Marston Parish Councillor Hugh Roberts has been beavering away on the idea of neighbourhood plans. Here's his latest report back. My own observations are the end
Report back from Neighbourhood Plan Advisory Group - (MMPC
May 15th 2012, Agenda Item 19)
Background
The January 2012
Meeting of the Marston Moreteyne Parish Council (MMPC) resolved to appoint an
Advisory Committee, pursuant to Standing Order 50 to (a) examine the
feasibility of a Neighbourhood Plan (NP) as set out within the Localism Act
2011 and associated guidance for either solely the Parish of Marston Moreteyne
or in conjunction with contiguous Parishes, and established that the Advisory
Committee (subsequently known as the Neighbourhood Plan Advisory Group, (NPAG) would
comprise Robert, Chris, Emma, Bill, David, Janice and myself to report back no
later than the May 2012 meeting of the PC. This Report seeks to fulfil the task
set by the MMPC within the agreed timetable.
To recap the
Localism Act 2011 provides a new right for communities to draw up a
Neighbourhood Plan (NP) which will enable communities to shape where new homes
and businesses should go and look like and protect green spaces. Neighbourhood
Plans must be in accordance with local policy and vetted by the relevant local
authority - in our case Central Bedfordshire Council (CBC). A National Planning
Policy Framework (NPPF) is now in place which promotes neighbourhood planning
as a 'collective enterprise' which includes people and communities. The NPPF
also states that development which is sustainable should go ahead, without
delay. This is the 'default' position of the NPPF - a presumption in favour of
development.
Parishes contiguous
to Marston Moreteyne - those with which we have a shared boundary - are
Lidlington, Brogborough, Houghton Conquest, Millbrook, Wootton, Stewartby and
Cranfield.
Activity Thus Far :
The NPAG met on
March 13th and members of the Group have also attended workshops hosted by CBC
on the possible CBC Development Strategy, March 14th and Neighbourhood Planning,
March 24th. We also attended a meeting hosted by Lidlington Parish Council on
Monday, March 26th which explored ways of working together. The NPAG in
conjunction with CBC hosted a meeting on April 25th of surrounding Parishes to
receive a presentation on Neighbourhood Plans and examine how we could take
this new planning tool forward either individually or jointly. We also
benefited from attending the Bedfordshire CPRE AGM and hearing how they and
other local community organisations had succeeded in re-establishing the
emphasis on brownfield first, not greenfield in the final version of the NPPF.
General Points Arising.
Obviously a Plan
must have a Purpose - what is it for ! It can provide a more powerful tool with
which to develop a long term sustainable vision for our Parish - immediately
one can become lost in a fog of jargon. Nevertheless in line with many rural areas
in the East of England we face significant challenges: an ageing population,
how to provide affordable accommodation whilst meeting the needs of youth,
community services while retaining and further enhancing the rural feel of the
area.
A successful Plan should
reflect the local housing pressures and identify specific need; it will articulate
local ambition for enhanced community amenities and employment opportunities.
Ultimately it will be for those that live within the Plan area, its business
community and local stakeholders to agree a robust and visionary statement of
what the area needs are and how we intend to meet those needs.
Key activities in
preparing a Plan are formally deciding we wish to form a Plan and where,
establishing a delivery body and mechanism for taking the Plan forward,
consulting with the whole community - care to be taken with hard to reach
groups, the business community, ensuring we have a Plan which meets a sustainability
appraisal and will be in conformity with the CBC over arching Plan - that may
not be until 2014.
Following an
independent examination a referendum is conducted and a majority of those voting
will provide democratic approval. When adopted the Plan will then carry
considerable weight in directing future development applications locally.
A resumé of the issues a Plan could include are the accommodation
needs of a growing elderly population, smaller sheltered units, enabling young
people to remain where they were brought up and families live, housing
solutions that retain the rural nature of Parishes and avoid coalescence of
communities, what additional schools are needed, how can we increase employment
opportunities locally and how can the area fulfil its part in meeting the
housing growth identified by the emerging Development Strategy.
The CBC Development
Strategy could adopt a high level of housing growth declaring CBC is open for
business. Greenbelt is mostly in the southern CBC and the Northern Marston Vale
remains an area designated for growth. Milton Keynes isn't getting any smaller.
If local communities are retain their character they must assert and identify
their interests - a Plan would help do that.
Although within CBC
there are 'front runners' for neighbourhood plans at Caddington, Slip End,
Toddington and Barton Le Clay its not obvious how far forward they are or whether
or when they will be able to share best practice. There seems to be no advantage
in waiting to see what happens in those communities. Each has its own
priorities. For example Barton Le Clay is very concerned about Luton Airport
expansion. However a common theme is communities wishing to retain their
distinctiveness.
The shelf life of a
Plan could be very long indeed and would need to be subject to review. The CBC
Development Strategy when adopted takes us up to 2032 so any NP would be in
that timescale.
If working with
other Parishes, one Parish is generally expected to take the lead. Whether we
proceed alone or with others we need widen our circle of expertise and one
source within our Parish might be those who applied recently to be Parish Councillors
many of whom had project delivery skills.
The actual cost of a
Plan and how this is funded is yet to be clarified and the extent to which it
will be assisted in preparation by CBC planners. However we have been told 'it
would be a great thing to do' : especially if we gave focus to incentivising
businesses into the area. Costs could be shared with other Parishes and
developers and will be related to the complexity of the Plan.
The forum hosted by Lid
linton revealed a willingness to work together across our community, share
services and produce value for money. If we wish to work together the ability
is there, it is merely a matter of will.
Conclusion &
Options Going Forward
Neighbourhood
Planning remains unchartered territory and for some time to come questions as
to time, commitment, complexity, cost will remain unanswered. Therefore it is
impossible at this stage to recommend whether a Plan would be either value of
money or provide the influence over development so trumpeted by champions of
the localism agenda. However it might just do so in the future and we would be
very exposed if we were alone or amongst the few who did not have a Plan and
surrounded by those who did. Developers would see us as 'default position'
land.
So a wise course of
action would be to extend the life of the NPWG for a further period - 12 months
to monitor and engage with relevant parties with the strict proviso that only a
full PC could decide to make a clear commitment to a Plan. Such a Plan could be
either our own, shared with others or simply in tandem with others.
Hugh Roberts
May 9th 2012
Many thanks to Hugh for capturing so much relevant detail and the context relating to neighbourhood plans. I came away from the 25 April presentation by Sally Chapman extremely unsure about the process. The cost, resourcing, time scale, and the need for key information such as future housing growth are all problematic.
I thought the discouragement against working as a cluster of parishes including with Wootton and Stewartby was disappointing. If we all pursue individual NPs it will effectively Balkanise the Vale.
Hugh writes:
we would be very exposed if we were alone or amongst the few who did not have a Plan and surrounded by those who did. Developers would see us as 'default position' land.
This is quite right but there needs to be more reason to create a plan than just everyone else doing it and big being left out. But that was the CBC message unfortunately.
Whether we do a plan, or plans or none at all I think the MV liaison group process initiated in Lidlington and continuing in Cranfield on 11 July is a valuable one. I think the local parishes need to work together on a range of issues including maybe joint commissioning of services. At the same time they might consider setting out a joint broad vision of the Vale's future. This might not have the legal effect of a NP but could be done with less bureaucracy and realise the aspiration to work Vale-wide.
However I would see this process and any NP activity as both-and not either-or.
Laurence Pollock
12 May
