting the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on grounds of traffic, lack of local facilities and infrastructure, the village is at its limit in terms of housing and it will lose its identity as a village if it continues to expand any further. There has already been a lot of new housing in and around the village.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20338
Received: 04/03/2020
Respondent: Miss Jo Felgate
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
It is not necessary to build here - the council already has land supply elsewhere and there is no need at all to spoil the village and the lives of the residents living here by putting pressure on the village infrastructure.
I am supporting the planning officers’ decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds; the village is traditional, offering a village community. There is evidence to confirm that the infrastructure is already at limits with the recent episodes of flooding in the village and the closing of local amenities that have been affected by this (and we have few amenities as it is). Current local residents should not be subjected to further strain through increase on sewerage and drainage that unnecessary building of more residential dwellings will bring when the council already has a 5 year land supply elsewhere that they could focus on instead.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20343
Received: 05/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Peter Hodgkinson
I support the planning officer's decision to deem this unreasonable on the following grounds:
1. It would create a ribbon development between Strumpshaw and Brundall and thereby be contrary to the Local Plan and local democratic decisions..
2. It would create a considerable flood risk - if not immediately, then in the future - as seen in recent climate change events.
3. It could not be accomodated in terms of the infrastructure - roads, schools, medical etc.
4. It would decisively impact (negatively) on the rural character of the area.
5. The environmental impact would be enormously damaging.
I support the planning officer's decision to deem this unreasonable on the following grounds:
1. It would create a ribbon development between Strumpshaw and Brundall and thereby be contrary to the Local Plan and local democratic decisions..
2. It would create a considerable flood risk - if not immediately, then in the future - as seen in recent climate change events.
3. It could not be accomodated in terms of the infrastructure - roads, schools, medical etc.
4. It would decisively impact (negatively) on the rural character of the area.
5. The environmental impact would be enormously damaging.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20353
Received: 05/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Stephen Cash
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
We are supporting the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable. Strumpshaw has no infrastructure for further residential development, no school, no shops therefore increased housing will mean more polluting car journeys, especially with the limited bus service. The roads to access Norwich are either through Brundall which is already overburdened with traffic or up Hemblington Rd which is single carriageway with a dangerous bend. There are no continuous footpaths to Lingwood or Brundall. The plan also includes an existing footpath which is frequently used by walkers. Valuable agricultural land such as this should not be built on.
We are supporting the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable. Strumpshaw has no infrastructure for further residential development, no school, no shops therefore increased housing will mean more polluting car journeys, especially with the limited bus service. The roads to access Norwich are either through Brundall which is already overburdened with traffic or up Hemblington Rd which is single carriageway with a dangerous bend. There are no continuous footpaths to Lingwood or Brundall. The plan also includes an existing footpath which is frequently used by walkers. Valuable agricultural land such as this should not be built on.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20384
Received: 05/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Imran Durowoju
My family moved to strumpshaw in order to get away from this. The thing that attracted us to Strumpshaw was the space and the personality of the village. With development around, it destroys this. I don't feel like just because there is land that it should be built on. There is no logic to it. Everything that is being proposed is against what I believe to be the great underlying character of the village.
My family moved to strumpshaw in order to get away from this. The thing that attracted us to Strumpshaw was the space and the personality of the village. With development around, it destroys this. I don't feel like just because there is land that it should be built on. There is no logic to it. Everything that is being proposed is against what I believe to be the great underlying character of the village.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20386
Received: 05/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Oliver James
I am supporting the planning officers decision to deem the unreasonable on the following grounds:
Strumpshaw does not have the services and infrastructure to support an increase in dwellings. There is no school, shop, regular bus routes.
There will be an increase in traffic which will go against the local authorities sustainable plans and national law to become carbon neutral.
The has been significant development in the village which causes more traffic, speeding and nuisance which the rural roads are unable to cope with.
There will be significant impact on the form and character of the village and rural landscape.
I am supporting the planning officers decision to deem the unreasonable on the following grounds:
Strumpshaw does not have the services and infrastructure to support an increase in dwellings. There is no school, shop, regular bus routes.
There will be an increase in traffic which will go against the local authorities sustainable plans and national law to become carbon neutral.
The has been significant development in the village which causes more traffic, speeding and nuisance which the rural roads are unable to cope with.
There will be significant impact on the form and character of the village and rural landscape.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20391
Received: 06/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Hilary Hammond
I support the GNLP conclusions that this is not a reasonable site because Strumpshaw has already had some 40 additional dwellings built in 2019/20 or currently under construction; because the sewage system is already inadequate; because of the lack of a footway along the whole of Norwich Road. Part of this site was considered by the 2014 adopted Strumpshaw Neighbourhood Plan for 10 dwellings and a community hall. It was rejected because of concerns about the danger of access to the highway on the Long Lane bends
I support the GNLP conclusions that this is not a reasonable site because Strumpshaw has already had some 40 additional dwellings built in 2019/20 or currently under construction; because the sewage system is already inadequate; because of the lack of a footway along the whole of Norwich Road. Part of this site was considered by the 2014 adopted Strumpshaw Neighbourhood Plan for 10 dwellings and a community hall. It was rejected because of concerns about the danger of access to the highway on the Long Lane bends
Comment
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20400
Received: 06/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Timothy Bishop
Strumpshaw does not have any services or facilities to deal with further increase in residential dwellings.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessing a road that will be made significantly busier by the proposed A47 changes.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing form and rural character of the area and impact well being.
Strumpshaw does not have any services or facilities to deal with further increase in residential dwellings.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessing a road that will be made significantly busier by the proposed A47 changes.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing form and rural character of the area and impact well being.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20426
Received: 06/03/2020
Respondent: Mr David Jones
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
Inadequate services facilities to serve an increased population absent school, shops, GP surgery. Increased traffic would be unacceptable with limited bus service. Present speed limit is widely abused. Increased private car usage inconsistent with local authority sustainability plans and national law to become carbon neutral by 2050. Main road to, from and through the village would have to be widened for safe vehicular access. Ancient hedgerow, statutorily protected which helps preserve the rural character of the village would be removed.
The natural " buffer" between Brundal and Strumpshaw would be lost severely impacting on the rural openness of the landscape
Inadequate services facilities to serve an increased population absent school, shops, GP surgery. Increased traffic would be unacceptable with limited bus service. Present speed limit is widely abused. Increased private car usage inconsistent with local authority sustainability plans and national law to become carbon neutral by 2050. Main road to, from and through the village would have to be widened for safe vehicular access. Ancient hedgerow, statutorily protected which helps preserve the rural character of the village would be removed.
The natural " buffer" between Brundal and Strumpshaw would be lost severely impacting on the rural openness of the landscape
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20440
Received: 06/03/2020
Respondent: Mrs M Hovey
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
I totally support the planning officers' decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds. Whats the point of a neighbourhood plan if this agricultural field which is used in farming which puts food on our plates. There are many more preferable locations for development to take place. This will not only impact on the form and character but also increases reliance on the private car as most houses have 2 per house and with no school or shop in Strumpshaw this would be a necessity. I strongly support that this is an unsuitable site.
I totally support the planning officers' decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds. Whats the point of a neighbourhood plan if this agricultural field which is used in farming which puts food on our plates. There are many more preferable locations for development to take place. This will not only impact on the form and character but also increases reliance on the private car as most houses have 2 per house and with no school or shop in Strumpshaw this would be a necessity. I strongly support that this is an unsuitable site.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20508
Received: 08/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Kevin Howlett
Strumpshaw is a small village with no facilities, small roads and highly unsuitable for any larger scale development.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessed by smaller roads that are unsuitable for increased traffic flow.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are much more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing character of the area.
Strumpshaw is a small village with no facilities, small roads and highly unsuitable for any larger scale development.
Access to shops, employment, schools etc. will be by car, increasing reliance on a transport mode inconsistent with sustainability plans and environmental aims.
Any road serving the site will be accessed by smaller roads that are unsuitable for increased traffic flow.
Following recent developments there is no need for further housing and there are much more preferable locations for development to take place. This proposal will destroy the existing character of the area.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20527
Received: 09/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Paul Cowcher
Significant impact on the landscape and character of the area
Close to conservation and wildlife area
Increase in traffic to access shops etc.
Roads not suited to increase in traffic.
Safety issue for pedestrians wanting to access shops due to absence of footpath
no communal areas for residents
Full text:
I support the GNLP decision that the site is unreasonable.
This site is large and any development would significantly affect the landscape and character of the village. There are no facilities other than a pub and church available in the village so a large increase in housing would seriously impact the nature of the village and surrounding areas. The site is close to the Yare Broads and Marshes and development could affect the surrounding environment.
There are no local amenities within Strumpshaw meaning an increase of traffic into neighbouring villages to access shops etc. Many of the local roads are single track and are unsuitable for higher volumes of traffic.
There is no continuous pathway into Lingwood or Brundall meaning access by foot represents a safety issue, especially during winter months during morning and evening commuting and school times. Note there is no street lighting in Strumpshaw.
There are no common open areas within Strumpshaw meaning no areas for young children to meet and play.
Comment
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20537
Received: 09/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Michael Manley
My wife and I fully the support the local authority in assessing these sites as unreasonable for the reasons stated plus the poor public transport curretly available and inadequate drainage which has already brought about the closure of the Huntsman public house in Strumpshaw.
My wife and I fully the support the local authority in assessing these sites as unreasonable for the reasons stated plus the poor public transport curretly available and inadequate drainage which has already brought about the closure of the Huntsman public house in Strumpshaw.
Comment
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20584
Received: 10/03/2020
Respondent: Mrs barbara Warrie
I support the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds,Strumpshaw does not have the infrastructure to support more properties.
Residents would have to drive to either Brundall or Lingwood for Schools, Doctors (already difficult to get an appointment) and shops, adding to traffic on Norwich Road.
We do not need more houses in Strumpshaw, some of those that have been built recently are still empty.
I support the planning officers decision to deem this site unreasonable on the following grounds,Strumpshaw does not have the infrastructure to support more properties.
Residents would have to drive to either Brundall or Lingwood for Schools, Doctors (already difficult to get an appointment) and shops, adding to traffic on Norwich Road.
We do not need more houses in Strumpshaw, some of those that have been built recently are still empty.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20829
Received: 13/03/2020
Respondent: Mr mark cannon
The sites are in a rural area, with inadequate Roads and facilities
The sites are in a rural area, with inadequate Roads and facilities
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20935
Received: 14/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Richard Dennison
The roads serving the site are narrow and inappropriate for the amount of traffic volume. Any attempt to increase the width would result in destruction of ancient hedgerows
It would result in a significant impact on the form and character of the rural landscape
There is a lack of local services and facilities eg shops and schools
It would increase the reliance on private car for transport eg taking children to school and driving to shops
The roads serving the site are narrow and inappropriate for the amount of traffic volume. Any attempt to increase the width would result in destruction of ancient hedgerows
It would result in a significant impact on the form and character of the rural landscape
There is a lack of local services and facilities eg shops and schools
It would increase the reliance on private car for transport eg taking children to school and driving to shops
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 20936
Received: 14/03/2020
Respondent: Mr Anthony Tuddenham
No reason to develop outside Strumpshaw's existing settlement boundary, the council has a 5 year land supply.
Strumpshaw has no schools, post office or shop.
Increased traffic on the narrow Long Lane and the single lane Hemblington Road. Flooding occurs on these roads, replacing agricultural land will exacerbate this situation.
Access would have limited visibility and endanger highway safety. Ancient hedgerows and a public footpath are also affected.
The site would destroy an area that is rural, open, with excellent countryside views.
The negative impact on amenity for properties and community through noise, disturbance, nuisance, loss of privacy and overlooking.
I am keen to support Broadland District Council's decision to deem site GNLP0215 as 'unreasonable' for development.
There is no reason to develop outside Strumpshaw's existing settlement boundary. Strumpshaw has seen a number of new developments in recent years and given that the council has a 5 year land supply this development is unnecessary.
Strumpshaw has no schools, post office or shop to accommodate further residential developments.
This will generate a noticeable increase in private car traffic particularly on the Long Lane and Hemblington Roads. Both of these roads are narrow, with the Hemblington Road being single lane. Large pools of water form on these roads regularly impacting traffic flow. This will be exacerbated if drainage is hampered by residential development replacing agricultural land. Any avoidable increase in private car usage is contrary to the aim of the UK becoming carbon neutral by 2050.
Means of access from either road would have limited visibility, threaten highway safety as well as destroying ancient hedgerows. A well-used public footpath is also likely to be affected.
The proposed site is an area that is rural and is key to the landscape and openness that provides excellent views of open countryside. This would be destroyed by this proposed development. This area also provides the gap that stops Brundall and Strumpshaw merging.
There could also be a negative impact on amenity for neighbouring property and the community through noise, disturbance, nuisance, loss of privacy and overlooking.
Support
Draft Local Plan-Part 2 Site Allocations
Representation ID: 21013
Received: 15/03/2020
Respondent: Mrs Mary Green
(Changed from object to support as respondent is actually supporting the categorisation of the site as unreasonable in the GNLP)
The village does not have the resources for such a massive amount of influx and it would change the character of STrumpshaw irreparably. This must not happen.
The village does not have the resources for such a massive amount of influx and it would change the character of STrumpshaw irreparably. This must not happen.