11 October 1997.

Dear Councillor Shulver,

Both in 'Out of Reach'(October/November edition) and in a meeting with some of us at the above address last evening, you set out your views on those aspects of East Cambridgeshire District Local Plan which appertain to Reach. The purpose of this letter is to set down our reaction to your views. Because, however, we wish this letter itself also to be seen as a response to that Plan we are sending copies to the Chairman of the District Council as to James Paice Esq., NIP, whom, we believe, will also be interested.

The Plan says that ' in view of the village's special character, its size and limited facilities, Reach is designated an Infill Only Settlement.' You say, on page 24 of Out of Reach that you believe that to be too restrictive. You say that, without some modest growth, the smaller villages, (and by implication Reach), will go into further decline and say that 'we can see it happening now'. You say that you are in favour of small scale development , particularly linear as opposed to bunches of houses. In the meeting you also said that without development house prices in Reach would go up, that it would become exclusive and that truly local residents in your definition those who were horn here -would no longer be able to remain. And, finally, you said that an alternative approach to expanding the development envelope might lie in granting exemptions outside the envelope for low cost housing.

Our position is quite straightforward. The evidence, which we presented to You at the meeting, is that some 20 or so years ago, Reach was indeed a dying village but that now things have changed out of all recognition. The population is younger than it has been for a century, there is a far more varied social mix and there is a lot more going on. The village hall and the pub both thrive. We do not have a shop but see that as an inevitable consequence of increased mobility and supermarket development. As to house prices there is no evidence that these are higher in Reach than elsewhere. And when pressed, you yourself were not able to cite any evidence of people being forced to move out of the village because of high prices or a lack of suitable accommodation. As to other services , again you could cite no evidence that these would decline without further housing development or that such development of the type you propose would affect the issue in any way.