Enlargement on why the perceived need for additional housing in Reedham outlined in the GNLP is flawed

1. Reedham Primary School: -

• Until recently Reedham did not have a pre-school nursery therefore nursery age children attended Freethorpe Nursery from where on attaining school admission age they transited to Freethorpe Primary School on the same site.
• Since the establishment of a private pre-school nursery at Reedham Primary School (soon to be integrated into the school) children starting there are transiting into Reedham Primary School on attaining school admission age.
• In the past the reputation of Reedham Primary School was diminished, however under the present headship the school is thriving and is attracting pupils from adjoining villages.
• The present number of children attending Reedham Primary is greater than is being indicated and it is highly likely that if the current trend continues the school will be up to capacity before any additional houses are built.

2. Train travel: -

• One of the reasons put forward within the GNLP for the building of houses in Reedham is the fact that it has a railway station and therefore people will use the railway to travel to and from the village especially for employment purposes.
• The reality of this is that only 6% of people travelling from Reedham for employment purposes do so by train meaning that 94% are travelling by private vehicle and in most cases with only one occupant per vehicle.
• Unless one works within walking distance of the station it is of no use arriving in the centre of say Norwich when your place of employment is on one of the various business or retail parks on the outskirts of the city.
• If partners within a household work in different locations this immediately means two single occupied vehicles in daily use.
• Even if only one partner works a second vehicle becomes a necessity for shopping, school runs etc because of the remoteness of Reedham.
• With all Norfolk District Councils and the County Council pledging to reduce their carbon emissions and to improve air quality it is inconceivable that any consideration would be given to unnecessary additional housing in remote village locations knowing what the impact on the environment would be. Particularly when that location is served by a road system that is rapidly becoming unfit for purpose.

3. Perceived need for extra housing: -

• In 2011 Broadland District Council consulted under the Site Allocations DPD within the Joint Core Strategy on a shortlisted site in Reedham (Red 1) for 15-20 units to meet Reedham’s perceived housing needs up to 2026.
• The Site Allocations DPD was adopted on 21 April 2016 and in May 2016 Broadland District Council granted Planning Permission for 24 dwellings on a larger site than the one consulted on.
• In 2018 24 new houses and bungalows were built on Red 1 in Reedham, of these 25% remain unsold to date and one has now been reduced in price by £35k. This certainly does not demonstrate a need for additional houses to be built.
• Under a Section 106 agreement of the 24 houses, two houses were allocated for rental to persons wanting to live in Reedham who were either born there or had other strong family connections with the village. In reality no one came forward and they were allocated to people who wanted a house anywhere, not specifically in Reedham.
• With the large number of houses built in Reedham over the past 20 years there is no need for any new large sites to be allocated prior to 2038 and any perceived needs of Reedham under the GNLP can be more than met from windfall sites and a slight adjustment to the settlement boundary to incorporate the sites put forward in Church Road and Witton Green.