Reepham Town Council

Reepham has several events planned for the Jubilee weekend! EVERYONE is invited to come and celebrate the Queen’s Jubilee.

Sunday 3rd June

10.30am in St Mary’s Church, Reepham -A service of Thanksgiving for the Queen is to be held

12 – 2pm in the newly refurbished Town Hall, Church Street, Reepham -

A (Bring and Share) BIG Lunch is being held

bring a plate of ‘finger food’ to share with others. Refreshments will be provided.

The Reepham Rover has been booked to help anyone needing assistance to get to and from these Sunday events. All Rover bookings / enquiries to Jo Boxall (Town Clerk) on 01603 873355 or by email on clerk@reephamnorfolk-tc.gov.uk

Monday 4th June

From 1- 4pm on Stimpson’s Piece.

Enjoy a traditional village Fete. Bring a picnic! With Fancy Dress Competition and prizes. Dance displays, Arena events, Fun games and a varity of stalls, BBQ, refreshments and bar.

From 7 -11pm on the Scout Field, Smugglers Lane

Live Music with refreshments, a BBQ and Bar. During the evening a beacon will be lit to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee.

The following is a local policing update for the Reepham neighbourhood

Weekly crime summary 20-27 April 2012

Overview from Broadland Policing Commander

Historically at this time of year we traditionally see a rise in thefts from gardens with anything from cycles, tools, garden ornaments, pots and even hanging baskets and plants becoming an attractive option for thieves. Quite often residents will have expensive equipment and items in their garden so it’s worthwhile investing in security for sheds and outbuildings.

A decent padlock and a battery-powered shed alarm are cost-effective ways to help protect your property. Most alarms cost just a few pounds and let off a considerable noise which could help deter would-be thieves. I would also encourage residents to property mark valuables, making it harder for criminals to sell on while also helping police to identify recovered stolen property. Finally, I would urge householders to remain vigilant, look out for neighbours and report any incidents of suspicious activity to police on 101.

Chief Inspector Carl Edwards

Please note the information contained within the crime summary is information suitable for public distribution and does not include certain categories which may have personal privacy or data protection implications. Crimes may not be reported to us until well after the event.

“Residents are reminded that in the Station Road car park there are recycling bins for glass, old clothes and shoes, books and paper. The Town Council receives money in exchange for use on local projects, so please use these bins whenever you can.

We also have in the Town, charity recycling shops at the Bircham Institute in the Market Place and Scrapbox on Collers Road; please support these if you can. There are some items such as electrical goods which these cannot take; the best way to dispose of such items if in good condition is to take them to a large charity shop.

If you have such items but have difficulty in getting to a town such as Dereham, or would like advice on recycling, pleae contact Councillor Rose on edwin.rose@btinternet.com or 01603 872422″

Please note that all bottles must be placed in the bottle bins, the council employees will not take away bags of bottles left in the car park. Plate glass will not be taken away under any circumstances, it should not be left between the bins as this is dangerous.

Highway Community Rangers visit Reepham during the year

They carry out maintenance works identified by the Highway Inspector and would welcome any additional tasks which you feel need attention while they are in the area.

Typical tasks which can be carried out by Rangers are: -

• • Side out a carriageway or footway ( where an encroachment of silt, debris and weeds etc has reduced the width of the carriageway or footway)
  • Potholes (mostly identified by inspectors but you may wish to make us aware of the locations which are of concern)
  • Clear mud and soil from the carriageway (predominantly in rural areas where farm activity has left  small deposits on the highway)
  • Hand sweep carriageway or footway (the routine sweeping service will continue to be provided by the District Council)
  • Trim hedge to expose sign etc. (purely to free up sign visibility, more significant encroachments can be dealt with via consultation with the landowner)
  • Soil and seed verge (suitable in the spring where localised damage has occurred. Not a long term solution to persistent parking)
  • Strim verge grass (does not affect scheduled Grass cutting but in addition to improve visibility on bends and junctions)
  • Rod and flush drain (offlets and the like at the side of the road which become blocked with silt and weeds)
  • Clean out gully (digging out by hand the slotted iron drain covers predominantly situated in the edge of the carriageway
  • Clear grip (cuttings in the verge to clear standing water from the carriageway. Additional cleaning does not affect the cyclic cleaning schedule of these)
  • Wash sign, bollard or reflector post ( does not affect the scheduled annual sign cleaning)
  • Repair minor kerb defect (loose kerbs can be reset and chipped kerbs can be repaired. Kerb replacement can not be done by Rangers due to our safe digging practice)
  • Repair minor footway surface defects (footway potholes or changes in surface height can be cut out and replaced with fresh material)

Should you wish to add any work for completion by the Rangers please email these to highways@norfolk.gov.uk including RANGER and REEPHAM in the subject title. Please provide as much information as possible including the exact location and specific concerns. highways would be grateful to receive your response no later than a week prior to the programmed visit. We aim to provide feedback on the work which has been carried out during the visit this will follow within a few weeks. Alternatively you can contact the Clerk who will notify Highways.

Reepham Town Council contacted Broadland District Council in March requesting an update on the LDF process and received this response:

‘we are still going through the process of assessing sites in the light of comments received, with a view to having a consultation exercise on “preferred options” this autumn.  However, it is also possible that we will have a short specific consultation exercise on a few sites that have been raised by landowners etc as part of the last consultation, including a couple of sites in Reepham.  This has not yet been finalised, but would probably be in May / June.’

Reepham Town Council discussed the plans for the Local Development Framework at the last Planning Committee meeting which was held on the 22nd November 2011. Minutes from this meeting are available to view under Planning Committee Minutes. The Council submitted the following response to Broadland District Council:

REEPHAM TOWN COUNCIL RESPONSE TO LDF PROPOSALS:

Dear Sir

Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) – ‘Shortlisted Sites’

Local Development Framework

Deadline for response:  5.00pm on Monday 19^th December 2011

We write this letter following a planning meeting at the Town Hall on Tuesday 22 November 2011 when 54 members of the public attended and 24 members of the public spoke in response to the above consultation.  In addition, Counsellors have been approached individually by residents of Reepham about the above matter.

Proposals for consultation

The proposed site allocations shortlisted site for Reepham, within the Broadland District Council Local Development Framework, shows three sites shortlisted as follows:

1.    Reepham 1:  A site showing potentially 200 units on 8.7 hectares (approximately 30 dwellings per hectare) identified as Cawston Road / Wood Dalling Road, annexed onto the North Eastern end of the Town and outside the existing settlement limit and being built upon open farmland.

2.    Reepham 2:   A site showing potentially 250 units, on 11.9 hectares (approximately 30 dwellings per hectare) identified as ‘Dereham Road’, again annexed to the existing settlement limit and being built upon open farmland.

3.    Rep 1:  A site proposed for mixed use of residential and employment where Stony Lane and Station Road are located, for approximately 10 dwellings on 2.8 hectares (approximately 10 dwelling per hectare).

Reasons for objections made by the Town to the proposed sites known as Reepham 1 and

Reepham 2:

In the Joint Core Strategy (Policy 14) there are approximately 100 – 200 new homes proposed for Reepham up to 2026 (subject to overcoming sewage capacity constraints), with the encouragement of appropriate job growth.

In addition, it must be remembered that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of ‘sustainable’ development.  ‘Sustainable development’ means development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.  It… is the core principle underpinning planning.  (p.3 of the Draft National Planning Policy Framework).

Members of the public and the Town Council are of the view that two of the sites will result in a detrimental impact upon the Town and are unsustainable for the following reasons:

1.1    The proposed sites known as Reepham 1 and Reepham 2 result in an ‘over-allocation’ in terms of numbers of housing for Reepham, as the two sites are for a total of 450 houses when the existing policy is for between 100 and 200 new homes proposed up to 2026. This is not ‘justified’ nor is it ‘sound’.

1.2   There are too many houses in each group known as Reepham 1 and Reepham 2.

1.3   The over-allocation is likely to prejudice the long term planning of the Town and blight  future development for it and does not take into account the needs of future generations of inhabitants of Reepham and so it does not fit into ‘sustainable’ planning.  For example, the building to the North of Dereham Road will mean that the Town will not be able to build a ‘relief road’ around it in the future, to avoid heavier traffic being funnelled through the Town centre (from future development in neighbouring Towns and within the Town itself).  This area of land must be kept clear for a future corridor.

2.1  The number of houses allocated to the area of land is at the upper end of the density requirement.  Within Reepham 1, the Local Authority have already included landscaping to the North and Western ends of the site.   Within Reepham 2, significant landscaping has been added around its edges.  This evidences that the Local Authority already recognise that the sites will result in a detrimental visual impact.

2.2  In addition, annexing large areas for development to the existing Town of Reepham in large contained areas results in the Town becoming another Thorpe Marriot type of build and puts it in danger of losing its character and its visual beauty.

3.  Both sites do not relate to the existing facilities of the Town in a sustainable way as follows:

3.1  Each site is isolated to the existing settlement as they are designed to be ‘self contained’.

3.2  As the sites are large and are annexed onto the existing Town at each end they will, more likely than not, result in continued reliance on travelling by car.  This will result in a greater carbon footprint for a Town that has been working hard to reduce its carbon footprint in the last few years.

3.3  As the two sites are at a distance from the Town Centre, it is more likely than not (and in particular this applies to Reepham 1) that residents will use their cars to exit the site and, as they are in their cars, they are more likely to travel to Aylsham or Dereham to shop, rather than using the shopping facilities within the Town.

3.4  New residents on these large proposed developments would in reality be working and travelling in and out of Reepham to Norwich, making the Town more ‘commuter’ in nature causing it to lose its sense of identity, sense of community spirit and sense of history

3.5  There is no potential to deliver community facilities to the Town.  The Town requires better infrastructure to include pavements where there are none (i.e. to the High School and 6^th Form College) and at the moment, there is no potential to realise the Town’s infrastructure needs through the proposed development on either site.

4.     The Government’s objective within the National Planning Policy Framework is to delver the right community services, schools and other services to meet local needs.  The present proposals do not appear to have considered community services at all.  For example the existing school facility is at full capacity now and there is no viable regular bus route into Norwich or Kings Lynn to transport new residents to their likely place of work.  In addition, Reepham already has a sufficient number of allotments to offer its residents.  In addition, should space be offered as an extension to the Town’s cemetery, the management cost would add an unwelcome financial burden to the rate payer of Reepham.  The offer of community services has not been made through a consultation process with the Town.

5.  It is not the case that the two proposed sites would have less impact on the landscape and environment than other options for the following reasons:

5.1  The two sites are not in keeping with the definition of sustainable planning to protect and enhance our natural, built and historic environment within the Draft National Planning Policy Framework.  The housing will encroach onto open countryside and neither Reepham 1 nor Reepham 2 are in keeping with the form and character of the surrounding landscape around Reepham, adversely impacting upon that open landscape.

5.2  It is also not in keeping with the Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning Document.  In particular there will be a loss of; open countryside, walks / bridle ways, wildlife and tree species.

5.3  There is an adverse environmental impact.  Statistically, one household is known to have 10 vehicular movements in and out in one day.  Multiply that by 100 to 450 houses and this confirms significant congestion and pollution when developing large sites.

5.4  There is an additional adverse impact on the Town’s carbon footprint from the use of solid fuel and oil as the Town has no gas supply.

6.  One of the reasons provided for the short listing of the sites known as Reepham 1 and Reepham 2 was that the Local Authority believed that the two sites would provide safe vehicular access.  This is not the case for the following reasons:

6.1  Entrances and exits to both sites will result in ‘choke points’.

6.2  Cawston Road where Reepham 1 is intended to be built is already a dangerous stretch of road.   Cars are currently being recorded as travelling too fast along that stretch by our Community Speedwatch Team and one child has already been hit.  There would be a significant risk to the general public with a jump in the increased usage of that road.

7. In respect of Core Strategy Policy 14 there exists a servicing constraint of the safe disposal of waste water resulting in:

7.1   A real risk of contamination to the Wensum due to the volume of proposed housing.  The existing pipe work system is struggling to cope with the existing housing and there are already problems with the disposal of waste water.

7. 2  In addition, the existing sewerage system is already overloaded.  Residents reported existing problems with effluent escaping onto land to the South of the Town with the current sewage system being inadequate.  The Town’s system will not be able to cope with additional sewage from either the Reepham 2 or Reepham 1 sites.

8.  Other issues raised as having a detrimental impact upon the existing Town were as follows:

8.1 Problems with the water supply (pressure and quality) as there are existing problems with this in houses surrounding the Reepham 1 site.

8.2  Problems with the existing electricity supply.

8.3 Residents also reported concern about the emergency services response times being adversely impacted resulting in problems with safety and an adverse impact to the Townspeople.

9.  The sites Reepham 1 and Reepham 2 reflect a site selection consultation carried out by Broadland during March to September 2009 and is out of date in current national policy terms regarding countryside protection and sustainable transport set out in the draft NPPF document.

Reepham Town Council would like to remind the Local Planning Authority that a number of local authority plans and proposals have recently been rejected by the Minister Eric Pickles, due to local opposition not being taken into account by the Local Planning Authority and it is strongly recommended that the Local Authority considers the new effect of the Localism Bill when considering Reepham Town and the Town Council’s response to the proposed development sites.

The Town Council acknowledge that it is important for some development to take place in Reepham in the future either by infill or from smaller developments. Members of the public present (by show of hands) indicated that no one was against development per se, but the Townspeople felt that the current LDF proposal sites known as Reepham 1 and Reepham 2 were detrimental to Reepham and unsustainable.  It is also important to note that no-one raised an objection to the proposed site known as ‘Rep 1’.

Yours faithfully

Reepham Town Council

‘We have a small but increasing problem of residents misusing our litter and dog bins.  It appears that a small minority of residents are using the bins for general waste, garden cuttings, dog faeces and cat litter that is generated at home. In Station Road Car Park carrier bags with garden cuttings are frequently left beside the bin.

It is important to remind residents that our litter and dog bins are provided for waste from the public highway only!

Though only a small proportion of the bins are being misused.  It causes considerable disruption to Broadland District Council’s Cleansing Service, as teams are diverted from their scheduled rounds to empty these bins.  The unsightly overflowing bins also spill waste across the surrounding area, which is compounded by people leaving their waste next to the full bins.

Waste generated at home must be disposed of through the Council’s refuse service, whilst excess general household waste is accepted free of charge at the Civic Amenity Sites.  Pet owners should wrap up their animal’s waste and put it in their household bin or buy a “doggy loo” to compost the poo in the garden.

If there is a problem with a bin or if you witness any misuse of the bins then please report it to Broadland District Council on 01603 430534 / environ.protection@broadland.gov.uk.

Continued misuse of a bin may result in its removal.

Broadland District Council –working with Veolia’

Allotments in Reepham

In the last year Reepham Town Council has created many new allotments. The Council has taken a twenty year lease of a field off Stony Lane near Marriots Way and Fiddler’s Lane off Worlds End Lane in Reepham.

The Council were successful in their bid for external funding to plough the plots, improve access and fence in the sites. As you can see from the photo below, the allotments are starting to look great!

There are only a few plots left to rent at Fiddler’s Lane site. Currently £30 per year for a full size plot and £15 per year for a half size one. (we also have a couple of three quarter plots available!) If you are interested in growing your own fruit or vegetables, please contact the Town Clerk on 01603 873355 or email her at clerk@reephamnorfolk-tc.gov.uk for more information.

The Clerk is available by appointment only as she regularly has duties to perform which take her away from the office.

To arrange an appointment or to leave a message please call: 01603 873355 or email: clerk@reephamnorfolk-tc.gov.uk

There is a representative of the Citizens Advice Bureau in the Bircham Centre on Wednesdays from 10am – 12:30 on Wednesdays.  This is a drop-in service and no appointments are necessary.

Police Officers now man the station regularly, as well as there being a visible presence from Police Comunity Support Officers This is also the base for the Reepham and District Safer Neighbouthood Team (SNT) If there is no one in the office letters may be left for delivery to the SNT for action.