Please consider the following objections to the GNLP

Reedham

Although the proposed sites are not currently predicted to be at risk from flooding, large parts of Reedham are within the “Land projected to be below annual flood level in 2050” including the sewerage plant, roads, railway, pubs and other businesses, meaning that well within the lifespan of any new development the village may no longer be viable, I suggest this reason alone makes additional large developments in Reedham unsuitable. It is very surprising that the “Lead Local Flood Authority” has entered a response of “No comments”

The “village clusters” approach does not make sense when the Climate Change Statement is taken into account, the entire principle is flawed, the approach used for the Joint Core Strategy was much more sustainable.

The consultation document states;

“Reedham is not clustered with other settlements as the school catchment does not extend to adjoining villages. The school currently has spare capacity.”

How can Reedham be a “cluster” of one village? The school currently has pupils from Freethorpe, Cantley and Brundall, how does this indicate a catchment of Reedham only? Any reliance on school places as a justification for development should be questioned, there are no guarantees that housing will bring children to the village, the recent 24 dwelling development of a JCS site (Red 1) in the village has so far only resulted in one additional pupil at Reedham school. Parents have a choice of schools in the area. Any benefit is lost in any case after a few years as children grow up and leave the primary school.

The consultation states;

“there is a total of 28 additional dwellings with planning permission on small sites”

For a small rural village developing these dwellings alone would give a sustainable amount of growth, further large developments are not required and indeed risk changing the character of this historic village.
There is an emerging neighbourhood plan which may provide a more suitable proposal for Reedham, no sites should be allocated until the neighbourhood plan has been adopted.

The sewerage system in the village already requires tankers to remove material, sometimes daily.

The narrow roads to and around the village are not suitable for a permanent increase in traffic.


GNLP1001

The farmland to the east of this site will be accessed for large machinery through any residential development on this site.
The site is outside the development boundary.
Contrary to GNLP Policy 2 issue 1
Contrary to GNLP Policy 7.4 347

GNLP3003

The only possible vehicle access to this site is not wide enough with no scope to widen without purchase of private garden land, there is absolutely no reason to believe that this would be possible. Highways confirm it is not feasible to provide a safe access as the carriageway is narrower than required for 2-way traffic and there is limited site frontage to the highway.
The site is outside the development boundary.
Contrary to GNLP Policy 2 issue 1
Contrary to GNLP Policy 7.4 347