I am writing to express my objections to the proposals to build 66-88 new homes in Reedham as detailed in the GNLP.

There are a number of issues that apply to both proposed sites (GNLP 1001 and GNLP 3003). These are:

1. Housing recently constructed adjacent to the proposed site GNLP 1001 has sold very slowly. Indeed, much is still not sold (see Right Move website where a number of properties are still advertised for sale). The building of these properties has also proceeded increasingly slowly given the relatively small number of properties. Some properties are still to be completed. I believe that this indicates low demand. How then can any further housing be justified at this time.

2. The sewerage system in the village does not adequately support existing housing, let alone the additional dwellings proposed. Tankers take sewerage away from the site in Holly Farm Road virtually every day and have been doing so for an extended period. Tankers can also be seen going to and from the site multiple times on individual days. This is very concerning without the prospect of the proposed new housing and indicates a serious issue with the sewerage system in the village. Additionally, in parts of the village (Wilton Green for example) drains get blocked resulting in flooding. Clearly Anglian Water are likely to be in favour of additional housing in Reedham which will bring additional income from water rates. I do not believe that these issues have been highlighted by or with Anglian Water when they were contacted regarding the proposed developments.

3. The roads to and within the village are not adequate given the amount of additional traffic that will come with these proposed new dwellings. They are windy, narrow country lanes in the most part. This would be clear if it was to be examine ‘on the ground’ rather than just be looking at maps. I do not believe a detailed examination of the roads in the village and surrounding area has been undertaken. I am not suggesting the roads should be widened as this will alter the character of the area. I am saying that additional dwellings should not be built as this will add to the burden on the roads.

4.Public transport serving the village is not adequate for current inhabitants, yet alone the increase in numbers that will come with more housing. The bus service has been reduced over the past year. One bus a day Monday - Friday is hardly adequate. The train service has been very unreliable and continues to be so. The service is also infrequent when it does run during the day, where trains are 2 hours apart. Further housing will add to burdens on the transport system.

5. Facilities were much better in Reedham in the past. Not so good now for current numbers, yet alone increased numbers resulting from proposed housing development. There is currently no cash point in the village. We have a shop, but it in no way does this cater adequately for more than odd items. Main shopping has to be done elsewhere. The doctors surgery only opens 4 half days a week. This recently increased from 3 half days but it is still very difficult to get an appointment due to the numbers of people it serves. With more people living in the village as a result of this proposed new dwellings this situation will undoubtedly become worse.

6. Additional housing threatens to seriously alter the character of the village. Reedham is a beautiful Broadland village popular with tourists. Additional housing could bring demand for street lighting, footpaths and other changes that will seriously alter the character of the village.

7. The GNLP incorrectly states the number of vacancies at the village school. The headmaster corrected the figure, which is considerably less, at the Parish Council meeting on 10th February this year. Over the last year numbers at the school have been boosted. In any case, having more housing in the village does not automatically mean there will be more children, unless there is a condition that housing can only be occupied by families with children of the age that can attend the school! Parents may also chose to send their children to a neighbouring village.

8. Water supply capacity in the village has been shown to be inadequate. I believe that the water main capacity has not been increased for around 20 years despite the increase in the size of the village. With the proposed additional housing this situation would worsen. When the parish church caught fire water had to be pumped from a nearby dyke as the water pressure was insufficient to extinguish the fire. The water supply was also insufficient to extinguish a fire at Pettitts last year.

9. Reedham is an environmentally important and sensitive area. Building more houses could adversely affect this by affecting habitats. This is unacceptable.

10. Set on the River Yare, Reedham is potentially at risk from flooding. While the proposed site are above river level at present, with the likely increase in sea and, consequently, river level going forward, it has been stated that large parts of the village could be under water by 2050 (see Cimate Central map in Norwich Evening News 22 Jan 2020) Therefore I believe it is irresponsible to build the housing proposed for Reedham in the GNLP. There are many other sites outside Reedham more suitable and sensible to take additional housing, if indeed this is required.

11. Reedham is an environmentally sensitive area with wildlife that needs to be protected. Additional housing could diversely affect this with destruction of habitats.

Proposed site GNLP 3003

Access to this plot relies on obtaining third part land given the restricted visibility from this, the only viable vehicular access to the site. Given this I question why this site has been identified as suitable.

Proposed site GNLP 1001

I believe this site was designed as recreational in plans approved for the Barn Owl Close development. How can this be developed now therefore.

General Additional Points

There is nothing in the plan regarding the proposed housing being carbon neutral. If the proposed housing is not to be carbon neutral this will have an adverse effect on this environmentally sensitive area, another reason why the proposed housing should not be built.

Given that a number of houses have been built in the village in recent months I believe these should be deducted from the total number of houses proposed in the GNLP for Reedham. Indeed any further ad hoc housing built going forward should be deducted. Otherwise the village will in fact end up with considerably more houses than those specified in the plan. This means even more substantial adverse effects on the village, environment and burdens on the infrastructure.

Please ensure that my comments are included with others received as part of the consultation on the GNLP.