Neighbourhood Plan Newsletter 4 December 2016

Transcription

1 Neighbourhood Plan Newsletter 4 December 2016 W elcome to the fourth CCA Neighbourhood Plan Newsletter. The Newsletters aim to keep Neighbourhood Plan groups up to date with current news covering issues such as funding, guidance, training opportunities and best practice, and also to let everyone know how other groups in Cheshire are progressing. Do please keep us updated with any news, send us any interesting stories, and let us know if there is anything that you d like included in the next edition of the Newsletter. Also feel free to pass this Newsletter on to any other groups or parishes that you feel may find it of interest or who are considering becoming involved in Neighbourhood Planning. THE NATIONAL PICTURE - Around 2,000 groups have started the neighbourhood planning process since 2012, in areas that cover nearly ten million people across England. Over 240 successful neighbourhood planning referendums have taken place, with an average yes vote of 88%. Over 200 plans have come into force as part of the development plan for their area and are being used as the starting point for determining local planning applications. Over 250,000 people have now voted in neighbourhood planning referendums. In October, the first plan to fail at referendum occurred at Swanwick in Derbyshire more of this later in the newsletter. LOCAL PLAN UPDATES The resumed hearings of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy were undertaken in September and October. The Inspector will now prepare his Report which hopefully will be ready early next year. Work is underway on the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document and the Council has commissioned consultants to undertake a suite of preliminary work. The first consultation on the emerging Site Allocations and Development Policies Document, the proposed Issues and Options consultation, is programmed to take place shortly. See the examination page for more information: Work on Cheshire West and Chester Local Plan (Part Two) Land Allocations and Detailed Policies is underway and the consultation of the preferred approach has been completed. It is anticipated that there will be a consultation on draft plan in the second half of 2017 followed by an examination in public. The Local Plan (Part Two) will set out the non-strategic allocations and detailed policies, following on from the strategic framework set out in the Local Plan (Part One), and which will be illustrated on an accompanying policies map. See the Cheshire West & Chester planning consultation portal for more information:

2 CHESHIRE EAST NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANS Cheshire East now has 5 made neighbourhood plans, and a further 33 areas designated or under application. Congratulations to Marton who became the fifth Neighbourhood Plan group to have their plan pass referendum in October 93% of voters voted in support of the plan. Goostrey and Poynton have now completed their reg 14 consultation stages, and Holmes Chapel have recently received their examiner s report. To keep up-to-date on Cheshire East Neighbourhood Plans visit: CHESHIRE WEST AND CHESTER NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANS - Broxton and District Neighbourhood Plan passed referendum in October, with an 88% yes vote. The Plan is due to be made (30 th Nov) which means it will be the 9 th Neighbourhood Plan in Cheshire West. An independent examiner has been appointed for the Central Gowy Neighbourhood Plan. Kelsall and Willington have received their examiner s report, and Ashton Hayes Neighbourhood Plan has completed its reg 16 formal submission consultations. Whitegate and Marton is currently at examination. This brings the total of Neighbourhood Plans in Cheshire West and Chester with designated areas to 29, including the 9 made plans once Broxton and District Neighbourhood Plan has been completed. To keep up-to-date on Cheshire West & Chester Neighbourhood Plans visit:

3 LEGISLATION UPDATES Rosie Morgan from CWaC has put together the following information on the new Neighbourhood Planning Bill. The latest updates to the Bill have now come in and are listed below. Whilst not yet enacted, the provisions of the Bill will be of interest to neighbourhood planning groups. Additional detail can be found at: Clause 1 - Duty to have regard to post examination neighbourhood development plan -Local planning authorities must have regard to post-examination neighbourhood plans when dealing with applications for planning permission, (where the plan is relevant to an application). This applies to situations where a neighbourhood plan has been through examination and the local authority has made the decision to proceed to referendum, but that referendum has not yet been held. Clause 2 - Status of approved neighbourhood development plan -Provides for a neighbourhood plan that has been through referendum to form part of the development plan for the area (effectively giving full weight to a plan in advance of the local authority s decision to formally make the plan). Clause 3 - Modification of a neighbourhood plan - Provides detail about the process of modifying a neighbourhood plan in various circumstances: - Allows a local planning authority to modify a neighbourhood plan if they consider that the modification does not materially affect the policies in the plan. Any such modification would require the consent of the qualifying body. - The bill provides for a new schedule to be included in the main Act which sets out the process for modifying a neighbourhood plan in cases where the proposed changes would materially affect the policies in the plan but would not be so significant so as to change the nature of the plan. In this case, the qualifying body would submit proposed modifications to the local planning authority and an examination would be held. Only in exceptional circumstances would a hearing be required and no referendum would be needed. A local authority would be required to make the modified plan, if that is what the examiner recommends. (A judgement would need to be made by the LPA and qualifying body as to whether the modifications would change the nature of the plan or not, if it was felt that the modifications would change the nature of the plan, then the usual route of examination and referendum would need to be followed).

4 LEGISLATION UPDATES CONTINUED Clause 4 Changes to neighbourhood areas - This clause would allow the modification of a neighbourhood area where a plan has already been made in relation to that area, which may be necessary in circumstances such as changes to parish boundaries following a governance review. The Bill allows for an existing plan to remain in force even where the boundaries of the neighbourhood area for which it was made are amended or a new neighbourhood area is created. Clause 5 Assistance in connection with neighbourhood planning -would require local planning authorities to publish information on how they will advise and assist neighbourhood plan groups in their statement of community involvement. In addition to the above, the government have indicated that they will bring forward amendments to the Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 which will prescribe various timescales and requirements within the existing neighbourhood plan preparation procedures: - the date by which a local planning authority must decide what action to take in response to the examiner s recommendations; - where the local planning authority s proposed decision differs from that recommended by the examiner, the persons who must be notified and the date by which representations must be submitted; - the date by which a neighbourhood plan or Order must be made after it has been approved at referendum; - a procedure where the Secretary of State can intervene in the decision to put a plan or Order proposal to referendum. - the date by which a referendum should be held following a decision by a local authority to accept an examiner s recommendations (usually 56 working days). Neighbourhood Planning Bill DCLG Policy Factsheet: rhood_planning_policy_factsheet.pdf CHESHIRE WEST AND CHESTER NEW STATS AND DATA RESOURCES The Insight and Intelligence Team at Cheshire West & Chester Council have produced some Parish Council statistics which is a free resource. These are for the current Parish Councils (taking into account the boundary changes from the 2015 Governance Review). These will be useful for Neighbourhood Planning, rural housing needs analysis and will give Parish Councils statistics on their resident populations. The new products include: - A short summary document which contains guidance on 2011 Census data for parishes - A 2011 Census Overview Profile for each Parish Council - A 2011 Census Housing Profile for each Parish Council Available on the JSNA (Joint Strategic Needs Assessment) website: us_2011/census_2011 parish There are also sheets for each Parish Council with the most recent (currently 2014) mid-year estimates of population and some key statistics from the 2011 Census and 2001 Census: ulation/mid_year_estimates_2014_/mid_year_population_estimates parish

5 CHESHIRE WEST AND CHESTER (CWaC) COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY CHARGING SCHEDULE What is the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)? CIL is a planning charge, introduced by the Planning Act 2008 as a tool for local authorities in England and Wales to help deliver infrastructure to support the development of their area. It came into force on 6 April 2010 through the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations Source: In January 2016, CWaC consulted on its draft charging schedule for CIL, and CCA asked a series of questions to which CWaC gave the following responses: How does CIL get paid to Town and Parish Councils from development and when? CWaC response: Neighbourhood Planning groups are able to input into the content of the Regulation 123 list and Parish / Town Councils will be able to decide how their portion of any chargeable development in their area is spent. CIL is paid on implementation of development, although may be paid in instalments for larger developments. A system will need to be set up to automatically pass on the relevant percentage of CIL to relevant Town / Parish Councils. What are the implications for areas that want to do, or indeed have started a Neighbourhood Plan, but won t be eligible for CIL under these proposals, whereas the guidance states that areas with a Neighbourhood Plan will be entitled to 25% of CIL money? CWaC response: 15% of CIL receipts from development in an area must be provided to the Town / Parish Council where the development is located. This rises to 25% if the area has a made Neighbourhood Plan. In areas that have a 0 charge, any developments in this area will not pay any CIL money and therefore Parish / Town Council will not get any CIL monies directly. So in terms of CIL, in areas with 0 charge it does not make a difference to the level of CIL received whether there is or

6 CWaC CIL CHARGING SCHEDULE UPDATE CONTINUED is not a Neighbourhood Plan (as it would be 0 in either case). However, CIL receipts held by the charging authority (CWaC) can be spent anywhere in the borough, so could potentially be spent on infrastructure in areas with a 0 charge. If CIL is paid in a Neighbourhood Plan area at 25% - can it only fund infrastructure evidenced in the Neighbourhood Plan or is it wider than this? CWaC response: The regulations state that Parish / Town Councils must use CIL receipts to support the development of the local council s area, or any part of that area, by funding a) the provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure; or b) anything else that is concerned with addressing the demands that development places on an area. Where there is a Community Land Trust forming or already set up, how can this benefit from CIL and will a CLT that is providing affordable homes and other assets for community benefit take priority for CIL funding? Community Land Trusts are a supported approach to provision of affordable housing in Policy SOC3 of the Local Plan, however, to support this, local resources will be needed. CWaC response: The Parish / Town Council could potentially use CIL funds to support work of a Community Land Trust if it complies with the definition above. Does the Local Authority have a list of infrastructure to be funded and if so, how can communities influence where the money goes and what evidence is needed to do this? CWaC response: The Regulation 123 list is the list of infrastructure projects and types to be funded through CIL. Local communities can submit suggestions of infrastructure projects or types to include on this list, but they must contribute to delivery of development set out in the Local Plan and should not just remedy existing deficiencies. Information on costs, funding sources and timescales would also need to be provided. If a large piece of infrastructure is needed, how can the Neighbourhood Plan groups facilitate a reasonable CIL contribution from development to help fund the larger infrastructure projects? In other words, how will the Local Authority s infrastructure requirements be matched or linked with that of the local communities? CWaC response: CIL funds will be spent on infrastructure types or projects on the Regulation 123 list and Local Councillors will make decisions on how spending should be prioritised. The CIL charging schedule will be examined on 13 December For more information visit:

7 NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING MAKES THE HEADLINES AGAIN! You may recall that in the last newsletter we reported that neighbourhood planning had hit the headlines early in May, even making the front page of The Times. It was all to do with the St Ives Neighbourhood Plan 83.2% residents voted for the plan on 5 th May, and it contained a controversial policy regarding second homes. The policy meant that new housing projects will only get planning permission if they are reserved for full-time residents. St Ives held the vote after a surge in holiday homes in the Cornish town and a shortage of affordable housing. According to St Ives town council, 25% of residential properties in 2011 were classed as second homes a 67% increase from A judicial review was held and in November it was announced that the High Court found the policy to be lawful. The court heard that the claimant, private developer RLT Built Environment Ltd, sought to challenge the making of the neighbourhood plan on the basis that there had been inadequate consideration of reasonable alternatives to the plan s policies, contrary to the Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) Directive. The developer argued that increasing the amount of available market housing for local people to buy was a reasonable alternative to the proposal in the plan. The developer also argued that the principal residence requirement was an unjustified interference with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), that being the right to a home, which would be enjoyed by future occupiers of dwellings subject to restriction. Justice Hickinbottom said he considered the policy to be in pursuit of legitimate public interests identified in Article 8, namely the interests of the economic well-being of the country, and for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. He therefore granted permission to proceed with the policy. Edwina Hannaford, cabinet member for planning, Cornwall Council, said: This is a hugely important judgement for Cornwall, St Ives Town Council and for the residents of St Ives who wanted to ensure that any new homes in the town would be the resident s sole or main residence.

8 SWANWICK, IN DERBYSHIRE, BECOMES THE FIRST PLAN TO FAIL AT REFERENDUM In a referendum held In October, Swanwick residents voted by 964 (85.5 %) to 164 (14.5 %) to reject a neighbourhood plan for their parish - the first in England to reject a neighbourhood plan. However, Swanwick Parish Council s neighbourhood plan steering group had themselves opted to actively campaign for a no vote after Amber Valley Borough Council refused their request for the neighbourhood plan to be withdrawn from referendum. Planning Resource details how the parish council had objected to a series of modifications to the plan recommended by examiner Nigel McGurk and endorsed by the local planning authority. In a report to a parish council meeting in September, George Soudah, chair of the parish council, said that the examiner had effectively "decimated" the submitted plan by "deleting substantial policies and sections of the plan". "The modified plan no longer represents the aspirations and expectations expressed by the Swanwick community. It has been so watered down that it is unrecognisable as the work of all the groups of people who spent time and effort in making contributions to the plan." The parish council formally wrote to Amber Valley Borough Council requesting that the plan be withdrawn from referendum "as it is not likely to succeed without the support of Swanwick Parish Council and the Swanwick neighbourhood plan steering group". However, the borough council rejected that request, prompting the parish council s neighbourhood plan steering group to resolve to "campaign and actively promote a no vote". Amber Valley Borough Council said that they accepted the neighbourhood plan after changes, recommended by an independent examiner, were made. The majority of the changes were recommended to meet the basic conditions of a neighbourhood plan. Because the parish council did not request that the neighbourhood plan be withdrawn before the borough council s decision to accept it, we were legally-bound to proceed with organising a referendum." Mr McGurk s examination report, published in April, had recommended that, subject to modifications, the neighbourhood plan should proceed to referendum. His modifications included the deletion of the plan s aims and objectives, and the deletion of policies related to sustainable development principles, protected open land and affordable housing. He acknowledged that the deletion of the plan s protected open space policy would be "particularly disappointing for planmakers and the local community" but noted that the council s local plan "affords protection to open space" and that the replacement local plan "will, as it emerges, afford opportunities, through the consultation process, for Swanwick Parish Council and/or the local community to engage in the consideration of how to protect important spaces into the future". The examiner s report and submitted plan are well worth a read. d38

9 LESSONS FROM PLANS FAILING THEIR EXAMINATION Three neighbourhood plans have failed examination in the last few months, but observers say that an increase in the number of failures is inevitable as the number of plans coming forward grows. So are examiners setting a higher bar for neighbourhood plans? John Parmiter, the examiner who failed the Wantage neighbourhood plan last month over concerns about its "extensive protectionist policies and proposals", does not believe this is the case. Gary Kirk, a neighbourhood plan examiner said that he believes more plans are failing examination due to the sheer number being produced. "There are more going through examination now, so you would expect more to fail," he said. When a plan does fail at examination, it is most likely "devastating for groups", Kirk said. Parmiter added that volunteers "will have put several hundreds of hours of work into producing the plan". So how should they respond to having their plan failed? Teams should "pick themselves up, have another look at the issues highlighted in the report and work through them thoroughly", said Stephen Tapper, the Planning Officers Society s spokesman on neighbourhood plans. Tapper said that the plan for Coton Park in Rugby, which failed examination in January 2015, included a policy that required a lot of highway works, "but these fell into the county council and highway authority s remit, making the realisation of the policy dependent on third parties". This, Tapper said, "is basic stuff that local authorities working more closely with neighbourhood plan teams should be expected to have put right". So why the failures? Kirk believes that misunderstanding the scope of the document - by assuming that it can require third parties to complete projects, for example - is a common pitfall for teams. He said that another aspect many groups grapple with is the evidence base: "Sometimes people who ve lived around a particular green space and would like to see it protected don t step back and actually provide the evidence an examiner will need to confirm the designation. They don t ask themselves: is it beautiful, bounded, close to the village, tranquil, used by the community, of historical significance? The National Planning Policy Framework outlines what you need to demonstrate." The five plans that have failed at examination stage are Wantage, Vale of White Horse, Aug The examiner stated that the plan was "overly focused on protecting the locality s many features, too often without sufficiently robust evidence to do so". Berinsfield, South Oxfordshire, May The plan did not have regard to national policies, particularly in relation to policies for the green belt. Storrington, Sullington and Washington, Horsham, March The examiner highlighted site allocations that did not qualify as locations for sustainable development. Coton Park, Rugby, Jan Two plan policies were found not to meet statutory requirements. In Aug 2015, Rugby Borough Council agreed modifications, and the plan proceeded to referendum. Slaugham, Mid Sussex, Jan The plan was not compatible with EU requirements as the Strategic Environment Assessment was "not satisfactory in a number of respects" It is well worth a look at these Neighbourhood Plans and their examiners reports to see how their policies were viewed not to have met the Basic Conditions.

10 COMMUNITY LED HOUSING UPDATE Since our last update, Cheshire has seen its first Community Land Trust (CLT) become a registered, legal entity in Tattenhall which aims to deliver housing to meet local need. A Community Land Trust (CLT) is a not-for-profit organisation set up to hold assets on behalf of the local community and hold those assets for the benefit of the community in perpetuity. Local CLTs are community controlled and owned, with an open democratic structure, providing permanently affordable housing and other assets e.g. community shops, pubs, cafes, office space, orchards and gardens; and provide long-term stewardship. All surplus income generated from the community assets is reinvested for community benefit. Funding: NCLTN keeps an up-to-date web page with all the latest funding and resources to help with CLTs: For more information please contact John Heselwood, Policy & Development Manager, Cheshire Community Action by john.heselwood@cheshireaction.org.uk or call FINALLY Please do send us any news of progress, or any information which would be useful to share with other groups for inclusion in the next newsletter. Alternatively let us know what you would like to see included. Any contributions will be gratefully received. Please feel free to contact us if you would like to discuss ways that we may be able to assist you in preparing your Neighbourhood Plan. Our contact details are: John Heselwood john.heselwood@cheshireaction.org.uk Lucy Hughes lucy.hughes@cheshireaction.org.uk Richard Thresh richard.thresh@cheshireaction.org.uk You can keep up to date on CCA news via twitter, facebook and our website: You can now follow us on twitter We are also on facebook search for Cheshire Community Action Or visit our website at