To receive a presentation from Baldock, Bygrave and Clothall Common Neighbourhood Planning Group.
Decision:
Michael Bingham thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee regarding Baldock, Bygrave and Clothall Common Neighbourhood Plan Update.
The Chairman thanked Michael Bingham for his presentation.
Minutes:
Audio Recording – Start time of Item – 55 minutes 23 seconds
Michael Bingham thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee regarding Baldock, Bygrave and Clothall Common Neighbourhood Plan Update.
Michael Bingham informed Members of the following:
· Neighbourhood Plan was produced for Baldock, Bygrave and Clothall Common including all the parish by roads, Clothall and the town of Baldock;
· People were unhappy with the scale of development being proposed for Baldock in the Local Plan due to significant issues, particularly with the highway aspects of site BA1, which had not been fully resolved. The Neighbourhood Plan was about trying to get the best out of whatever does happen as a result of the Local Plan. It was all about securing a better future and more specifically to add what was in the Local Plan in terms of the facilities provided, ensuring that the character of the area was safeguarded and that new development was of a high quality;
· The Local Plan was a large document containing many policies however after great consideration, there were areas where additional safeguards could be added which was the intention of the Neighbourhood Plan;
· There were lots of steps needed to prepare the Neighbourhood Plan and they were half way through the process so there was initial engagement with the community, a lot of research, reviewing of the background documents, production of the Local Plan, other relevant technical documents including those produced for Hertfordshire County Council who were promoting the major developments around Baldock;
· Knights Templar School did a project which was now a regular feature for year 8 and most students were thinking about the future and how they envisaged it. There were concerns about environmental quality and sustainability of new developments;
· The draft plan was nearing completion and modifications to the Local Plan were being finalised. Endeavours were being made to align the Neighbourhood Plan with Local Plan as far as is possible;
· There was no requirement to abide by every word in the Local Plan and the Neighbourhood Plan had to conform to the strategic policies of the Local Plan but it could depart from it if there was a justified reason;
· The Neighbourhood Plan would be consulted upon in 2019 which would then go to an examination which may or may not go to hearing;
· Neighbourhood Plan would be subject to public referendum and if it were to pass this, it would then need to go to Statutory Development Plan. The Neighbourhood Plan when finalised would carry just as much weight as the Local Plan by law in making planning decisions;
· There were three main blocks of policies, only 15 in total. Some of which were general that added to the Local Plan and applied to the area as a whole; particularly extra material on heritage and on green space had been added. There were then policies for specific sites in the Local Plan so this was where we added to the details or the stipulations in the Local Plan and added extra safeguards e.g. BA1 – proposed development to the north of Baldock some additional safeguards regarding not needed to be retained, existing features of the site, importance of the gap between Baldock and Bygrave etc;
· There were some specific policies for Baldock, Bygrave and Clothall. To maintain the character of those villages and what that meant for new development;
· The question arose of whether supplementary policies needed to reflect wider ambitions of the community but would not be part of the statutory part of the plan – this was something under consideration at the moment;
· Acorn Consultancy were appointed by the Government to work with us under a Neighbourhood Planning support programme of the Government grants. They came up with some design guidelines which would be part of the Neighbourhood Plan and set out some broad design parameters for future development covered by the area covered by the Neighbourhood Plan. Unlike the Neighbourhood Plan, it was split into two parts, general principles which applied to the whole area and some were more specific which applied to the allocations within the Local Plan. Both major urban extension sites plus the two regeneration sites within the town at Deans Yard and Icknield Way – ideas how those sites could be developed.
Main modifications to Local Plan:
· Area to the east and north east of Clothall Common between sites BA4 and BA3, was not allocated for development in the Local Plan in the submission draft as it was sensible to keep that as open space;
· It rose steeply and was unstable from a building point of view with material deposited there following Baldock bypass;
· Used as a recreation area and the survey revealed this areas was highly valued;
· Hertfordshire County Council had been lobbying to build on part of that site – building outwards to the eastern edge of Clothall Common despite the District Council proposing they would not allocate it;
· Proposed modifications coloured in all the area as potential housing land;
· Inspector came up with these notifications through the process of dialogue with council officers. It was unclear as to why this had been done and no sound reason had been given. This did increase the risk that building would take place on the slope, east of Clothall Common and eat into the important recreation area;
· BA4 and BA3 policies did not include any additional written mitigation to limit that risk. There was nothing that said that building should not take place to the east of the edge of Clothall Common;
· People should be made aware that the Neighbourhood Plan could override this. The allocations were not strategic so it could be considered as allocated open space by ourselves or adding in some mitigation of our written policies but it would be much better if the Local Plan were to address the issue. The inspector would need to consider this issue when all of the objections are available.
In response to questions from Members, Michael Bingham advised that:
· It was unlikely that there was not enough money for the consultation with the residents of Baldock by growth of Clothall. Eligible to apply for funding from the Government. Technical support so far which funded the work by Acorn. Considered making a bid to the Government’s funding pot for funding for the consultation process. Other avenues would need to be considered if this was not successful. Councillor Muir did not know whether this was allowable by the Baldock committee and they would need to take advice in this regard however he said you could apply for the County Council budget and Michael would be willing to give some money to it if needed;
· They would like to consult on the draft Neighbourhood Plan as soon as possible. Plan almost written, design principle almost written. Currently making further changes needed to satisfy the modifications. Discussions needed with County Highways and was due to see then in January to discuss transport policies Discussions were taking place with statutory agencies to ensure they were happy with the policies. Consultation would take place once all these changed had been done. Date of consultation would depend on funding issue – undecided on whether before or after 1st April 2019 as the Government funding relates to the financial year;
· With regard to the saving of a particular area of land you would need to respond to the consultation on the proposed modification which is the one that was due to start on 3rd January 2019 i.e. the Local Plan consultation.
· It was felt that the use of photographs in the presentation clarified the area of concern.
The Chairman thanked Michael Bingham for his presentation.