Notes of NDP Steering Group Online Meetings held 29 Sept 2021 & 12 Oct 2021

Notes of NDP Steering Group Online Meetings held 29 Sept 2021 7:30pm & 12 Oct 2021 7:30pm

Present at both meetings: – Andrew De La Haye, Joanne Akers, Chris Barron, Peter Dunn, Janine Liddle, Ruth Dolman, Bill Bloxsome

1. Apologies: There were no apologies for absence.

2. Resignations: It was noted that Bob Puzey had resigned from the steering group but offered to continue to offer support in maintaining the NDP Website. All members were happy and grateful for this assistance.

3. Declarations: The following declarations of interest were received in respect of item 7.2;
Andrew De La Haye in relation to the settlement map for Howle Hill (29/9/21) Jannine Liddle and Peter Dunn in relation to the settlement map for Walford and Coughton (29/9/21) Ruth Dolman in relation to the settlement maps for Bishopswood (29/9/21 & 12/10/21)

4. Minutes: The notes of the previous meeting held on 3rd August 2021 were approved.

5. Public Participation Session: Phil Grant identified himself as the owner of site 11 and was present to listen to proceedings

6. The formal withdrawal of site 37 from the NDP was noted and will be included in a 4th addendum along with other changes resulting from the WPC EM meeting of 8 Sept 2021

7. Consideration of instructions from WPC following the EM on 8th September 2021
7.1. Paint a picture of what major development means and present at the October WPC meeting.
29/9/21 After much discussion it was concluded that what would constitute major development would be different for each settlement. The method agreed upon was to determine what was typical in each settlement and establish that anything larger would be considered major. Bill and Chris will work together to draw up something for consideration at the next meeting.

12/10/21 Bill Bloxsome had circulated a document about defining Major Development with recommendations to be added to the supporting statement/policy justification and appendix ’s with an explanation of how it might be used. Joanne Akers requested the addition of views from the top of the valley to the bottom. It was agreed to incorporate Bill’s suggestion into the draft with these additions.

7.2. Prepare maps for the settlement boundaries to present to October WPC meeting.
Andrew De La Haye was excluded from talks concerning Howle Hill.(29/9/21)
Jannine Liddle and Peter Dunn were excluded from talks concerning Walford and Coughton. (29/9/21)
Ruth Dolman was excluded from talks concerning Bishopswood (29/9/21 & 12/10/21)

29/9/21 Chris had prepared maps illustrating the built up areas within each settlement with sites 24R, 26, 32,34 added. The maps for Walford and Coughton, Ross fringe, and Howle Hill were accepted as they are to present to WPC. There were 2 options discussed for Bishopswood, one as instructed with the built up areas and sites 24R, 26, 32,34 added and one with these plus the dwellings following the curtilage of the sites added. It was agreed to present both options to WPC and Bill Bloxsome will produce a Map of the second option for the next meeting.

12/10/21 Further discussion took place about the outline for the second option for the settlement boundary for Bishopswood and which version of the map illustrating the settlement boundaries would appear in the draft for WPC. It was agreed to accept the second option as drawn by Bill Bloxsome and include the first option in the draft plan and present the second option separately to WPC.
7.3. Consider the potential of BREEAM for use in WALF 9.
The BREEAM and the Code for Sustainable Homes schemes are both managed by the Building Research
Establishment (BRE). There are other schemes such as Passivhaus which might also be used. This is covered under the justification for WALF9, para 5.10

7.4. Approach for including views from PROWs or roads
29/9/21 It was agreed that the Views Policy would be incorporated into WALF4 by Bill Bloxsome, Andrew would
circulate the photo’s already received and members would pick the best ones to use.
12/10/21 Bill Bloxsome had produced a draft policy. Joanne Akers again requested the addition of views from the top of the valley facing downwards, in particular from the top of the field above Cherry Tree lane as well as reference to serial views of Howle Hill, Bulls Hill and Leys Hill. The SG went through the photo’s therein to identify which were acceptable and which needed replacing to better define what the NDP is trying to protect. It was agreed Andrew De La Haye, Joanne Akers, Janine Liddle and Peter Dunn would retake photo’s of some of the views discussed and forward these to Bill for inclusion.
Peter Dunn suggested including maps showing the angle of the views from the various viewpoints and it was agreed to try to produce / include these in the policy. It was agreed that the Views Policy needed to be a stand alone policy instead of included within WALF4 and that Bill Bloxsome will number the Views Policy as WALF5 and re-number the subsequent policies.

7.5. Update and amend the Draft NDP to reflect the decisions made at the EM of 8th September 2021, changes in facilities and businesses mentioned in WALF 13 and typographic errors provided by councillors.

29/9/21 Bill took members through the alterations already made in V5. In addition to this here was discussion regarding;
a) WALF2 – to remove “and there is adequate infrastructure”
b) 5.9 – To beef it up regarding Surface Water Flood Risk
c) 3.16 – To remove Option 1 – To meet the required housing needs through the allocation of one large site
d) WALF10 – To include Air Source Heat Pumps in Para 5.11
e) Increase the strength of the narrative in relation to the consultations and survey results regarding public objections to major development in relation to the choice of housing options NDP para 3.17
f) WALF16 – To leave the following addition in for councillors to consider.
“j) Sites for 6 or more dwellings should provide an element of affordable housing at the rate of 40% unless there is evidence that the need at the time of a planning application is lower, in which case the proportion can be reduced accordingly.”


a) To Update paragraph 3.9 with the housing figures
b) WALF4 – To add views from the top of the valley facing downwards, and serial views of Howle Hill,
Bulls Hill and Leys Hill.
c) To re-name / number from Policy WALF5 onward
d) Bill to contact Sam Banks at HC regarding the necessity to include something on nutrient neutrality under Wastewater and Pollution, and include if needed.
7.6. Windfall allowance refinement

29/9/21 Andrew had carried out an assessment and didn’t agree with the figures presented by Bill. It was agreed that Andrew and Bill would work on this together and bring their findings to the next meeting.

12/10/21 It was agreed to include the windfall figure of 18 into the draft.
7.7. Review/strengthen WALF8 in respect of surface water flooding This had been completed by Bill.

8. To define the process for Regulation 14 for presentation at the October WPC meeting.

29/9/21 Bill will produce and circulate the process.

12/10/21 Bill Bloxsome had produced a document for the process for Reg 14 and it was agreed to adopt this document for presentation to WPC with the suggestion that the SG undertake this process for WPC. Andrew De La Haye agreed to break down the list of consultees into three categories for WPC’s consideration. 1) Must Consult. 2) For WPC to Consider Consulting. 3) Not Necessary. WPC also needs to decide who should send the emails to the consultees. Bill Bloxsome has templates which he is happy to forward to the nominated person who will contact the consultees.

9. Negotiations with RTC The Clerk had sent an email to RTC requesting they consider a Memorandum of Understanding along with a draft as a starting point. RTC are to consider this at their meeting of 13/10/21.

10. Communications Although the NDP email had not been checked in the last week or so due to holidays, up until then, since the WPC EM on 8 September there had been no further correspondence received.

11. Items for next meeting agenda
Reg 14

12. Date of next meeting: TBC


2 thoughts on “Notes of NDP Steering Group Online Meetings held 29 Sept 2021 & 12 Oct 2021”

  1. Site 11R was ranked in first position as a large site. It was subsequently reduced in size to accommodate a medium sized site for 19 dwellings. There is no reason why it cannot be reduced even more to meet the requirements of a small site for the NDP. Please could it be included as a small site in your final development plan?

    • Walford Parish Council has formally approved the NDP for consultation under Regulation 14 of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations. Following that resolution, any representations will need to be submitted through the consultation process. Statutory consultees, site owners and other relevant organisations will be notified when that consultation process is to commence, and it will be widely advertised through the NDP website and other means.

      On behalf of the NDP Steering Group


Leave a comment