Site Map

Object

Representation ID: 24574

Received: 08/02/2023

Respondent: Mrs Claudia Dickson

The plans for the fly-over do not currently include a pedestrian footway. There is no safe pedestrian route for children to access school, either Lingwood or Acle. There is no safe pedestrian route for residents to access local shops, either Lingwood or Acle. There is no safe pedestrian route for residents to access local green space at Lingwood, Acle, or North Burlingham. In order to access any local facilities a vehicle is needed. This is contrary to the Government's Green agenda, and sustainable transport. I would not like to live here so why is it acceptable for Gypsies or Travellers.

Object

Representation ID: 24584

Received: 11/02/2023

Respondent: Mrs Alice Farrow

Considering who this is designed for you have not considered their safety considering this is near an extremely busy section of road and will be even busier when/if the new road is built.

Object

Representation ID: 24637

Received: 23/02/2023

Respondent: Mr Martin Johnson

This site will be incredibly noisy with large lorries making use of the junction to go to Cantley along with all of the traffic using the A47 flying past at 70+ mph.
I am not sure this is a suitable place for any human beings to be residing.

Object

Representation ID: 24761

Received: 06/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Paul Kitley

I have lots of concerns about this project. How can you house families next to a main road with a proposed 70mph limit, it is dangerous. What about children roaming onto the road or dogs, which traveller sights normally have lots of. These type of homes are also thin walled by design and it is unfair to put them next to a major road. This is a danger to them and road users. The proposed sight is also in clear view of the road which spoils the landscape. What about flooding too it is a high risk flood area.

Object

Representation ID: 24813

Received: 07/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Ash King

The proposed traveller site would be dangerous for children, being in such close proximity to the dual carriageway, and which will have a speed limit of 70mph. Loose dogs could also stray onto the dual carriageway. Sewerage services are not close by and would be expensive to install. The site would be inaccessible directly by footpath meaning that vehicles would always be needed. The local Doctors Surgery is already full so could not cope with the Travellers influx. The site also lies on land which is historically prone to flooding. Surely there must be somewhere more suitable than this?

Object

Representation ID: 24841

Received: 08/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Christopher Charles

The GNLP5014 Policy Map appears to have been created in isolation to the road improvement details. The overall road appears in the proposals however the supporting infrastructure and services for the road improvements have been ignored. The proposed site for pitches is over the road improvement proposed soakaways as listed on the Drainage and Surface Water Plans. Additionally it conflicts with the maintenance access to these soakaways. Therefore I object to the proposal based on the compatibility with the road improvement scheme.

Object

Representation ID: 24855

Received: 09/03/2023

Respondent: Mr MIchael Plumb

Proximity to the complex, busy road junctions where Particulate Matter emissions are deposited each time a vehicle accelerates, brakes will ensure Travellers’ exposure to danger and likely illness (lung, respiratory, cardiovascular disease).
None Exhaust emissions (brake, tyre, road surface wear materials) become airborne by traffic induced turbulence and rainfall. These are equally hazardous, toxic threats.
NCC decision to wilfully expose Travellers to these dangers is unacceptable and inhuman. They would not subject taxpayers to such jeopardy.

Object

Representation ID: 24878

Received: 11/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Mark Winfield

Site location is unsuitable:
1. On all previous versions of this map, the 2.48 ha area highlighted for GNLP5014 was designated as a "drainage feature" to help "local flooding"? While this may have been an attenuation site for occasional heavy rainfall, it was clearly there to manage excess surface water, contrary to the site being "not at risk of surface water flooding" and the green coding given in the site assessment?
2. The map shows the rural aspect to the site with the local residents becoming totally overwhelmed by the introduction of 30+ families?

Object

Representation ID: 24883

Received: 11/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Stephen Farrow

I feel that the propose site GNLP5014 is totally disproportionate for the size of the existing community and they would be completely overwhelmed. An alternative site at Postwick Park & Ride has all the necessary infrastructure needed for the Travellers.

Object

Representation ID: 24914

Received: 12/03/2023

Respondent: Mr David Charles

It was noted by a long term resident of North Burlingham, having lived here for over 65 years , that the reason the original A47 had street lighting, which was continued when the road was dualled thirty years ago , that the area had its own Eco-climate and was prone to heavy fog throughout the winter time when weather conditions were poor, and therefore it is not a healthy site for people to live on, particularly as they will have lighting disrupting their sleep all night long for 365 days a year.

Object

Representation ID: 25014

Received: 14/03/2023

Respondent: Mrs Gillian Carass

When looking at the map it only highlights the absolute madness of putting a travellers site in this location. The proposed 30 caravan site completely outnumbers the neighbouring dwellings, there is no provision of a footpath anywhere near this location, the air pollution and noise would surely not make this a desirable site for anyone to live. In fact I am shocked to think that my local council would even consider that this area was suitable for any sort of habitable dwelling.

Object

Representation ID: 25015

Received: 14/03/2023

Respondent: Miss Sally FitzGibbon

The land is not appropriate it is too close to the A47. With high speed traffic and the heavy lorry traffic especially during the beet run season mixed with children and dogs is a disaster waiting to happen.
Acle Road leading back into Lingwood does not have suitable pedestrian needs, there are some tight blind bends and traffic is likely to increase along this route with the closing of the Lingwood Road/A47 junction as part of the A47 dualling.

Object

Representation ID: 25027

Received: 12/03/2023

Respondent: Penny Morgan

The map clearly shows the proximity of the site to major roads and linking roads. Placing a site so close to major roads will expose residents to unacceptable levels of pollution both in terms of air quality and noise. The safety of the residents will be in question next to a fast road; road users safety may also be compromised by poorly secured animals running onto the road or children playing near the road.

Object

Representation ID: 25136

Received: 20/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Raymond martin

Why are the council looking to spend a considerable amount on this proposal at a time when they are looking to save as much as possible at this time.
There is no provision for social welfare at the site. No easy access to doctors, dentist, shops of any description. Nor any recreational facilities.

Object

Representation ID: 25150

Received: 20/03/2023

Respondent: Mr Tim Knights

The current Site Assessment process analysis is only considering outdated design drawings for the A47 improvement (land which includes site GNLP5014) made several years ago. This clearly indicates the lack of “early engagement” and communication between the planners and major stakeholders, in this case Highways Authority. Such engagement is required according to the Planning Authorities own policies and according to government policy (as identified in Appendix A of the Norwich SCI).