Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Winchfield Neighbourhood Development Plan
Consultation Statement
Index Page
Introduction 2
Community engagement sessions 2
Village survey 4
Village survey results 5
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) 6 Health check 7
Pre-submission consultation and responses 7
Submission to Winchfield Parish Council 8
Submission to Local Planning Authority 8
Appendices
List of residents addresses 9
List of Community Engagement meeting dates 10
Example Timeline shared with village 11
Example of sign in sheets 12
Survey 13
Snapshot of survey results 19
Copies of leaflets and photos of meetings 21
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 23 & Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) WPC letter to accompany pre-submission consultation 28
List of pre-submission Consultation Bodies 29
Table of Pre-submission consultation responses and actions 31
Dated 15th June 2016
2
Introduction.
This Consultation Statement has been prepared by the Winchfield Neighbourhood Development
Plan (or WNDP) Committee on behalf of Winchfield Parish Council to fulfil the obligations of the
Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012, Section 15(2). Part 5 of the regulations sets out what
a Consultation Statement should contain:
a) Details of the persons and bodies who were consulted about the proposed neighbourhood development plan;
b) Explain how they were consulted; c) Summarise the main issues and concerns raised by the persons consulted; d) Describe how these issues and concerns have been considered and, where relevant,
addressed in the proposed neighbourhood development plan. This document accompanies the submission version of the Winchfield NDP alongside the Basic
Conditions Statement in submission to Hart District Council as the Local Planning Authority.
The Winchfield Neighbourhood Development Plan is a community plan and has derived its
objectives, actions and authority from the community. Winchfield currently comprises 242 houses
with approx. 660 residents.
Initial Plan Approval
Government and Local Council support for Localism in 2014, led to several members of the
community in Winchfield proposing the idea of the development of a neighbourhood plan for
Winchfield that would enable the local community to influence planning of the area in which they
live and work. Consequently, on 11 August 2014, Winchfield Parish Council discussed and
approved the development of the Winchfield Neighbourhood Development Plan and appointed
Clare Worley (Winchfield resident) to lead the process for Winchfield. A sub-committee of the
Parish Council was established of nine resident volunteers and a Liaison Officer from Winchfield
Parish Council appointed to work closely with the committee.
Community Engagement
The first WNDP committee meeting was held on 26 August 2014 to discuss the requirements of
writing a neighbourhood development plan; the initial way forward was agreed. Formal Terms of
Reference were agreed and declarations of independence signed, per the requirements of the
Winchfield Parish Council. It was agreed in the Terms of Reference that committee meetings
would be held at least every two months during the plan development process.
A rough timeline was established and an initial schedule of WNDP committee meetings laid out;
most importantly the date of the first Village Engagement Session was set. Meetings were also
arranged with our local Campaign for Rural England (CPRE) representative and with a
representative of the Basingstoke Canal volunteer group. Additional meetings were held with the
plan leads for the neighbouring rural villages throughout the plan process to share notes and
support each other.
The first public meeting was held on 31 August 2014 at the Winchfield Village Hall. Prior to the
meeting an invitation to attend and participate was hand delivered to every resident and business
in the parish of Winchfield.
3
This method of communication was used for all future public engagement sessions in addition to
public announcements on the WPC website, WPC notice board, Village Hall notice board and
personal e-mails to residents if requested. Signage was also posted on Station Road at the Village
Hall prior to key sessions to remind villagers.
Example Timeline – as shared with the village throughout the process.
At the village engagement session on 31 August 2014, WPC Chairman Andrew Renshaw
introduced the WNDP committee and Clare Worley as the leader of the plan development.
Andrew and Clare gave presentations to the audience on the legal requirements of the plan
process and invited questions. The audience of residents wholeheartedly supported the writing of
a NDP for Winchfield and several new volunteers offered assistance to the steering group.
Attendees were invited to voice concerns and issues to help define the next step in the process –
the village survey. Ninety four comments were received at this first meeting and these defined the
topics which would be addressed by the survey.
Key priorities for residents were:
ensuring sustainable growth could maintain the rural village character
ensuring the environment and wildlife would not be adversely impacted
the likely scale of current and future housing needs
site locations and design requirements
preserving the history of the village
Examples of meeting invitations to the village are in the appendix on pages 22-23.
4
Village survey
The survey questions were drafted using the information and feedback received at the August
2014 public village engagement session. Once drafted, independent external consultant – Towns
Alive www.townsalive.com - reviewed the comprehensive survey structure and questions to
ensure responses would provide usable data to develop the draft Plan. The survey included the
indicative timeline, to help ensure everyone understood the end to end process.
The survey was delivered to every home and business in Winchfield by 26 September. By mid-
October 2014 eighty nine responses had been received representing 34% of Winchfield
households, with an overwhelming support for what we were seeking to achieve.
A full size copy of the survey is also included in the appendix.
5
Throughout October and November the plan committee used the data and comments resulting
from the survey to define the challenges, draft the key objectives and start to develop the vision
for Winchfield in 2032.
At the next Community Engagement meeting on 7 December 2014 attendees were invited to
review and comment on the survey results, the draft challenges and vision and evolving
objectives. With each separate topic shown as hard copy A3 size, everyone was invited to write
comments and suggestions on post-it notes, which were then attached. This method of inviting
input was used very successfully throughout the neighbourhood development plan process.
Following each session the comments were reviewed by the plan committee and incorporated into
the emerging draft plan. Notes were taken at all meetings and circulated to all members of the
plan committee via e-mail. The plan leader and Winchfield Parish Council liaison also attended
meetings with Hart District Council Planning Manager/s.
Village survey results
Survey responses indicated that the challenges for Winchfield were:
1. Inappropriately sized or located or designed development not in keeping with the size and scale of the village.
2. Risk of coalescence; losing the green space separation between the existing Winchfield village settlements, and the local gaps between Winchfield and adjoining villages and towns.
3. How to respect the heritage of Winchfield alongside sustainable development. 4. Losing the natural green landscape valued by residents and visitors for varied recreational
activities 5. Supporting and retaining the farmed landscape in Winchfield. 6. Preserving the tree-lined narrow lanes whilst accommodating increased road usage in
Winchfield and the surrounding villages.
A snapshot of the survey results is included in the appendix on pages 20-21.
In the early stages of the process, the plan committee met once or twice each month and
additional working groups were formed as needed to work on specific aspects as the plan
progressed. Additional village residents volunteered to research different aspects of village life
which contributed to the comprehensive final plan documents producing an excellent overview of
6
Winchfield today, the history of the village and the importance of our built heritage and
environmental assets.
From this work the policies became more clearly defined and at each engagement meeting
community input refined them still further.
As work on the plan progressed the five main areas of focus were captured as
Housing
Character and Design
Conservation
History
Roads
The draft Winchfield Neighbourhood Development Plan was presented to the community at each
version stage. A total of six public community engagement sessions were held, attended by
between 50 – 100 people each time. This represents a particularly high turnout for a village with
only c.660 total residents (including children). Residents were invited to comment at any time and
invited to attend plan committee meetings if they chose to do so. Prior to each meeting, formal
notice was given via the usual Parish Council channels inviting all to attend and contribute.
The information gathered was used to build our evidence base and define the plan policies. Once
drafted each policy was tested for compliance against the NPPF basic conditions, then against
appropriate national and local policies and advice to ensure general conformity.
The 14 month plan preparation period (August 2014 – October 2015) culminated in a final village
engagement session where the Vision, Objectives and draft Policies were unanimously endorsed
by attendees.
Further consultant advice and guidance was sought by the plan committee during the process,
using Towns Alive (www.townsalive.com) and Plan-et (www.plan-et.community).
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)
Work on the layout and design of the plan continued throughout November 2015 and in December
2015 the draft plan was submitted to Hart DC for a formal screening as to whether a Strategic
Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) were required for
the plan. This was arranged by Hart DC as the relevant Local Planning Authority (LPA). This
screening determination was undertaken by independent consultants ‘BASE – Town Planning
Urban Design Environment’ under Article 9 of the SEA Regulations 2004 & 102 of the Conservation
of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) January 2016. Their report states:
‘.. it is concluded that the Winchfield Neighbourhood Plan will not have significant
effects in relation to any of the criteria set out in Schedule 1 of the SEA Regulations,
and therefore does not need to be subject to a SEA Report. Similarly, the screening
assessment concludes that no likely significant effects are likely to occur with regards
to the integrity of any European sites and a full HRA is not required.’
7
From 16 December 2015 to 22 January 2016 a consultation was undertaken by Hart on this
screening report with Natural England, the Environment Agency and Historic England.
Consultation responses were received from all three bodies and on the basis of the information
provided, all three consultation bodies agreed with the draft Screening conclusions. Hart, as the
LPA, then formally confirmed:
‘On the basis of the contents of the draft Neighbourhood Plan and following
consultation with the relevant statutory bodies, Hart District Council has
determined that an SEA or HRA assessment is not required for the Winchfield
Neighbourhood Plan’.
The full response is in the appendix on pages 25 – 29
Health check
The draft plan was then sent for a pre-submission Health check, as recommended by Hart, via the
Neighbourhood Planning Independent Examiner Referral Service (NPIERS) in January 2016. The
Health check is an independent desk-based review designed to help the qualifying body and the
local planning authority to identify any issues that may cause delay or failure at submission or
examination stages. By its very nature, the health check is less comprehensive than a formal
examination, but it does try and pick-up on any obvious weaknesses in the draft neighbourhood
development plan.
The report from Ann Skippers MRTPI, independent planning consultant and member of NPIERS
Panel, was received on 4th February 2016 and helped us to refine the draft plan ready for
mandatory Pre-Submission Consultation.
Pre-submission consultation
The draft NDP was submitted for the statutory period of six weeks pre-submission consultation on
18 March 2016.
The list of consultees is included in the annex on pages 31 - 33
Comments received during the pre-submission consultation have been considered and
addressed. Where appropriate amendments have been made to the plan. Overall, 18 responses
were received. Response initiators included:
- Local Planning Authority / District Council - 2 Developers - 5 residents - 1 non-resident land owner - 2 representing religious groups - Highways England - Historic England - Hampshire County Council - Environment Agency - Relevant Borough Council - Neighbouring Parish Council - Water utility
8
Particular comments of note regarding our consultation were provided by Hart District Council:
Hart District Council’s response was provided by independent consultant and experienced plan
inspector, Nigel McGurk, (Erimax Land, Planning and Communities).
‘As presented the Winchfield Neighbourhood Plan is an impressive document and it is clear that it is the result of a major community effort.’ and ‘It is clear that, to this stage, the Winchfield Neighbourhood Plan has emerged through extensive public engagement and that there have been plentiful opportunities for people to comment. This is a fundamental consideration, as consultation provides the process through which a community can develop a shared vision for the neighbourhood and deliver the sustainable development they need, in accordance with the Paragraph 183 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). As a consequence of the extensive consultation undertaken, there is significant evidence that the Policieis of the Winchfield Neighbourhood Plan reflect the views of the community.’
The full table of responses and actions is in the appendix on pages 34 - 38
Submission to Winchfield Parish Council.
The summary of responses received and proposed action or amendments from the pre-
submission consultation responses to our plan, was submitted to Winchfield Parish Council for
approval to proceed to formal submission to Hart District Council. This approval was given by
members on 14 June 2016.
Basic conditions statement
For our NDP to be submitted to our Local Planning Authority, Hart District Council, and then be put forward for independent examination we must demonstrate that our plan meets each of the ‘NPPF basic conditions’ and other legal requirements. There are five criteria against which we carefully considered and tested each policy to ensure general conformity and alignment:
1. NPPF Basic Conditions relevant to a Neighbourhood Plan 2. NPPF Three Dimensions of Sustainability 3. NPPF Core Planning Principles 4. Local Planning Authority (Hart District Council) Strategic Priorities (draft, 2015) 5. Local Planning Authority (Hart District Council) 1996-2006 Saved Policies
Our Basic Conditions Statement has been prepared and accompanies this Consultation Statement as we submit the Winchfield Neighbourhood Development Plan to Hart DC, our Local Planning Authority.
9
Appendix
List of Winchfield addresses, letter re: pre-submission consultation delivered by hand to every address.
Address number of houses / business units
Bagwell Lane 18
Bagwell Lane – commercial 2
Barley Mow Close 10
Beauclerk Green 47
Hurst Farm – commercial 7
Pale Lane and Hungerford Farm 7
Odiham Road / Shapley Hill 30
Potbridge Road / Old Potbridge Road 15
Sprats Hatch Lane 8
Station Hill 6
Station Road 19
Station Road / Hill – commercial 6
Taplins Lane 2
Taplins Lane - commercial 2
The Hurst 36
Winchfield Court 34
London Road 7
Total residential and business 268
10
List of meeting dates for NDP · 26th August 2014 – committee meeting · Sunday 31st August 2014 – Winchfield Village Hall · 27th October 2014 – committee meeting · 6th November 2014 – committee meeting · 17th November 2014 – committee meeting · 4th December 2014 – committee meeting · Sunday 7th December 2014 – Winchfield Village Hall · 18th December 2014 – committee meeting · 12th January 2015 – committee meeting · Sunday 15th February 2015 – Winchfield Village Hall · 14th April 2015 – committee meeting · 22nd April 2015 – committee meeting · Sunday 26th April 2015 – Winchfield Village Hall · 29th May 2015 - committee meeting · Sunday 7th June 2015 – Winchfield Village Hall and Cricket Ground for Village Picnic · 11th June 2015 – committee meeting · 15th July 2015 – committee meeting · 13th August 2015 – committee meeting · 8th September 2015 – committee meeting with WPC · 16th September 2015 – committee meeting · Sunday 18th October 2015 – Winchfield Village Hall · 25th November 2015 – committee meeting · 23rd February 2016 – committee meeting
11
Example of a timeline shared at engagement session
12
Example of a Village Engagement meeting sign-in sheet
13
Copy of the village survey
14
15
16
17
18
19
Snapshot of Survey Results
20
21
Examples of meeting invitations for public engagement sessions
22
23
Letters confirming SEA and HRA are not required for Winchfield NDP
24
25
26
27
From: Katie Bailey <[email protected]>
Date: 25 January 2016 at 12:10:42 GMT
To: Clare Worley <[email protected]>
Subject: Neighbourhood PLan SEA/HRA screening
Hi Clare
I just wanted to let you know that I have had confirmation from all three statutory bodies (Environment Agency/Natural England/Historic England) that they agree with the Screening that has been undertaken and no further screenings are required unless there is a change to the general content of the Plan when the situation will need to be reviewed. I will finalise the Screening document, which we have to place on our website and send you a copy.
Regards
Katie
Katie Bailey
Corporate Strategy and Policy Development Manager
Hart District Council
(Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday)
01252 774146
http://www.hart.gov.uk
Twitter: @HartCouncil
Facebook: /HartDistrictCouncil
28
WPC Letter to accompany pre-submission consultation
29
List of statutory consultees for pre-submission consultation - Winchfield Neighbourhood Development Plan – according to Regulation 14 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012.
.
A letter inviting review and comment was sent on 18th March 2016 by hard copy or e-mail to the following:
Telefonica UK Ltd
Orange UK Ltd
BT Group plc
SSE Power
Basingstoke Canal Authority
Virgin Media
Vodafone Group plc
Waldon Telecom
British Gas
Old Basing Parish Council
The Rev Canon Mark Tanner, Hartley Wintney
Berkeley Homes South
Solstice Renewables
Stratfield Saye Parish Council
Hartley Wintney NDP Group
30
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
A separate list of an additional twelve names where personal e-mail addresses were provided has been supplied to Hart DC with this document.
The same letter was delivered, by hand, to every residential and business address in the Parish of Winchfield.
Hard copies of the pre-submission version of the NDP were also available to read at the Winchfield Village Hall, the Winchfield Inn and The Barley Mow Pub,
31
Summary of pre-consultation responses
Type of Respondee
Change reference number
Respondee Comments WNDP Action
Local Authority n/a
Nigel McGurk independent inspector for HDC
Complimentary of design and content of introduction and pages 1-16
No action required
1 Change of wording for housing
numbers. P 17 para 2 Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
2
p 17 para 3. delete existing wording on housing numbers, insert new sentence as supplied.
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
n/a
Recommend to delete policy A1 and replace with watch point. Suggestion to change the wording in the criteria for "strong connection to Winchfield" on p26
Noted. Further guidance sought from Health check reviewer - other made plans successfully have similar Policies for 'local people' preference
3
A2 - remove 'wherever possible' also remove 'other commercial buildings' and non policy statement about Beauclerk Green. Use the words recommended on page 12 of the report
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
4
Recommendation to delete policy A3 and / or delete the word 'curtilage' and rethink.
Noted - propose to merge part of A3 into A2.
5
Policy A4. HDC parking rules would apply therefore suggest ensuring rationale for why we need different policy be made clearer.
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
6
Define garage blocks, delete reference to garden implements, change curtilage to 'boundary'.
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
7
Significant views, change first para as suggested. Change second para as suggested, third para to be changed to a watchpoint
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
n/a
Para 1 re: policy on road width; width of lanes is a matter for highways authority
Noted - but no change as HCC responsible for highways, and made no change suggestions on this policy.
8
B2 delete para 1 and new words suggested re: footpaths and new public rights of way
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
32
Type of Respondee
Change reference number
Respondee Comments WNDP Action
Local Authority
(continued) 9
(continued) B3 local gaps, suggestion that policy should be deleted, OR map the proposed local gaps are so situated.
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
10
Local green space. Change wording to be specific and add map.
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
11
Light pollution. Recommendation to change this policy to a watch point. And include NPPF para 125 and clearly define why lighting controls are required.
Noted - Wording from other 'made' plans has been used, therefore propose not to delete. Also reference 'reduction of obtrusive light, the Institute of Lighting Engineers Guidance notes, Rural Areas 2005' added. Health check reviewer guidance also sought
12
Change wording to reflect national policy - NPPF para 109. change policy wording as suggested
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
13
Heritage assets/ remove 'physical assets' and change policy wording.
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
14
Development access / purpose is unclear but no wording suggested. Remove reference to 'considered'
Minor wording matter - Purpose of policy made more explicit and word 'considered' removed
County Council 15
Peter Errington, planning policy manager, HCC economy, transport and environment
A6. add words as suggested to incorporate clear sustainability requirements are complied with
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
16
C1. flooding - words amended as suggested
Minor wording matter - Further wording added as suggested after HDC changes applied.
Parochial Church Council.
n/a
Peter Shaw Compliment on NDP No action required
Private landowner
(non-resident)
n/a
Maria Morgan Overall supportive of plan. Specific comments about lack of Winchfield infrastructure (mains drainage and gas), affordable housing availability and suggests new developments would be best situated near existing transport links. Supports respecting environmental constraints.
No action required
33
Type of Respondee
Change reference number
Respondee Comments WNDP Action
Developer
n/a
Barton Willmore for Barratt homes and Gallagher Estates.
Raises concerns that WNDP is proceeding ahead of LP and does not "and has no regard to ….HDC emerging Local Plan"
No action required - HDC response confirms that "whilst I note that the Hart emerging LP suggests that the neighbourhood area could potentially be suitable for a new settlement, there is no requirement for the WNDP to be in general conformity with emerging plans"
n/a
Methodology for calculating housing need questioned.
No action required - HDC response has recommended including the wording "in preparing the Winchfield NP, plan makers have taken into account available up to date information relating to housing, housing need and the provision of housing land. This has included relevant information relating to the emerging Hart LP." and "calculations are based on the most up to date relevant info" supporting calculation
n/a
Considers that WPC is acting prematurely to proceed with NDP prior to finalised LP
No action required, HDC has been, and continues to be, supportive of the Winchfield NDP process
Resident n/a
Ed Fisher Fully supportive No action required
Developer
n/a
Persimmon Homes Thames Valley
Specific comment on policy A1, think local preference cannot be delivered through the planning process.
Noted, however as successfully incorporated into other NPs propose to retain into examination. Health check reviewer advice also sought
n/a Specific support for policy A5. No action required
see action 3&4 above
Policy A7, believe flexibility should be included for some development in excess of seven houses similar to Beauclerk Green
Agree, this was also our intention, wording changes made pre-examination. See action 3&4
n/a
They note the lack of housing sites identified and offer general comments on suitability of sites nearer existing facilities, need for access to transport links and sites not to be impacted by flood and sustainability issues.
No action required
34
Type of Respondee
Change reference number
Respondee Comments WNDP Action
Environment Agency
n/a
Jack Moeran, Planning Specialist
Positive comment on Policy C1, pleased to see Winchfield will steer development away from areas of flood risk and will ensure ecology protected.
No action required
Historic England
17
Martin Small, Principal Adviser, Historic Environment Planning
Welcomes the description of the historical development of Winchfield although would welcome more detail re: listed buildings and historic routes. Recommend future discussions to discuss Heritage at Risk records and whether any buildings in Winchfield are at risk from lack of maintenance or from development.
Minor wording matter - to Add references to Historic Landscape Character Assessment and Hampshire Historic Environment Record. Update listing of Winchfield House to grade II* in main text and evidence base. Take further consultation suggestion off line for WPC to consider outside WNDP initial draft.
18
Suggested new wording for objective D
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
19
Observations on housing need calculation.
Noted - but no action – as deferring to HDC comments above see item 2 re: how to edit housing calculation section
n/a
General support for policies A6, B1 and (in principle) D1
No action required
n/a
Suggested that area around St Marys church should be defined as conservation area or local green space.
No action required - Future action for WPC see comment above in action 17
20 The reference to English Heritage
should now be Historic England Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
21 Change of wording in policy D1 -
add 'the significance of any heritage asset'
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
n/a
Recommend future policy specifically for the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment and heritage assets in the parish. Attached helpful list of references for future WPC use
No action required - As Historic England have confirmed they do not consider this essential for the plan to meet basic conditions; future WPC action after NDP is made.
Waverley Borough Council
n/a Ian Motuel, Principal Planner (Policy)
No comments No action required
Odiham Parish Council
n/a
Neighbouring PC offered congratulations on "excellent plan"
No action required
35
Type of Respondee
Change reference number
Respondee Comments WNDP Action
Chair of Winchfield Parochial
Church Council
n/a
Canon Mark Tanner Fully supports comments about importance of St Mary's Church, building and location in policy B1
No action required
Thames Water Utilities
22
David Wilson, Associate Director Planning, Savills appointed on behalf of Thames water.
Requested specific wording to be added to NDP re: water supply, waste water, sewerage infrastructure and surface water drainage.
Minor wording matter - Amend as suggested
Highways England
n/a
Zoe Johnson, Spatial Planning and Development Control
No comments on plan. Comments noted on future development impact on safe and efficient operation of the strategic network, in this case M3
No action required
Resident n/a
Mr and Dr Hoffman Full support, excellent balance between needs of the historic, uniquely special rural environment and its community and the needs of the area for growth
No action required
Resident n/a
Mr Nick Norton Full support, "outstanding, reflecting a very thorough piece of work; reinforces that housing needs can be met at a local level across Hart, maintaining the character of our villages and causing minimal damage to our rural environment.
No action required
Resident n/a Mr Iain Hamilton I support the Neighbourhood Plan No action required
Resident n/a Mr and Mrs Swinstead
“Provides a sensible and caring vision for the future of Winchfield”
No action required
Comments received via Hart DC post Pre Submission Consultation
Infrastructure Engineer
n/a – informal
comment
HDC Suggested flood zones incorrectly labelled on map
Confirmed maps used were HDC but amended wording as suggested.
Biodiversity Officer
n/a – informal
comment
HDC Suggested table of bird species on p.47 was misleading re: planning considerations
Noted but not changed, table is information only and no specific policy relates to this list
