Policy GNLP5009

There will be traffic and highway issues, the bridge wont take the weight of the caravans the road is a dead end and extremely tight especially at school times.
safety issues - a fire engine will struggle getting down the road, the school bus has great difficulty. It is extremely close to the river and conservation area.
Close to the school, the school is full
Extend the current site in Bawburgh.
We have no amenities and it is not suitable for the small village. The current one is close to highways and easier access, no neighbouring houses.

1. Local Democracy. 140 residents of Bawburgh attended a meeting at the Village Hall on 16th February 2023 including the majority of residents of Hockering Lane. The proposed site was unanimously rejected. If you want to “grow communities stronger together”, you should consider the wishes of local residents who understand better than anyone outside the village the suitability or otherwise of a traveller site in the village. Local democracy counts.
2. Existing Provision Nearby. There is a perfectly adequate existing site next to the Park & Ride on Long Lane. It is currently being improved following a temporary closure due to travellers on the site causing a serious fire after burning hazardous waste material.
3. Proximity to housing. The proposed site is the only one of the 10 sites listed which adjoins directly existing housing.
4. Access. The only access to the site is by travelling east along Hockering Lane. It is totally unsuitable to accommodate the additional flow of private and commercial vehicles generated by the proposed site. The road is a narrow cul de sac. Large vehicles, eg school buses, cannot turn round at the end. When cars are parked on either side of the road, vehicles travelling in opposite directions cannot pass each other. This already causes serious problems when children are taken to/collected from the school.
5. Volume of extra traffic. The proposal allows for visiting or transit travellers in addition on to permanent occupants. The number of vehicles travelling to and from the site will be much greater than the number of pitches.
6. School. The proximity of the school and the large number of children/parents/staff using Hockering Lane makes the site unsuitable. The school is already heavily over-subscribed and could not accommodate the children living on the proposed traveller’s site.
7. Lack of Amenities. There are no shops, Doctor’s surgeries or other amenities in the village. There is no daily public transport service in the village to provide for those without cars.
8. Proximity to gas main. The proposed site would be constructed directly over a gas main which runs only 1 metre underground. Given the known propensity of travellers to light fires on their sites (see 2 above), the risk to both travellers and local residents is considerable.
9. Sewerage. The existing sewerage infrastructure is inadequate. The construction of adequate sewerage for the two new residential developments either side of the village hall was problematic, as the developer will confirm. The proposed travellers sight will put additional strain on the system and pose a risk to pollution of the river less than 100 metres from the site.
10. Conservation Area. The site adjoins the boundary of the designated Conservation Area. The site, consisting of caravans, toilet block, commercial vehicles etc will destroy a beautiful view of the Yare Valley when approaching the village down Stocks Hill.
Unlawful and Anti-Social Behaviour. While law abiding travellers willing to integrate into the local community are to be welcomed, the recent history of unlawful and anti-social behaviour by travellers in Bawburgh does not bode well for any new travellers site in the village.

Hockering Lane has a school, increased traffic would pose a greater risk of accident \ injury.

There are no other access points thus increased traffic will lead to greater use of the lane.

The site is very close to a main gas pipe, the old site was burnt down, who is to say that this will not occur again, and the implications will be greater due to the pipeline.

Bawburgh has few facilities for a site and other sites closer to amenities would be better.

There was an increase in theft when the last site was opened, the area of the proposed site has many vulnerable people who could be exploited.

Why should be have another site as the last one was burnt down and generated no money for the council.

Hockering Lane is a dead end, not viable for any further passing traffic.
Residential housing lane, made up of private houses and Saffron housing, lots of children and adults walk this road daily, along with cyclits, parents with young children and dog walkers.
Hockering Lane is next to a Conservation area.
In use garages are at the end of Hockerign Lane used by residents daily.
Primary School on Hockering Lane, cars park along side of lane throughout its length from junction back to garages.
Would cause localised flooding and drainage will not cope.
Gas mains piping at end of lane.
Wildlife and environment would be seriously affected by any sort of traveller camp being built.


Use the existing transit camp next to longwater park and ride, it is already there, this would be a good alternative.
there is already a travellers site at the junction of Marlingford Road and Bawbugh Road, the village is already contributing to housing travellers, we do not support another site with the village.
The villagers have heard that the travellers camp is part of a deal in order to allow the building of 35 houses on Stocks Hill, it is felt this is under hand and not approproate at all.
The village would not be able to support more occupnats, the village already has a high number of vehicles passing/cutting through, this would only add to the already existing traffic problem which much of it travels way over the existing speed limits in the village.
For the local government to consider a travellers site at the end of a residential village lane, where there will be sited numerous vehicles of varied sizes, moving up and down our not very wide lane at all sorts of times of day, large gas bottles being sited and undoubtly illegal activity as there was at the transit site, to consider this ok to be granted in a residential village on a dead end lane is totally unacceptable adn absolutely not supported.

Hockering Lane is a dead end, not viable for any further passing traffic.Residential housing lane, made up of private houses and Saffron housing, lots of children and adults walk this road daily, along with cyclits, parents with young children and dog walkers.Hockering Lane is next to a Conservation area.In use garages are at the end of Hockerign Lane used by residents daily.Primary School on Hockering Lane, cars park along side of lane throughout its length from junction back to garages.Would cause localised flooding and drainage will not cope.Gas mains piping at end of lane.Wildlife and environment would be seriously affected by any sort of traveller camp being built.Use the existing transit camp next to longwater park and ride, it is already there, this would be a good alternative.there is already a travellers site at the junction of Marlingford Road and Bawbugh Road, the village is already contributing to housing travellers, we do not support another site with the village.The villagers have heard that the travellers camp is part of a deal in order to allow the building of 35 houses on Stocks Hill, it is felt this is under hand and not approproate at all.The village would not be able to support more occupnats, the village already has a high number of vehicles passing/cutting through, this would only add to the already existing traffic problem which much of it travels way over the existing speed limits in the village.For the local government to consider a travellers site at the end of a residential village lane, where there will be sited numerous vehicles of varied sizes, moving up and down our not very wide lane at all sorts of times of day, large gas bottles being sited and undoubtly illegal activity as there was at the transit site, to consider this ok to be granted in a residential village on a dead end lane is totally unacceptable adn absolutely not supported.

We strongly object to the proposed gypsy and traveller site, East of Hockering Lane. This land is at the end of a residential street and the site would essentially become part of Bawburgh village! Bawburgh Primary school is also on Hockering Lane and to allow a gypsy site in such close proximity to this is completely inappropriate.
Misuse of the river and village green is a huge concern. Residents have suffered many incidents of antisocial behaviour in recent years, especially those which reside at Bawburgh Mill.
There is already a number of gypsy sites in the area and another one is not welcome. The transit site near Longwater Park and Ride was closed recently. Surely this would be a better option for a residential set of gypsy pitches if they are needed in this area. Although if this was closed due to ongoing issues then why on earth should a new site closer to the residents of Bawburgh be allowed.

When making your deliberations, kindly consider the following concerns, road safety and traffic flow.

Pedestrian safety along Hockering Lane, this lane gets extremely busy when school opens and close, the lane has a footpath to one side only which gets obstructed by vehicles parking half on road half on path forcing pedestrians onto road. The proposed 6 pitches with 18 sub-pitches constitutes An awful lot of traffic movement and many will be commercial vehicles.

At times during summer months the village is overwhelmed with 200 to 300 picnicking day trippers to village green, river and mill pond which results in utter chaos, cars parked along Stocks Hill and into Hockering Lane, Harts Lane and New Road.

Traffic through the village has increased of late with the emergence of a short cut, traffic coming off the Watton Rd down Stocks Hill (recently been a fatality on this road) over bridge turning right into new Road and on to Bowthorpe then on to Dereham Road city bound.

South Norfolk Planning Authority are duty bound under the 1990 planning act to preserve the Bawburgh conservation area. This planning proposal goes against all that conservation means.

There are a number of reasons that I consider this proposal to be unnecessary, impractical, inappropriate and undesirable for the following reasons :

1. The caveat in the suitability conclusions state overwhelmingly reasons why the site is not suitable.

2. There are a number of existing sites in the Bawburgh area, one in Long Lane with the necessary facilities and which is unused.

3. As it is unused it must be assumed that it is not needed, therefore why is it necessary to increase the provision by an additional site close by.

4. Access will be difficult, particularly as it will be down the spur leg of Hockering Lane, which is narrow, winding and unsuitable.

5. I understand it is the same land owner/applicant for the Gypsy and Traveller site and the thirty five new houses off Stocks Hill and therefore assume that there is some sort of "trade off" to influence approval of the housing application, which must be questionable and not permitted.

The proposed site on Hockering Lane in Bawburgh is a wholly inappropriate location, it is the only site out of all sites referenced that is placed directly inside a village, Adjacent to a local population.

The location within the village is abhorrent. This is the most quiet area of the village. Children play in the street safely, there is a tight knit community surrounding the school. There are walks down by the river that are enjoyed by the community, families, dog walkers and tourists. This proposed site will completely change the dynamic of the area.

A site was proposed and scrapped at Cotessey due to 3 such sites in a 1 mile radius. The proposed site at Hockering Lane is within a mile of the scrapped Cotessey site. Therefore it also has the same situation where there are already enough sites in the local vicinity.

Bawburgh already has a traveler site. Why should we have to have a second site within the village. This is completely unacceptable. We already have our share of the responsibility and in the past have had to deal with the resulting problems from the existing site.

Regarding the existing site, it has been reported in the press that it was forced to close due to several issues at the site including: Officers being threatened and assaulted, out of control fires, theft of public property including portable toilets and waste bins, problems collecting rent. The existing site had to be cleared of waste and toxic materials on several occasions at the councils expense. Additional management and monitoring has been identified as being required. Why would a quiet road in a quiet part of the village be an appropriate place for a site that could have the same or similar issues? There is no mention in the assessment or evidence base on how this would be managed.

Bawburgh village is under conservation protection due to its historical nature. The new site is within meters of this area and undermines the value of the village.

The proposed site is adjacent to the River Yare. The river deserves to have environmental protection. There is a variety of wildlife that lives in the area. The additional disruption to wildlife is underestimated in the study. The environmental impact the site could have if any potential waste or spills from the associated vehicles were to enter the river is dangerous.

The land is on a flood plane. The field adjacent to the site has flooded in recent years. It has nearly flooded this year making the area completely waterlogged. The area for the site helps provide drainage to stop more flooding. Any residents on the site would be constantly worried that their site would be flooded and their belongings damaged. Any run off from the site will go straight into the water table and river. There is a fisheries down stream from the site and their stocks could be damaged by the pollution.

How will this site have drainage? There are no pipes leading to the area? There are no drainage mitigations that can be implemented at such a low ground level. There is no access to the current sewerage system.

The proposed site goes over a high pressure gas pipeline. Any damage caused by construction of the site, mismanagement of the site or potential residents of the site could be very dangerous. The plan has a 12m zone around the pipeline but who will police this policy? How will this be enforced? It cant be. This is very worrying.

Regarding the adverse impact on the landscape a few trees isn't going to mitigate the problem! The village is in a valley, the site area can be viewed from both main road entrances of the village as you enter. The site will be an eye sore and impact the beautiful countryside views that we currently have.

The road and access to the site is not suitable for the site. During weekends the road has cars parked along it. There is enough space for normal vehicles but that additional associated traffic both from site construction and the proposed residents will be too much for the road, there is no turning space for any large vehicles. It will transform what is currently a quiet cul-de-sac into a busy street. The road past the school equally is busy during drop off and pick up times. Parents park all the way along the street. The school bus used for swimming lessons can barely get down the road and has to reverse from the junction due to there being no where to turn the bus around. How can this road handle the site traffic?

There are no amenities within the village. The school is over-subscribed. There is a pub. There is no shop. The constraints analysis for the area acknowledges this but what about healthcare? It is already nearly impossible to get a doctors appointment and there are zero spaces at any NHS dentist anywhere.

As this is a traveler site, typically no CIL monies would be collected from the development. In turn this development would not contribute to the local infrastructure needs that would be created by its construction.

I acknowledge that the traveler community needs and deserve their space. They have a tight community and are unlikely to want to integrate into the existing community. Well we also have a tight community in the village and we deserve our space. The council is supposed to work for its constituents. You cannot throw our community under the bus for no good reason other than the land has been made available. Norfolk is a large county with many more appropriate locations (in fact we already have a more appropriate location within the village). Choose a better suited site.

I would like to place an objection to this site . I feel it is not ideal as it is next to an extremely busy main road . Knowing that they often have dogs running loose but also children . Also I feel it is an extremely inconsiderate decision on your behalf bearing in mind the close proximity of two houses .

1. Existing Provision in the immediate vicinity.
There is an existing site next to the Park & Ride on Long Lane. It is currently being improved following temporary closure due to occupants burning hazardous waste materials on site.

2. Proximity to housing.
The proposed site is the only one of the 10 sites listed which adjoins directly to existing housing.

3. Proximity to gas main.
The proposed site is positioned over a gas main (1 metre underground). This poses a very real and very dangerous risk to everyone given the tendency for travellers to light fires (see points 1 and 2 above).

4. School.
The proximity of the school and the large number of children/parents/staff using Hockering Lane makes the site unsuitable. The school is already heavily over-subscribed and could not accommodate the children living on the proposed traveller’s site.

5. Access.
The only access to the site is via Hockering Lane. It is totally unsuitable to accommodate the additional flow of traffic generated by the proposed site. The road is narrow and ends in a cul de sac. Large vehicles, eg school buses, cannot turn round and have to reverse along Hockering Lane. At school drop off and pick up times the road is extremely congested and hazardous.

6. Lack of Amenities.
The village does not have any shops, Doctor’s surgeries or other amenities. There is no daily public transport service in the village.

7. Designated Conservation Area
The site abuts a designated Conservation Area and will undoubtedly have a negative impact on the local wildlife/habitat.

8. Visual impact
The site will also have a very detrimental impact on the aesthetics of what is currently a very beautiful area.

9.Extra Traffic.
The proposal allows for visiting or transit travellers in addition on to permanent occupants. The number of vehicles travelling to and from the site will be much greater than the number of pitches.

10. Sewerage.
The village sewerage system is inadequate and problematic. This can be confirmed by developers whom have recently completed residential projects in the village.

11. Unlawful / anti-social behaviour.
The village hall has been the target of criminal behaviour several times in recent years.
Several unlawful trespasses requiring court orders to evict travellers occupying the village hall car park, oil theft, burglary and threatening behaviour towards residents.

12. Local Democracy.
140 residents of Bawburgh attended a meeting at the Village Hall on 16th February 2023 including the majority of residents of Hockering Lane. The proposed site was unanimously rejected

For all the above reasons, I object to the proposed travellers site in Hockering Lane, Bawburgh. (GNLP 5009)

We moved to Bawburgh in 2021 specifically to be in a quiet village with little traffic. The only congestion I have ever witnessed in the village is on Hockering Lane. I walk the dogs in fields close by at am & pm school times and see two lanes of traffic trying to pass each other outside a busy primary school. It worries me. I don’t think that area is suitable for any more traffic so close to the primary school. It could be so dangerous.

I think the road is far to narrow to accommodate this gypsy site, and it gets full of school traffic when the children are picked up from school.

- Safety issues for both travellers and residents of Hockering Lane and school children.
- One road to be crossed from proposed site to school. This already has a build up at school opening and pick-up times. Already it is over-used by parked cars, making Hockering Lane a single track road.
- Fire or major emergency anywhere along this road will mean that services will be severely limited.
-As well as above "significant" highway issues, there are heritage and landscape concerns expressed at public meeting Village Hall 16/2/23 to which no one from the Council attended though invited.
- Kadent gas main only a few feet below surface is a major concern.
- Already drainage and waste water an issue in the village – flood of 2019/20. Pollution of ground water, a concern.
- Concern re wildlife habitats – great crested newts, red kites, bats, badgers, muntjac.
- Concern re archaeological remains in said area.

There is no need for a gypsy/travellers site to be located in Hockering Lane, as there is already one off Marlingford Road leading to Easton.
Hockering Lane is to narrow as to be dangerous with excess traffic including caravans, transit vans and other transport using it. it is also unlit at night. There is also a school which is at full capacity. The facilities in Bawburgh are inadequate to support more families as there are no shops or safe footpaths which would lead to more traffic. Also, the proposed site is within a groundwater protection zone and has a gas main. This would add extra cost to developing the site. Money that could be better used elsewhere. Already the council has had to spend £125,000 to refit the transit site by the Park and Ride on Long Lane. There is also the issue of illegal activity (which happened at the transit site) of burning debris causing a certain amount of air pollution and not all the tenants were legal!
Also, could the bridge take the increase of heavy vehicles?
Already, during warm weather, the village green gets very crowded which has led to noise and bad behaviour, causing anxiety and stress to nearby residents. Extra development will only add to this!

Rightly or wrongly, the view of traveller sites is such that property values would decrease within an unknown radius of the site.
The local school would possibly be affected by the influx/outflow of pupils.
Already under strain NHS services/affected.
Who would be responsible for the cost of clearing any site contamination that may occur?

OBJECTIONS AND COMMENTS

1. Location to existing housing.
The proposed site is the only one of the 10 favored sites listed which directly borders the settlement boundary. The reasons for the temporary stopping place site at Long Lane, Bawburgh closure, noted in a cabinet meeting dated 01/06/2021 agenda item 12 included unsanctioned use, fly tipping and burning of waste, similar activities. if they were to take place would have a hugely negative impact on the current residents in the area.

2. Existing Provisions in the vicinity.
There is an existing site next to the Park & Ride on Long Lane. It is currently being improved following temporary closure. Creating permanent pitches could form part of the improvements. Others sites within close proximity include Brooks Green at Harford under 5 miles away and The Roundwell site just 2.6miles away

3. Proximity to gas main.
The proposed site is positioned over a gas main (1 metre underground). This poses a very real and very dangerous risk to everyone given the tendency for travellers to light fires based on the information noted in the report regarding the TSP on long lane.

4. School.
The proximity of the school and the large number of children/parents/staff using Hockering Lane makes the site unsuitable.

5. Access.
The ONLY access to the site is via Hockering Lane. This is the only safe road in Bawburgh for people to learn how to ride a bike often used by the school and local residents to do so. The road is narrow and ends in a cul de sac. Large vehicles, eg school buses, cannot turn round and have to reverse along Hockering Lane. At school drop off and pick up times the road is extremely congested and hazardous. The potential increase of large and commercial vehicles using this road proposes an increased risk of danger. It is totally unsuitable to accommodate the additional flow of traffic generated by the proposed site.

6. Lack of Amenities.
The village does not have any shops, Doctor’s surgeries or other amenities. There is no daily public transport service in the village.

7. Designated Conservation Area
The site abuts a designated Conservation Area. The site also directly borders a piece of land where the owners have been working extremely hard to improve the the land and increase wildlife activity. If this site was to go ahead it will undoubtedly have a negative impact on the local wildlife/habitat.

8. Visual impact The proposed site is visible when entering the village from the Watton Road/Stock Hill, New Road and Long Lane. The site will have a very detrimental impact on the aesthetics of what is currently a very beautiful area and village.


9.Extra Traffic.
The proposal allows for visiting or transit travellers in addition on to permanent occupants. The number of vehicles travelling to and from the site will be much greater than the number of pitches.

10. Sewerage.
The village sewerage system is inadequate and problematic. This can be confirmed by developers whom have recently completed residential projects in the village.

11. Unlawful / anti-social behaviour.
The village hall has been the target of criminal behaviour several times in recent years.
Several unlawful trespasses requiring court orders to evict travellers occupying the village hall car park, oil theft, burglary and threatening behaviour towards residents.

12. Local Democracy.
There would be significant risks to the Councils reputation if this site was given approval. 140 residents of Bawburgh attended a meeting at the Village Hall on 16th February 2023 including the majority of residents of Hockering Lane. The proposed site was unanimously rejected

13. Managing the site.
Given the difficulties to manage the TSP at Long Lane, a second site could also be as problematic . Improving to TSP to allow for permanent sites would take less managing, use less resources and require lower spending of council money.


For all the above reasons, I object to the proposed travellers site in Hockering Lane, Bawburgh. (GNLP 5009)

I admit I was quite surprised to see plans for a potential Traveller site at the end of Hockering Lane. This site would appear to be very unsuitable for development.

I note that there is no public transport into or out of the village. Pedestrian access is frankly dangerous. Any Travellers that move into the proposed site will have to use cars etc. These will all need to travel down Hockering Lane.

The site is at the end of a cul de sac. Hockering Lane is already nearly grid locked by the school traffic twice daily. The road becomes increasingly narrow towards its end, where the site is proposed. It is entirely unsuited to motorhomes or vehicles towing caravans. The combination of the school traffic, school children and additional traffic to the traveller site would be a potentially unsafe mix. The road is unlit at night further discouraging pedestrians.

Bawburgh already has a site catering to Travellers by the A47 Longwater Roundabout. Expansion of the area around this existing site would appear to be a far better location.

The site itself is directly adjacent to land that floods at least twice per year, right up to the fence of the land proposed. I am sure that if any site is to be built on this land, very close attention will need to be paid to preventing water run off into the meadow and river. I hope the costs of this will be carefully considered and added to the many other disadvantages of the site.

I consider this proposal to be unnecessary, impractical, inappropriate and undesirable for a number of reasons, as follows :

1. The caveat in the suitability conclusions state overwhelmingly reasons why the site is not suitable.

2. There are a number of existing sites in the Bawburgh area, one in Long Lane with the necessary facilities and which is unused.

3. As it is unused it must be assumed that it is not needed, therefore why is it necessary to increase the provision by an additional site close by.

4. Access will be difficult, particularly as it will be down the spur leg of Hockering Lane, which is narrow, winding and unsuitable,

5. I understand it is the same landlowner/applicant for the Gypsy and Traveller site and the thirty five new houses off Stocks Hill and therefore assume that there is some sort of "trade off" to influence approval of the housing application, which must be questionable and not permitted.

While agreeing with the need for suitable sites for gypsies and travellers, I question the effectiveness of the choice of site GNLP5009 because:
Access - no public access at present; Hockering Lane is narrow. It is congested especially when the local school opens and closes each schoolday. Residents of the site will need to use motor transport as there are no services within the village such as shops.
Environmental issues - The site may be on a flood plain; there is the possibility of contamination of local groundwater near the river; the local sewage system is overburdened as it is. The site will need oil for heating, power supply and sewage to be laid on. All of which could impact on groundwater in this low-lying area, as well as increasing the carbon footprint of the village.
Noise pollution for the site residents - there is a constant noise froom the A47 Southern Bypass which will be disturbing to those on the site and will be difficult to mitigate (and the erection of barriers to sound will be unsightly)

One positive is that a site may reduce the illegal commandeering by travellers of the local village hall car park which has been a problem in the last few years.

I believe the site is unsuitable. It would require -
Obtaining a right of way on a private road
The widening of Hockering Lane to take lorries, caravans and heating oil delivery trucks
Laying on of sewage, electricity taking into account the groundwater pollution risks
The erection of noise-reducing barriers (traffic noise Southern Bypass) around the site to protect the quality of life of its occupants

- Past experience of a site near the P+R in Bawburgh highlighted problems of filth and rubbish
- In addition the proposed site is near a residential area and the village school
- resident are concerned about noise and anti-social behaviour
- The road to the site is already quite congested at both the beginning and end of the school day. The road is unsuitable for extra traffic of large vehicles. As are other roads through the village.

The proposed site is inappropriate for a Gypsy and Traveller site. This is the quietest area of a conservation village, where children play and villagers walk their dogs. The Parish Council provide waste bins. The access via Hockering Lane is narrow, passes a school and the junction at Stocks Hill has an illegal site line.
There is already a Gypsy and Traveller site in the village currently undergoing refurbishment. Both sites should be combined at the Long Lane site.
The site is on the water meadows and is prone to flooding. None of the other proposed sites in the GNLP are near a village and all have better road access.

The proposed site is totally inappropriate in the conservation village of Bawburgh. The site is on a flood plain next to the River Yare. Many people from the village enjoy the flora and fauna of the countryside here.
To access the proposed site one has to pass the length of Hockering Lane. This is a residential road and also the site of the Village School. This has also created much traffic. The road is narrow and the "T" junction out onto Stocks Hill is dangerous in terms of sight line.
There are already many travellers sites within 1–2 miles and these should take priority rather than spoiling the picturesque village of Bawburgh.

The application refers to amenities in the village of which there are none apart from a gastro pub and school. There is no shop, regular bus route or main facilities so residents would be reliant on vehicles to access amenities on an already busy road system.

1. Poor Choice of location. Access is via a busy primary school and down a cul de sac.
2. Small village; roads are narrow. At peak times hockering lane is chaos and buses/oil tankers/delivery vans cannot get down the road
3. Conservation area threat
4. Village struggles with sewage/drainage; adding additional dwellings adds to the strain on these
5. Dog walking area will be lost
6. Natural habitat lost
7. Flooding risk
8. Noise issues
9. Loss of privacy
10. A fully operational site is down the road at costessey park and ride.
11. School already oversubscribed

I object to the proposed Gypsy and Traveller site proposal off Hockering lane and believe the site to be unsuitable for such development for the following reasons:

1. Overlooking / loss of privacy:
The proposed development would look directly into the two bedrooms at the front of my property. The proposed site is only 12 meters from my bedroom windows, this would negatively impact my privacy and enjoyment of my property.

2. Loss of amenities:
Access to the site would involve removing a parking and turning area and passing by a block of in-use garages. The garages are in the direct path of the proposed access. Any loss of these to improve access would amount to a loss of amenities and inadequate parking facilities left for local residents.

When considering a recent planning application by Saffron Housing Association for 2 No. bungalows on this land, Norfolk County Council Highways Authority expressed a requirement for the parking and turning area to be maintained as such indefinitely for the purpose of road safety. Please find this report attached.

3. Site access:
The site access is via a narrow piece of road with trees on one side and on-street parking for residents on the other. This is access to a small number of homes but isn’t suitable as a regularly trafficked road into a larger site.

A proposed access is through a former Anglian Water sewage works. When permission was granted for two bungalows on the land, it was subject to a site survey for contamination.

Looking further out, the site can only be accessed by two routes, neither of which are suitable for regular use by heavy vehicles. Access from Longwater is via a historic bridge which is protected as a scheduled monument. Access via Stocks hill involves a road where two cars can barely pass and through traffic calming bollards which narrow the road further.

4. Land boundary
Land owned by my property extends beyond the front of garage block and narrows any potential access.

5. Road safety:
Hockering Lane is a quiet residential cul-de-sac, frequently enjoyed by children playing in a safe space with minimal traffic, and dog walkers accessing the nearby permissive footpath.
The proposed access to the site would substantially increase the number of vehicles entering onto Hockering lane, past Bawburgh Primary School before passing onto a much narrower part of the road in order to access the site.
This narrower part of Hockering Lane is used extensively for resident’s on-street parking, and at school time, the entire length of the road is used for on-street parking.
With children playing in the area and coming to and from the school I would be concerned that an increase in traffic will greatly increase the risk a serious or fatal accident occurring along the road where a child comes out from between vehicles, is not seen due to the narrow road and is struck. The road is extremely congested at school drop off and pick up times and cannot cope with additional traffic.

6. Fear of crime:
South Norfolk Council published a Review of Bawburgh Temporary Stopping Place for Gypsies and Travellers on 11 February 2021. In this review they mention evidence of illegal activity, negative impact on the environment, theft of facilities, assault of council staff and an inability of the council to effectively manage the site. Given these short-fallings and the eventual closure of that site after a serious fire, there is a real fear that the same will happen at this site if the proposed development was to go ahead.

7. Nuisance:
Given the stated issues in the South Norfolk council Review of Bawburgh Temporary Stopping Place for Gypsies and Travellers dated February 11 2021 with cable stripping, fly tipping and burning rubbish at the site on Long Lane, Bawburgh. There is a high risk of noise and smoke from bonfires pollution the air and causing a nuisance to local residents. As it’s mandatory for a site to be lit, light pollution would also become a nuisance shining into bedroom windows of neighbouring properties.

8. Access to services:
The village has virtually no access to public transport (one bus, once a week) and has no footpath or cycle path connection to any neighbouring areas. This means that all access to employment, shops, 11+ education, and medical care would require use of a motor vehicle.
The nearest bus stop to the proposed site would require somebody to walk more than 1 mile along narrow, unlit country roads with no grass verges and compromised visibility for drivers.

9. Environmental impact:
The proposed development is within the yare valley river landscape, an area rich in wildlife and an important natural eco system. Any development here would have a negative impact on this delicate environment and would negatively affect the visual amenity.

The proposed development is on land that is indicated on Natural England mapping at being peat land. Peat land traps large amounts of carbon and if disturbed, can release this back into the atmosphere. It also retains a large amount of water, something that is of particular importance given the site directly borders a level 3 flood protection zone.

In the South Norfolk council Review of Bawburgh Temporary Stopping Place for Gypsies and Travellers dated February 11 2021 it was cited that “there is demonstrable evidence that cable stripping and other such activities to retrieve valuable metals for re-sale were common place on the site. Since opening, the site has had to be cleared of waste and toxic materials on several occasions. This has been at considerable cost to the Council. The clean-up of the site following its most recent closure resulted in 24 tonnes of material being removed”. They also cited that: “There is extensive evidence on the site that burning waste was a regular occurrence. These activities may have been a means of disposing the waste that had been fly tipped on the site and is likely to have been in contravention of the Environment Protection Act 1990 as the practice could constitute a statutory nuisance.”

There is a concern that if burning of rubbish or fly tipping of toxic materials was to occur on this site, it would lead to contamination of ground water that runs into the river Yare. This will pollute the watercourse and cause untold damage to the sensitive yare valley eco system and wildlife.

10. Cadent gas pipeline:
A high-pressure Cadent gas pipeline runs across the site. There is a concern that any development on this land risks damage to the pipeline and to the environment. Given that the South Norfolk council Review of Bawburgh Temporary Stopping Place for Gypsies and Travellers dated February 11 2021 states that “Closure of the site arose from reports of an out of control fire that occurred when waste was being burned, allegedly by residents.” Given the legal requirement of a clear zone around the pipeline, it’s an obvious but incredibly dangerous clear area where rubbish would be burned, potentially risking a catastrophic accident.

11. Site sustainability appraisal:
The sustainability appraisal conducted by Lepus Consulting did not recommend the site on Hockering Lane (Table 5.15) after taking into account mitigation. In addition, the Ordinance survey map that Lepus Consulting worked from does not accurately reflect the location of housing in the immediate vicinity – Bungalows meters from the site are missing from the map.

12. Local provision more suited to development:
The previously closed site at Long Lane, near the park and ride is undergoing refurbishment and would make a more suited site to develop. This site is in close proximity to public transport, shops, employment areas and a doctor’s surgery. There are also other sites within a close radius.

13. Increase in traffic:
Changing proposed road layout from a cul-de-sac to a road will increase traffic and road noise through a quiet area of the village.

14. Local democracy:
140 Bawburgh residents attended a meeting at on 16 February. A vote was held and residents voted unanimously against the proposal.

15. Road noise and pollution:
Due to the close proximity of the A47 to the site, noise mitigation will be required to make the site habitable. This could be difficult and costly given the geography of the site and location of the road.

Bawburgh site is the only one proposed within a village setting and directly opposite existing residential areas. Why have the Bawburgh Villagers been singled out?

The gas main running directly underneath the planned site is also a major concern. I’d hate to see how many fatalities a breach to this would cause. Presumably this is why the site planned is by far the largest. Making this an inefficient use of the land.

The private road used for site access will need maintaining and managing. A cost that will ultimately come back to the tax payers of South Norfolk.

Ive seen no evidence of how the effects of this site will impact local schools, doctors, dentists and roads. All of which are currently quaking under the pressures of over development already.

RRR Consultancy’s GTAA 2022 only identified a need for 53 pitches for a period between 2022 and 2038. The whole plan is delivering 62. 60 of which will be delivered between years 1 & 5. There has been no mention of why this is happening in such a short timescale.

The Traffic along Hockering Lane is shocking. Do not make the problem worse. Especially outside the primary school. I’d hate to be the person telling a parent why their child has been killed. It’s only a matter of time, especially if this development is allowed to go ahead. Bawburgh already has a history of speeding within the village, sadly one fatality in the so called traffic calmed area of Stocks Hill.

Not the place for any type of development because of the roads. Hockering Lane is not wide and has the school. The Lane can be incredibly busy. Apart from residents vehicles, there's school traffic at all times of the school day, the coach that transports pupils to activities, delivery vehicles, be they post, oil tankers, parcels etc. The entrance to the site already has traffic for the garages, recycling centre, dog walkers who arrive in vehicles and fisherpeople in the season. There is no off road parking for the properties nearest the site and no turning space into the site.

The road to access the site is narrow , there is already problems due to parking for the school.
The meadows and river are very scenic , this site will have a huge impact on the environment.
Bawburgh does not have the amenities for this site , no transport links, no shops, roadways and bridge are not suitable for the traffic.
There is a gasline on this land that will impact on use of the area.
Of all 10 proposed sites this is the least logical, others already have infrastructure in place and are NOT in a village setting

While I appreciate the need for such facilities, there are several concerns that must be addressed.

Firstly, the proposed location is too close to the local school. It is well known that such sites can often bring with them a range of problems, such as increased traffic, noise, and pollution. This would undoubtedly, among other things, have a negative impact on the children's learning and could compromise their safety.

Secondly, the proposed site has limited access, which would create problems for both the travellers and the wider community. With limited access, it may be difficult for emergency services to reach the site quickly in the event of an accident or incident.

Thirdly, the proposed site is located in an area that contains rare species and is environmentally sensitive. It is well documented that traveller sites can have a negative impact on the local environment, particularly if they are not managed correctly. This could potentially damage the local ecosystem, which would be a loss for both the community and the wider environment.

There are more suitable options available for the proposed site that are closer to amenities and services. By choosing a different location, we can ensure that the travellers have better access to the resources they need, while also minimising the impact on the local community and environment.

In light of these concerns, I urge you to reconsider the proposed site and explore more appropriate alternatives.