NPG Minutes 4 February 2020
Scopwick and Kirkby Green Neighbourhood Planning Group Minutes of the Meeting held on 4th February at the Friendly Farmer Service Station Newark
Attendees;
John Woodward(JW), Owen Davies (OD), John Money (JFM), Peter Reeds(PR), Helen Metcalfe (HM) and Charles Kerrigan (CK).
The meeting was opened with the Chairman attending via mobile phone for the first four agenda items, but due to technical difficulties JW was unable to participate any further. OD acted as chairman for the rest of the meeting.
1. Apologies for absence – None.
2. Minutes of the last meeting – Minutes of the meeting held on 6th January 2020 were agreed.
3. Action Items from the last meeting held on 6th January were as follows:
- JFM was still in the process of testing the Call Connect system to determine how the booking of a vehicle functioned.
- CK had annotated the replies to the proposed call for sites letters on Scopwick and Kirkby Green maps. The replies were discussed further at item 4.
- JFM had contacted Mr Priestley (Housing Strategy Manager NK) for guidance on the draft HNA.
- CK had contacted HM and the Clerk for comments on the HNA.
- PR had responded to AECOM with the Group’s comments by the 8th January.
4. HNA – JFM had briefed the group on the conversation he had had with Mr Priestley (Housing Strategy Manager NK) regarding the AECOM rational with the housing derived dwelling figure. Mr Priestly had confirmed that the housing figure that AECOM had used was taken from the NK figures sourced from the housing department which was an up to date need figure. This figure is continually changing month by month as housing stock becomes empty/occupied. The general scale of growth, in the region of 45 dwellings, reflecting the housing need up to 2040 was based upon the HNA. This was in recognition of the likely move in the revised CLLP already established in the NPPF 2019 to move towards allocating smaller development sites across more settlements.
The Group discussed the possibility of identifying sites for entry level exception sites. HM referred the Group to reference; NPPF para 71 and footnote 33 and/ or rural exception sites as defined in the glossary to the NPPF. The possible sites will need to be allocated in the NP and these sites will need to be viable. The Group agreed that a submission would be made for an additional £10k funding to ensure that the work would be commissioned. This was further discussed at item 11.
The AECOM HNA had yet to be received and PR agreed to follow up with AECOM for the issue of the assessment.
Action point – PR to follow up with AECOM for the issue of the assessment.
5. Call for Sites Letter – CK briefed the Group that as at the time of the meeting there were in total 30 sites submitted by 14 individual replies to the NPG call for sites letter. The maps and submissions were reviewed by the Group. However, the Group were aware of a further 3 possible submissions, and it was felt that a further 7 days should be granted to the reply end date. The 3 possible submissions were from; J Middleton, J Flett and a further site from the Blankney Estates Ltd. The date for returns was extended to 11th February.
The Group noted that two NPG members had direct pecuniary interests with regard to their submission of sites for consideration. It was agreed that they should not be seen to have any influence on the sites’ selection process for which they could benefit. Therefore, JW and JFM would not be included within any future Group discussions regarding site assessments or selections.
Action points – The Group were to contact J Middleton, J Flett and Blankney Estates Ltd to submit their proposed sites by 11th February.
- JW and JFM would not be included within any future Group discussions with regard to site assessments or selections.
6. Progress since the October 2019 meeting – There seemed to be some disconnect with the flow of HM request for information raised at the October 2019. It was agreed that the Group would revisit the action items raised at the meeting and forward any completed actions to CK for the NP evidence based record. CK was to forward all completed actions to HM.
Action points - The Group would revisit the action items raised at the October meeting and forward any completed actions to CK.
- CK was to forward all completed actions to HM.
7. NP Vision and Objectives - The Group agreed that the current HM drafted Vision and Objectives (V&Os) were acceptable with a rewording of number 4, and the inclusion of a new objective as follows:
To ensure that new development is well connected so that it is integrated to the existing settlements. This means a layout that provides safe and direct access (on foot and cycle) to the existing settlements between them and to the wider countryside.
The Group asked HM whether AECOM should have sight of the V&Os. HM stated it was not necessary for AECOM to have the V&Os to do their site assessment, but they will need to do a site visit for the design code work. However, the Group could send them the V&Os, but HM’s view was that it more important that we meet AECOM for the site visits.
Action points - HM was to include the rewording of objective 4 and additional objective.
- CK was to circulate the final agreed document to the Group.
8. Drainage Issue - HM was briefed by the Group that the recent drainage issue was from a planning aspect resolved. But the Group thought that for clarity and audit purposes the follow should be inserted to the minutes;
From a development point of view the Parish drainage is not a major factor. At a recent PC meeting (dated 19th November 2019) the Anglia Water Services (AWS) representative Matt Moore stated that further development would be allowed because the Scopwick and Kirkby Green sewerage system had capacity. He also went on to say if the sewer hasn’t had the capacity AWS would have to undertake remedial measures to accommodate the extra flows (like pumping the ground water into the beck). Therefore, it was believed that AWS as a consultee would not make a negative response to any planning application because the sewer had design capacity.
9. Finance – The current funds available was £6651.90.
10. Public Meeting Arrangements - It was agreed that the Group were still not yet in a position to host a Public Meeting. The HNA had yet to be finalised, and the call for sites returns were still to be finally analysed. A date for a Public Meeting would be determined at the next NPG meeting. However, it was felt that the community really needed to be brought up-to-date on the current situation regarding the NP process. It was agreed that a news letter should be drafted for circulation via the Village Magazine, Janet Flett’s email news letter and posted upon the Village notice boards. CK agreed to draft a piece for distribution.
Action point – CK was to draft a news letter for distribution.
11. Next Steps – Funding Application – Pending the receipt of the HNA it was agreed that applications would be made for further funding to cover the work of site assessment and allocations, design codes, affordable housing for sale and further funding. PR agreed to research the funding processes and if viable submit the appropriate applications.
Action point – PR was to research the future funding processes and if viable, to submit the applications for funds.
12. Date of next meeting – The next working group meeting was to be held as appropriate once the final HNA report had been finalized by AECOM, and the replies to the call for sites letter had been received.