North Hertfordshire District Council Pirton · The village of Pirton is first recorded in the Domesday Book as Peritone meaning pear tree farm and has a long and rich history with

North Hertfordshire District Council

Pirton Neighbourhood Development Plan 2011 - 2031 Independent Examiner’s Report By Ann Skippers BSc (Hons) MRTPI FRSA AoU

19 December 2017

2

Contents

Summary

3

1.0 Introduction

4

2.0 Theroleoftheindependentexaminer

4

3.0 Neighbourhoodplanpreparationandtheexaminationprocess

6

4.0 Compliancewithmattersotherthanthebasicconditions 8

5.0 ThebasicconditionsNationalpolicyandadviceSustainabledevelopmentThedevelopmentplanEuropeanUnionobligations

99

101011

6.0

DetailedcommentsonthePlananditspolicies1. PlanBackground2. ParishPortrait3. KeyThemes4. TheNeighbourhoodPlanVisionandObjectives5. TheNeighbourhoodPlanPolicies- 5.1HousingandDevelopment(PolicyPNP1)- 5.2DesignandCharacter(PoliciesPNP2,PNP3)- 5.3Biodiversity,EnvironmentandHeritage(PoliciesPNP4,PNP5,PNP6,

PNP7,PNP8)- 5.4AmenitiesandFacilities(PoliciesPNP9,PNP10)- 5.5TransportandConnectivity(PoliciesPNP11,PNP12,PNP13)6. NonPlanningPolicyIssues7. EvidenceBaseDocuments8. ListofAbbreviationsandGlossary

1313151515161618

212930333333

7.0 Conclusionsandrecommendations 33

Appendix1ListofkeydocumentsAppendix2Questionsofclarification

3536

3

SummaryIhavebeenappointedastheindependentexaminerofthePirtonNeighbourhoodDevelopmentPlan.ThevillageofPirtonisfirstrecordedintheDomesdayBookasPeritonemeaningpeartreefarmandhasalongandrichhistorywithnumerouslistedbuildingsandaConservationArea.Todaythevillagehasapproximately1300residents.TheParishissituatedontheslopesoftheChilternHillsclosetoNorthHertfordshire’sborderwithBedfordshireandthevillageliessomethreemilesnorthwestofHitchin.ThePlanbuildsonearlierworkcarriedoutbytheParishCouncilwhichincludedworkonaVillageDesignStatement,aParishPlanandaHousingNeedsSurvey.ThesupportingdocumentsandinparticulartheBasicConditionsStatementareveryhelpfulandcomprehensivedocumentsthatIcommendtoothers.InadditionthePlanhasbeenproducedagainstthebackdropofaratherdatedLocalPlanandtheemergenceofanewLocalPlanwhichisnowatanadvancedstage.ItisclearthattherehasbeencloseworkingandcooperationbetweentheParishandDistrictCouncilsaswellasexemplaryandconstantengagementwiththecommunity.Whilstnositeallocationsaremadeforhousing,allofthePlan’s13policiesarecriteriabasedandwillhelptoensurethatanydevelopmentissustainableandsuitablefortheParish.ThisisasensiblewayforwardgiventheuncertaintyatDistrictlevelexperiencedduringthePlanpreparationperiodandwillhelptoensurethatthePlanretainsitspurposeaswellasaddressingthecommunity’sconcernsaboutdevelopmentpressure.DuringthecourseoftheexaminationIaskedforfurtherinformationaboutanumberofissues.IamgratefultobothCouncilsfortheirattentiontothisandforenablingtheexaminationtorunsmoothly.IhaverecommendedaseriesofmodificationswhichbyandlargearetohelpensurethatthePlanisamoreworkabledocumentthatprovidesapracticalframeworkfordecisionmaking.Subjecttothosemodifications,IhaveconcludedthatthePlandoesmeetthebasicconditionsandalltheotherrequirementsIamobligedtoexamine.IamthereforepleasedtorecommendtoNorthHertfordshireDistrictCouncilthatthePirtonNeighbourhoodDevelopmentPlancangoforwardtoareferendum.InconsideringwhetherthereferendumareashouldbeextendedbeyondtheNeighbourhoodPlanareaIseenoreasontoalterorextendthisareaforthepurposeofholdingareferendum.AnnSkippersMRTPIAnnSkippersPlanning19December2017

4

1.0 IntroductionThisisthereportoftheindependentexaminerintothePirtonNeighbourhoodDevelopmentPlan(thePlan).TheLocalismAct2011providesawelcomeopportunityforcommunitiestoshapethefutureoftheplaceswheretheyliveandworkandtodeliverthesustainabledevelopmenttheyneed.Onewayofachievingthisisthroughtheproductionofaneighbourhoodplan.IhavebeenappointedbyNorthHertfordshireDistrictCouncil(NHDC)withtheagreementoftheParishCouncil,toundertakethisindependentexamination.IhavebeenappointedthroughtheNeighbourhoodPlanningIndependentExaminerReferralService(NPIERS).Iamindependentofthequalifyingbodyandthelocalauthority.IhavenointerestinanylandthatmaybeaffectedbythePlan.Iamacharteredtownplannerwithovertwenty-fiveyearsexperienceinplanningandhaveworkedinthepublic,privateandacademicsectorsandamanexperiencedexaminerofneighbourhoodplans.Ithereforehavetheappropriatequalificationsandexperiencetocarryoutthisindependentexamination.2.0 TheroleoftheindependentexaminerTheexaminermustassesswhetheraneighbourhoodplanmeetsthebasicconditionsandothermatterssetoutinparagraph8ofSchedule4BoftheTownandCountryPlanningAct1990(asamended).Theexaminerisrequiredtocheck1whethertheneighbourhoodplan:

§ Hasbeenpreparedandsubmittedforexaminationbyaqualifyingbody§ Hasbeenpreparedforanareathathasbeenproperlydesignatedforsuchplan

preparation§ Meetstherequirementstoi)specifytheperiodtowhichithaseffect;ii)not

includeprovisionaboutexcludeddevelopment;andiii)notrelatetomorethanoneneighbourhoodareaandthat

§ Itspoliciesrelatetothedevelopmentanduseoflandforadesignatedneighbourhoodarea.

1Setoutinsections38Aand38BofthePlanningandCompulsoryPurchaseAct2004asamendedbytheLocalismAct

5

Thebasicconditions2are:

§ HavingregardtonationalpoliciesandadvicecontainedinguidanceissuedbytheSecretaryofState,itisappropriatetomaketheneighbourhoodplan

§ Themakingoftheneighbourhoodplancontributestotheachievementofsustainabledevelopment

§ Themakingoftheneighbourhoodplanisingeneralconformitywiththestrategicpoliciescontainedinthedevelopmentplanforthearea

§ Themakingoftheneighbourhoodplandoesnotbreach,andisotherwisecompatiblewith,EuropeanUnion(EU)obligations

§ Prescribedconditionsaremetinrelationtotheneighbourhoodplanandprescribedmattershavebeencompliedwithinconnectionwiththeproposalfortheneighbourhoodplan.

Regulations32and33oftheNeighbourhoodPlanning(General)Regulations2012(asamended)setouttwoadditionalbasicconditionstothosesetoutinprimarylegislationandreferredtointheparagraphabove.Onlyoneisapplicabletoneighbourhoodplansandis:

§ ThemakingoftheneighbourhoodplanisnotlikelytohaveasignificanteffectonaEuropeansite3oraEuropeanoffshoremarinesite4eitheraloneorincombinationwithotherplansorprojects.

ImustalsoconsiderwhetherthedraftneighbourhoodplaniscompatiblewithConventionrights.5Theexaminermustthenmakeoneofthefollowingrecommendations:

§ Theneighbourhoodplancanproceedtoareferendumonthebasisitmeetsallthenecessarylegalrequirements

§ Theneighbourhoodplancanproceedtoareferendumsubjecttomodificationsor

§ Theneighbourhoodplanshouldnotproceedtoareferendumonthebasisitdoesnotmeetthenecessarylegalrequirements.

Iftheplancanproceedtoareferendumwithorwithoutmodifications,theexaminermustalsoconsiderwhetherthereferendumareashouldbeextendedbeyondtheneighbourhoodplanareatowhichitrelates.Iftheplangoesforwardtoreferendumandmorethan50%ofthosevotingvoteinfavouroftheplanthenitismadebytherelevantlocalauthority,inthiscaseNorthHertfordshireDistrictCouncil.Theplanthenbecomespartofthe‘developmentplan’

2Setoutinparagraph8(2)ofSchedule4BoftheTownandCountryPlanningAct1990(asamended)3AsdefinedintheConservationofHabitatsandSpeciesRegulations20124AsdefinedintheOffshoreMarineConservation(NaturalHabitats,&c.)Regulations20075ThecombinedeffectoftheTownandCountryPlanningActSchedule4Bpara8(6)andpara10(3)(b)andtheHumanRightsAct1998

6

fortheareaandastatutoryconsiderationinguidingfuturedevelopmentandinthedeterminationofplanningapplicationswithintheplanarea.3.0 NeighbourhoodplanpreparationandtheexaminationprocessAConsultationStatementhasbeensubmittedwhichmeetstherequirementsofRegulation15(2)oftheNeighbourhoodPlanning(General)Regulations2012.ThePlanhasbeenunderpinnedbyearlierworkonaVillageDesignStatement(2005),HousingNeedsSurvey(2010)andaParishPlan(2013).Afteraparish-widemeetinginMay2013supportingtheproductionofaneighbourhoodplan,aSteeringGroupwasestablishedtotakeitforward.CommunicationwiththecommunityhasbeenthroughthemonthlyParishmagazine,theParishCouncilnewsletter,progressreports,websitesincludingonedevotedtothePlan,FacebookincludingonespecificallyforthePlan,emailsandleafletdrops.InJune2014,consultationtookplaceonkeythemesvialeafletsandstallsateventsandthroughspecificcontactwithkeygroupsandorganisations.ThisculminatedinthepublicationofaConsultationDocumentonkeythemescirculatedtoeachhouseholdandbusinessintheParishandincludedlandowners.ItwasalsoavailableonwebsitesandFacebook.IntheAutumn2014,twoquestionnaireswereproduced;oneaimedatyouth.Exceptionallyhighresponserateswereachieved;over80%fromhouseholdsand90%fromyouthinthosehouseholds.Feedbackwasgiventothecommunityabouttheresponses.Thenextstageinvolvedtheformulationofthevision,objectivesandpoliciesforthePlan.InJuly2015thesewereconsulteduponandwidelyadvertised.Feedbackonresponseswasgiven.WorkthenbeganonthedraftPlanitself.Pre-submission(Regulation14)consultationtookplacebetween4April–16May2016.Theconsultationwaspublicisedtoeachhouseholdbyindividualleaflet,postersaroundthevillage,onallcommunicationchannels,apublicmeeting,SteeringGroupmeetings,a‘reminder’leafletdropanddaybydaycountersonFacebook.Anumberofaimsweredefinedfortheconsultationprocessandthesearedetailedonpage3oftheConsultationStatement.Technicaladvicewasreceivedfromaplanningconsultant.ThroughouttherehasbeenliaisonandcooperationwithNHDC.Iconsidertherehasbeensustainedandexemplaryengagementwith,andfeedbackto,thecommunitythroughouttheprocess.

7

TheConsultationStatementisathorough,comprehensiveandexemplarydocumentthatIcommendtoothersasanexampleofexcellentpractice.Submission(Regulation16)consultationwascarriedoutbetween9February–23March2017.TheRegulation16stageattractedanumberofrepresentationsfromdifferentpeopleororganisations.IhavetakenalltherepresentationsreceivedduringtheRegulation16periodofconsultationintoaccount.Ihavesetoutmyremitearlierinthisreport.Itisusefultobearinmindthattheexaminer’sroleislimitedtotestingwhetherornotthesubmittedneighbourhoodplanmeetsthebasicconditionsandothermatterssetoutinparagraph8ofSchedule4BtotheTownandCountryPlanningAct1990(asamended).6PlanningPracticeGuidance(PPG),anonlinesuiteofplanningguidancefirstpublishedbytheGovernmenton6March2014,butregularlyupdatedconfirmsthattheexaminerisnottestingthesoundnessofaneighbourhoodplanorexaminingothermaterialconsiderations.7WhereIfindthatpoliciesdomeetthebasicconditions,itisnotnecessaryformetoconsideriffurtheramendmentsoradditionsarerequired.Somerepresentationshavesoughttheallocationofsites.Whilstneighbourhoodplanscanallocatesitesfordevelopmentthereisnoobligationtodoso.NeitherisanindividualneighbourhoodplanthevehicletotestobjectivelyassessedhousingneedsorthehousingstrategyfortheDistrict.ItisclearthatthePlanhasbeenproducedagainstabackdropofanolderLocalPlanandconsiderableuncertaintyabouttheemergingLocalPlan.AlthoughthePlanisnottestedagainstthepoliciesintheemergingLocalPlan,thereasoningandevidenceinformingtheLocalPlanprocessislikelytoberelevant.8PPG9isclearthatitisimportanttominimiseanyconflictsbetweenpoliciesinaneighbourhoodplanandthoseinanemergingLocalPlan.Thisisbecauseanyconflictmustberesolvedbythedecisiontakerfavouringthepolicyinthelastdocumenttobecomepartofthedevelopmentplan;inotherwordsitisthemostrecentlyadoptedpolicythatwilltakeprecedenceshouldtherebeanyconflictbetweenpolicies.PPGsuggeststhatneighbourhoodplansshouldconsiderallocatingreservesitesforexampletoensurethatemergingevidenceofhousingneedcanbeaddressed.10InthisinstancetherehasbeencloseworkingbetweentheParishandDistrictCouncils.ThePlanacceptsthathousingrequirementsmayrisegiventheuncertaintyatLocalPlanlevel.TworepresentationsfromtheHealthandSafetyExecutiveandHertfordshireCountyCouncil-Highwayssenttomeinthebundleofdocumentsrelatedtoanotherneighbourhoodplan.InresponsetomyqueryNHDCconfirmsthatthesedocumentswereincludedinerrorandIhavebeensentcopiesoftheonesmadebytheseorganisationsatRegulation16stageinrelationtothisPlan.

6PPGpara055refid41-055-201403067Ibid8Ibidpara009refid41-009-201602119Ibidpara009refid41-009-2016021110Ibid

8

PPGexplains11thegeneralruleofthumbisthattheexaminationwilltaketheformofwrittenrepresentations,12buttherearetwocircumstanceswhenanexaminermayconsideritnecessarytoholdahearing.Thesearewheretheexaminerconsidersthatitisnecessarytoensureadequateexaminationofanissueortoensureapersonhasafairchancetoputacase.IhavesoughtclarificationonanumberofmattersfromtheParishCouncilandNHDCinwritingandmylistofquestionsisattachedtothisreportasAppendix2.IamverygratefultobothCouncilswhohaveprovidedmewithcomprehensiveanswers.Theresponsesreceived(allpubliclyavailable)haveenabledmetoexaminethePlanwithouttheneedforahearing.Imadeanunaccompaniedsitevisittotheneighbourhoodplanareaon29October2017.4.0 CompliancewithmattersotherthanthebasicconditionsInowcheckthevariousmatterssetoutinsection2.0ofthisreport.QualifyingbodyPirtonParishCouncilisthequalifyingbodyabletoleadpreparationofaneighbourhoodplan.Thisrequirementissatisfactorilymet.PlanareaThePlanareawasapprovedbyNHDCon24January2014.ThePlanareaiscoterminouswiththeParishadministrativeboundary.ThePlanrelatestothisareaanddoesnotrelatetomorethanoneneighbourhoodareaandthereforecomplieswiththenecessaryrequirements.ThePlanareaisshownonpage2ofthePlan.PlanperiodThePlancoverstheperiod2011–2031.ThisisclearlystatedonthePlan’sfrontcover,inthePlanitselfandintheBasicConditionsStatement(BCS).ExcludeddevelopmentThePlandoesnotincludepoliciesthatrelatetoanyofthecategoriesofexcludeddevelopmentandthereforemeetsthisrequirement.

11PPGpara056refid41-056-2014030612Schedule4B(9)oftheTownandCountryPlanningAct1990

9

DevelopmentanduseoflandPoliciesinneighbourhoodplansmustrelatetothedevelopmentanduseofland.Sometimesneighbourhoodplanscontainaspirationalpoliciesorprojectsthatsignalthecommunity’sprioritiesforthefutureoftheirlocalarea,butarenotrelatedtothedevelopmentanduseofland.IfIconsiderapolicyorproposaltofallwithinthiscategory,IwillrecommenditbemovedtoaclearlydifferentiatedandseparatesectionorannexofthePlanorcontainedinaseparatedocument.Thisisbecausewidercommunityaspirationsthanthoserelatingtodevelopmentanduseoflandcanbeincludedinaneighbourhoodplan,butactionsdealingwithnon-landusemattersshouldbeclearlyidentifiable.13Subjecttoanysuchrecommendations,thisrequirementcanbesatisfactorilymet.5.0ThebasicconditionsRegardtonationalpolicyandadviceThemaindocumentthatsetsoutnationalplanningpolicyistheNationalPlanningPolicyFramework(NPPF)publishedin2012.InparticularitexplainsthattheapplicationofthepresumptioninfavourofsustainabledevelopmentwillmeanthatneighbourhoodplansshouldsupportthestrategicdevelopmentneedssetoutinLocalPlans,planpositivelytosupportlocaldevelopment,shapinganddirectingdevelopmentthatisoutsidethestrategicelementsoftheLocalPlanandidentifyopportunitiestouseNeighbourhoodDevelopmentOrderstoenabledevelopmentsthatareconsistentwiththeneighbourhoodplantoproceed.14TheNPPFalsomakesitclearthatneighbourhoodplansshouldbealignedwiththestrategicneedsandprioritiesofthewiderlocalarea.InotherwordsneighbourhoodplansmustbeingeneralconformitywiththestrategicpoliciesoftheLocalPlan.TheycannotpromotelessdevelopmentthanthatsetoutintheLocalPlanorundermineitsstrategicpolicies.15TheNPPFindicatesthatplansshouldprovideapracticalframeworkwithinwhichdecisionsonplanningapplicationscanbemadewithahighdegreeofpredictabilityandefficiency.16IhavealsohadregardtoPPGinpreparingthisreport.Thisisanonlineresourceavailableatplanningguidance.communities.gov.ukwhichisregularlyupdated.Theplanningguidancecontainsawealthofinformationrelatingtoneighbourhoodplanning.

13PPGpara004refid41-004-2017072814NPPFparas14,1615Ibidpara18416Ibidpara17

10

PPGindicatesthatapolicyshouldbeclearandunambiguous17toenableadecisionmakertoapplyitconsistentlyandwithconfidencewhendeterminingplanningapplications.Theguidanceadvisesthatpoliciesshouldbeconcise,preciseandsupportedbyappropriateevidence,reflectingandrespondingtoboththecontextandthecharacteristicsofthearea.18PPGstatesthereisno‘tickbox’listofevidencerequired,butproportionate,robustevidenceshouldsupportthechoicesmadeandtheapproachtaken.19Itcontinuesthattheevidenceshouldbedrawnupontoexplainsuccinctlytheintentionandrationaleofthepolicies.20Whilstthishasformedpartofmyownassessment,theBCSsetsouthowthePlanhasrespondedtonationalpolicyandguidancethroughcommentaryonhowthePlan,itspoliciesandcommunitypriorityactionsalignwiththeNPPF’s13elementsfordeliveringsustainabledevelopment.ContributetotheachievementofsustainabledevelopmentAqualifyingbodymustdemonstratehowthemakingofaneighbourhoodplanwouldcontributetotheachievementofsustainabledevelopment.TheNPPFasawhole21constitutestheGovernment’sviewofwhatsustainabledevelopmentmeansinpracticeforplanning.TheFrameworkexplainsthattherearethreedimensionstosustainabledevelopment:economic,socialandenvironmental.22Whilstthishasformedpartofmyownassessment,theBCScontainsatablewhichsetsouthowthePlan’svisionandobjectives,policiesandcommunitypriorityactionsalignwitheachofthethreecomponentsofsustainabledevelopmentoutlinedintheNPPF.GeneralconformitywiththestrategicpoliciesinthedevelopmentplanThedevelopmentplanrelevanttothisexaminationistheNorthHertfordshireDistrictLocalPlanNo.2(LP1996)adoptedin1996withvariouspoliciessavedin2007.AreducedversionofthewrittenstatementtoincludethesavedpartsoftheLPisavailable.NHDC’swebsiteexplainsthatmostpoliciesremainbroadlyconsistentwiththetheNPPF,butfour(Policies6,25,26and36)areinconsistentwiththeNPPF.EmergingLocalPlanWorkiscurrentlyunderwayonareplacementLocalPlan2011-2031.Atthetimeofwriting,theLocalPlan2011–2031wassubmittedtotheGovernmenton9June2017andanInspectorhasbeenappointedtoundertaketheexamination.Thefirsthearing

17PPGpara041refid41-041-2014030618Ibid19Ibidpara040refid41-040-2016021120Ibid21NPPFpara6whichindicatesparas18–219oftheFrameworkconstitutetheGovernment’sviewofwhatsustainabledevelopmentmeansinpractice22Ibidpara7

11

sessionswerescheduledforweekbeginning13NovemberandwillcontinueintoFebruary/Marchnextyear.IhavehadregardtotheemergingLocalPlanandanyrelevantsupportingmaterialinthisexamination.GiventhedatednatureoftheLP,thePlanhasbeenpreparedwithaneyeontheemergingLocalPlanandcloseliaisonwithNHDCOfficershastakenplace.EuropeanUnionObligationsAneighbourhoodplanmustbecompatiblewithEuropeanUnion(EU)obligations,asincorporatedintoUnitedKingdomlaw,inordertobelegallycompliant.AnumberofEUobligationsmaybeofrelevanceincludingDirectives2001/42/EC(StrategicEnvironmentalAssessment),2011/92/EU(EnvironmentalImpactAssessment),92/43/EEC(Habitats),2009/147/EC(WildBirds),2008/98/EC(Waste),2008/50/EC(AirQuality)and2000/60/EC(Water).PPGindicatesthatitistheresponsibilityoflocalplanningauthoritiestoensurethatthePlaniscompatiblewithEUobligations(includingobligationsundertheStrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentDirective)whenittakesthedecisionona)whetherthePlanshouldproceedtoreferendumandb)whetherornottomakethePlan.23StrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentDirective2001/42/EContheassessmentoftheeffectsofcertainplansandprogrammesontheenvironmentisrelevant.Itspurposeistoprovideahighlevelofprotectionoftheenvironmentbyincorporatingenvironmentalconsiderationsintotheprocessofpreparingplansandprogrammes.ThisDirectiveiscommonlyreferredtoastheStrategicEnvironmentAssessment(SEA)Directive.TheDirectiveistransposedintoUKlawthroughtheEnvironmentalAssessmentofPlansandProgrammesRegulations2004(EAPPR).AScreeningDeterminationdatedApril2016andundertakenbyCAGconsultantsonbehalfofNHDChasbeensubmitted.TheScreeningDeterminationrelatedtotheRegulation14versionofthePlanandconcludedthataSEAisnotrequired.Therequisiteconsultationwiththestatutoryconsulteeswasundertaken.OnlyNaturalEnglandrespondedandtheirletterof20April2016agreeswiththeconclusionoftheScreeningDetermination.IhavetakenthisdocumenttobethestatementofreasonsrequiredbyPPG.24NHDChaveconfirmedthattheSEAScreeningDeterminationwillbereviewedandfinalisedinaccordancewiththeEAPPRonceanymodificationshavebeenmadepostexamination.ThiswillthenensurethatEUobligationsinrespectofSEAhavebeensatisfied.23PPGpara031refid11-031-2015020924Ibidpara031refid11-031-20150209

12

HabitatsRegulationsAssessmentDirective92/43/EEContheconservationofnaturalhabitats,commonlyreferredtoastheHabitatsDirective,isalsoofrelevancetothisexamination.AHabitatsRegulationsAssessment(HRA)identifieswhetheraplanislikelytohaveasignificanteffectonaEuropeansite,eitheraloneorincombinationwithotherplansorprojects.25TheassessmentdetermineswhethersignificanteffectsonaEuropeansitecanberuledoutonthebasisofobjectiveinformation.Regulation32oftheNeighbourhoodPlanning(General)Regulations2012(asamended)setsoutanotherbasicconditioninadditiontothosesetoutinprimarylegislationasdetailedinsection2.0ofthisreport.OneofthequeriesIraisedwasinrelationtoRegulation32andIaskedwhatassessmenthadbeencarriedoutinrespectofthisbasicconditionandforanyinformationtoenablemetoconsiderwhetherithadbeencompliedwith.TherearenoEuropeansiteswithintheDistrict.ThreeEuropeansitesfallwithina15kmdistanceoftheDistrict;theEversdenandWimpoleWoodsSpecialAreaofConservation(SAC),theWormley-HoddesdonparkWoodsSACandtheLeeValleySpecialProtectionAreaandtheChilternsBeechwoodsSACliesjustoutsidethat15kmdistance.TheSEAScreeningDeterminationreferstoaHRAScreeningReportofFebruary2013.NaturalEngland’sletterof20April2016concurswiththeviewintheScreeningDirectionthatfurtherHabitatsRegulationsAssessmentisnotrequired.Inresponsetothisquery,NHDCdirectsmetotheHRAScreeningReportdatedSeptember2016fortheemergingLocalPlan.NaturalEngland’sresponseatRegulation16stageindicatedtheydidnotwishtomakeanyrepresentationsatthattime[Regulation16stage]havingpreviouslyreviewedthePlan.Giventheinformationbeforeme,theresponsefromNaturalEngland,thenature,characteristicsandlocationsoftheEuropeansitesandthenatureandcontentsofthePlan,IconsiderthatafullHRAisnotrequiredandthatthefurtherbasicconditionsetoutinRegulation32iscompliedwith.EuropeanConventiononHumanRights(ECHR)TheBCScontainsashortstatementaboutfundamentalrightsandfreedomsguaranteedundertheECHRandtheHumanRightsAct1998.ThereisnothinginthePlanthatleadsmetoconcludethereisanybreachoftheConventionorthatthePlanisotherwiseincompatiblewithit.

25PPGpara047refid11-047-20150209

13

PPG26confirmsthatitistheresponsibilityofthelocalplanningauthority,inthiscaseNHDC,toensurethatalltheregulationsappropriatetothenatureandscopeofthedraftneighbourhoodplanhavebeenmet.ItisNHDCwhomustdecidewhetherthedraftplaniscompatiblewithEUobligationswhenittakesthedecisiononwhethertheplanshouldproceedtoreferendumandwhenittakesthedecisiononwhetherornottomaketheplan.6.0DetailedcommentsonthePlananditspoliciesInthissectionIconsiderthePlananditspoliciesagainstthebasicconditions.Wheremodificationsarerecommendedtheyappearinboldtext.WhereIhavesuggestedspecificchangestothewordingofthepoliciesornewwordingtheseappearinbolditalics.ThePlanisverywellpresentedandeasyforreaderstouseanddigest.ItbeginswithaforewordfromtheParishCouncilChairandahelpfulcontentspage.ThroughoutthedocumentthereareanumberofphotographswhichhelptoaddtotheindividualflavourofthisPlan.Mapsanddiagramsareclear.1.PlanBackgroundThissectionsetsouttherationaleforthePlan,confirmsimportantdetailsincludingthedesignationofthePlanareaandexplainsthestrategiccontextforthearea.Inplaces,itseemstomethatthepagereferencenumbershavegoneastrayandsointheinterestsofaccuracyandclarity,Isuggestthatthesearereviewedtomakesuretheyarecorrect.PirtonisidentifiedasaSelectedVillageintheLP1996wherePolicy7applies.ThisindicatesthatdevelopmentwillnormallybepermittedifthesiteiswithinthemainareaofthevillageasshownontheProposalsMap,itisinlinewiththepolicyaimsfortheVisualCharacterAreasorinvolvesretainingandimprovingabuildingthatcontributestothecharacterorvisualqualityofthevillageandwouldmaintainorenhancethecharacterorvisualqualityofthevillageandsourroundingarea.IntheemergingLocalPlan,PirtonisidentifiedasaCategoryAvillagewheregeneraldevelopmentwillbeallowedinthedefinedsettlementboundary.SuchvillagesusuallyhaveaprimaryschoolasisthecaseofPirtonandhavesiteallocations.However,therelevantemergingLocalPlanpolicyissubjecttoamainmodificationandmaychange.Iaminformedthataround110houseshavebeenbuiltorgrantedplanningpermissionsince2011.Pirtonisunusualinthatitdoesnothaveanysiteallocationsinthe

26PPGpara031refid11-031-20150209

14

emergingLocalPlanandthisisadiscussionthatformspartofthehearingsessionsfortheemergingLocalPlan.Pirtonisdescribedasamediumsizedvillagewithareasonablerangeoffacilitiesincludingaprimaryschool,church,villagehall,chapel,ashopandpublichouses.ThewesternpartoftheParishisdesignatedaspartoftheChilternsAreaofOutstandingNaturalBeauty(AONB).AsettlementboundaryisshownwhilsttheremainderoftheParishisclassedasruralareabeyondtheGreenBelt,apartformasmallsectionofGreenBeltinthesouth-eastoftheParish.Inrelationtotheeconomy,theemergingLocalPlanreferstoasteadydemandforruralemploymentlandandpremisesandthatitsgeneralapproachistodirectconcentrationsofruralbusinesstoCategoryAvillages.ThePlanacceptsthelevelofgrowthintheemergingLocalPlanwhichofcourseisyettobeexaminedandmaychange.MostdevelopmentwilltakeplacewithinthedevelopmentboundaryidentifiedforPirton.Theproposeddevelopmentboundaryisshownonpage3ofthePlanandlabeledas‘(fromDraftDLP)”.Withthepassageoftime,thishasnowbeenrevisedintheemergingLocalPlanandwhilstIrecognisethismaybesubjecttochange,itwouldseemsensibletoupdateittoreflectandalignwiththelatestversionoftheemergingLocalPlan.ThepreferredoptionsmapfromtheemergingLocalPlanisshownonpage4ofthePlantogetherwithexplanatorytextatparagraph1.3.7.ThisisbothunnecessaryastheemergingLocalPlanhasnowmovedonandconfusingtoincludeinthisPlan.InorderforthePlantoprovidethepracticalframeworkrequiredbynationalpolicyandguidance,itshouldberemovedfromthePlan.Section1.4ofthePlansetsoutinformationrelatingto,amongstotherthings,theStrategicHousingLandAvailablityAssessment(althoughthisisreferredtoincorrectlyastheAllocationAssessment)andhousingnumbers.ThemostuptodateinformationavailableshouldbesourcedfromNHDCandusedintheinterestsofaccuracyandcompleteness.

§ Reviewthereferencestopagenumberstoensuretheyarecorrectincludingreferencesinparagraphs1.3.4(topage1whichshouldbetheforeword),1.3.6(topage4whichshouldbepage2)

§ Updatethedevelopmentboundarymaponpage3ofthePlantoreflectthemostrecentemergingLocalPlanmapandremovethereferencesonthemaptothedraftLocalPlan

§ Deletethe“PreferredOptionsMap”andparagraph1.3.7frompage4ofthe

PlanandanyreferencestoitthroughoutthePlanforexampleonpage20§ Updateparagraph1.4.3torefertotheSHLAAupdatein2016andcorrectthe

titleoftheSHLAAto“StrategicHousingLandAvailabilityAssessment”

15

§ Updateparagraph1.4.6withthelatesthousingfigureavailable

§ Consequentialrenumberingofparagraphsetc.willbeneeded2.ParishPortraitThissectionconfirmsthatthecommunityrecognisesandacceptstheneedfordevelopment,butseeksdevelopmentthatrecognisesthecharacteroftheareaandthequalitiesthatthecommunityvalue.ItreferstoanumberofstatisticsaboutPirtonandsignpostsotherinformationandevidenceinsupportingdocuments.Therearesomeinstancesofthepagenumberreferencesgoingastray.Inadditionthereisrepetitionbetweenparagraphs2.1.11and2.1.12.Theseshouldberemediedintheinterestsofaccuracy.NHDCalsopointoutthatthemaponpage13shouldbeupdatedtoreflectthemostuptodatepositioninrespecttoPriorsHillandintheinterestsofaccuracythisshouldbedone.

§ Reviewthereferencestopagenumberstoensuretheyarecorrectincludingreferencesinparagraphs2.1.11(topage10)

• Deletetherepetitionbetweenparagraphs2.1.11and2.1.12inrelationtotheVisualCharacterAreareferencesonpage10ofthePlan

§ Updatethemaponpage13toreflecttherevisedboundaryforthescheduledancientmonumentatPriorsHill

3.KeyThemesAshortsectionthatidentifiesfivekeythemeswhichemergedfromcommunityengagementandthemainissuesspringingfromthosethemes.4.TheNeighbourhoodPlanVisionandObjectivesThevisionforthePlanis:

“PirtonParishthrivessocially,economicallyandenvironmentallyasasafe,tranquil,ruralcommunitywheresustainabledevelopmentofgoodandintelligentdesignenhancesitsdistinctivecharacter;itsheritage,biodiversityandposition,andrespectsandenhancesitspositioninthelandscape.”

Elevenobjectivesunderpinthevision.Theserangefromthetypeofhousingprovisionsoughttoconservationandenhancementofthelocallandscape.Allareclearly

16

articulatedandrelatetothedevelopmentanduseoflandandmanyareinclusiveandforwardthinking.5.TheNeighbourhoodPlanPoliciesThepreambletothissectionexplainshowthePlanisorganised.Itmakesastatementreflectingthestatutorydutyondecisiontakerstodetermineplanningapplicationsinaccordancewiththeplanunlessmaterialconsiderationsindicateotherwise.ItincludesastatementthatmakesitcleartheParishCouncilwillworkwithapplicantsandotherstakeholderstoencourageacceptableschemes.Thisisapositivestancetotakeinlinewithnationalpolicyandadvice.Policiesarearrangedunderthekeythemesidentified.Eachpolicyorgroupofpoliciesisprecededbytheobjectivesofrelevanceandissupportedbyajustificationandevidencesection.Thismakesthe‘story’ofthepolicyveryclearandmakesadirectlinkbacktotheoverallvisionandobjectives.5.1HousingandDevelopmentPolicyPNP1MeetingLocalNeedTwosmallpointsofinconsistencyarise;theheadingonpage19refersto“MeetingLocalandWiderNeed”,butthepolicytitlerefersonlytolocalneed.Secondly,objective2onpage19isnotexactlythesameasobjective2onpage16ofthePlan.Intheinterestsofaccuracytheseinconsistenciesshouldberemedied.Turningnowtothepolicyitself,thissupportsdevelopmentwithinthedevelopmentboundarysubjecttovariouscriteria.ItsoverallapproachisbroadlyinlinewithLP1996Policy7insofaritacceptsdevelopmentwithinthemainareaorboundaryofthevillage.ThePlanalsohastakentheopportunitytoreconsiderthatboundaryinlinewiththeemergingLocalPlan.Criterion1.1whichreferstothedevelopmentboundaryshouldcross-refertotheboundaryshownonpage3ofthePlantoprovideclarity.Criterion1.2imposesalimitofamaximumof30dwellingsonanyonesite.TheNPsurveyshowedthatmostpeoplewishedtoseesmallerdevelopmentsofupto10dwellingsorbetween1-25dwellings.ThisissupportedbytheCharacterAssessmentwhichassessespastdevelopmentsizes.Ithasalsobeensubjecttopublicconsultation.Noneoftherepresentationsobjectingtothishavedefinitivelydemonstratedthatindividualdevelopmentsofupto30dwellingscannotbedesignedinanappropriatemanner,wouldnotuselandsustainably,arenotdeliverableorthathousinggrowthcouldnotbeachievedinthisway.Thereisnocaponthetotalnumberofhouses.Inmyopinionthisisnotanarbitraryapproach;ratheritspecificallyseekstomaintainthe

17

village’sstrongandestablishedsenseofplace.ThisapproachhasregardtotheNPPF,whereitrequirespoliciestorecognisehousinggrowthandrespondtolocalcharacter.OthercriteriarelatetothetypeofhousingsoughtincludingforyoungfamiliesandolderpeopleandtheseparticularneedsareevidencedwellthroughamixtureofCensusdata,theCommunityRuralProfile,ParishPlan,HousingNeedsSurveyandNPsurvey.Thepolicypursuesamixofhousingincludingself-build.AffordablehousinginlinewithNHDC’spolicyandtomeetlocalneedsissoughtsubjecttoalegalagreementtoensureaffordablehousinginperpetuity.Allareclearlyworded,demonstrateanunderstandingoftheneedsofthecommunityand,subjecttooneminormodificationtoenhanceflexibility,willaccordwiththebasicconditions.However,twocriteriaraiseissuesinrelationtothebasicconditions.Thefirstiscriterion1.7whichreferstoconstructionmanagementwhichisoftensubjecttoaconditionattachedtoaplanningpermission.However,thecriteriongoesfurtherthanthisbyseekingassuranceonhowanydamagetoinfrastructurecausedbytheconstructionprocessmightberectified.Howeverdesirable,thisseemstometogobeyondwhatcouldbereasonablysoughtinrelationtoplanningmattersandthemethodstatementforconstructionshouldavoiddamagesothelatterpartofthiscriterionshouldbedeleted.Thesecondcriterionis1.8.Thisrequiresdevelopmentsof11ormoredwellingstoaddressadverseimpactsonthecharacterofPirton,thefacilitiesinPirtonandonparkingandpublictransportandtodosoviaaSection106legalagreement.Whilstitisnotunreasonabletoseektoensurethatdevelopmentproposalsshouldminimiseormitigateanyharmfulimpactsarisingfromthatdevelopment,itisnotcleartomehowthiscriterionwouldworkinpractice.Forinstanceiftherewasanadverseimpactonparkingandpublictransportthiscouldbedealtwiththroughtheusualplanningapplicationroutethatmightincludeplanningobligations.However,Icanenvisagemanyargumentsregardingwhatimpactoncharacterandfacilitiesmightincludeandwhetheritwasdirectlyattributabletothedevelopment.ThiscriterionthereforedoesnotprovidetheclarityandprecisionsoughtbynationalpolicyandadviceandIcannotfindawayofmodifyingitsatisfactorilyasitisunclearwhatismeant.Thereforeitshouldbedeleted.Subjecttothesemodifications,thepolicysetsouttheapproachsought,takesaccountofnationalpolicyandguidanceandwillhelptoachievesustainabledevelopmentandthesocialdimensionofsustainabledevelopmentinparticular.

§ Changethepolicytitleto“PolicyPNP1–MeetingLocalandWiderNeeds”

§ Changethesecondobjectiveonpage19ofthePlantoread“Toencouragesensitiveandinnovativedevelopmentinaccordance…”

§ Addtotheendofcriterion1.1“asshownonthemaponpage3ofthePlan”

18

§ Amendcriterion1.5sothatitreads:“Itprovidesamixofhomes(includingtheprovisionofself-buildplotswhereappropriate)….”

§ Deletethewords“…and,howandwhenrepairstoanyinfrastructuredamage

causedbytheconstructionprocesswillberectified.”fromcriterion1.7

§ Deletecriterion1.8initsentirety5.2DesignandCharacterPolicyPNP2DesignandCharacterPolicyPNP2supportsdevelopmentproposalsiftheyaccordwiththePirtonCharacterAssessmentandthe13criteriaofthislongpolicy.TheCharacterAssessmentisamajorpieceofworkthatunderpinsmanyofthePlan’spolicies.InthemaindesignguidanceistobefoundinAppendix5oftheCharacterAssessmentwhichupdatesapreviouslyproducedVillageDesignStatement.Turningtothedetailofthepolicy,thefollowingcriteriawarrantfurtherthought.Criteria2.3.and2.5.refertodensityandsupportamaximumdensityofabout22dwellingsperhectare“onmerit”andwhereanidentifiedneedsuchassocialandaffordablehousingistobemetor17dwellingselsewhere.Anumberofrepresentationshaveexpressedconcernaboutthis.ThesupportingtextreferstotheaveragedensityinPirtonbeingbelow17dwellingsperhectareandthegreatestasabout22,butthereislittleinthePlanorCharacterAssessmenttoindicatewhatassessmentshavebeenmade.TheNPPFenableslocalapproachestodensitytobesetoutreflectinglocalcircumstances.27However,inthisinstancethereislittleexplanationforthemaximumdensityandtheimpositionofamaximumfiguremaybeunnecessarilyrestrictiveandleadtoaninefficientuseofland.ItisimportantthatthepolicyreflectstheNPPF’saimofensuringnewdevelopmentfunctionswellandaddstotheoverallqualityofthearea;respondstolocalcharacterandhistory;andreinforcesandpromoteslocaldistinctiveness.Theimpositionofamaximumdensitycouldpreventdevelopmentatahigherdensitywhichisotherwiseacceptablecomingforward.TheNPPFisclearthatgooddesign(ofwhichdensityisoneconsideration)isakeyaspectofsustainabledevelopment,isindivisiblefromgoodplanningandshouldcontributepositivelytomakingplacesbetterforpeople.28Itcontinues29that

27NPPFpara4728Ibidpara5629Ibidpara65

19

permissionshouldnotberefusedfordevelopmentthatpromoteshighlevelsofsustainabilitybecauseof“concernsaboutincompatibilitywithanexistingtownscape”ifthoseconcernsaremitigatedbygooddesign.Inotherwordshigherdensitymaywellbeacceptableifthereisadesign-ledapproach.ThereforeinordertotakeaccountoftheNPPFthiselementofthepolicyshouldberewordedmorepositivelyandflexibly.Criterion2.6.referstodemonstratingcompliancewiththeChilternsConservationBoard–PositionStatementDevelopmentaffectingthesettingoftheChilternsAONBAdoptedJune2011(Rev1)orasupdated.MyunderstandingisthatthepositionstatementisguidanceproducedbytheChilternsConservationBoard.Thereforethiscriterioncannotrequirecomplianceasthatwouldelevatethisguidancetopolicystatus,butitcouldencourageittobetakenintoaccount.ItisalsounclearwhethertheConservationBoardhasbeencontactedinthisregard.Amodificationismadetoachievethis.InordertoreflectthestatutorydutyinrelationtoConservationAreas,anadditiontocriterion2.9isrecommended.Criterion2.13referstoVisualCharacterAreas(VCA).LP1996Policy7identifiesfourVCAsforPirtonnamelyTootHill,WesternEdge,EasternEdgeandRearoftheFoxPH.TheCharacterAssessmentexplainsthatthesecondandthirdoftheseareasarenowredundantgiventhepermissionsgrantedintheinterveningperiod.Asaresultittakestheopportunitytoupdateandidentifiessixsuchareas(V1–V6).Thecriterionseeksareducedbuildingdensityandheightand“considerable”openspacestobeprovidedinanydevelopmentthataffectsaVCA.Itcontinuesthatonlyinexceptionalcircumstanceswillproposalsthat“adverselyaffect”suchanareabesupported.TheCharacterAssessmentinidentifyingsixVCAsshownonpage11ofthePlaneffectivelysurroundsthevillagewiththeexceptionoftheoppositesideofPriorsHill/HitchinRoadthatfallwithintheChilternsAONB.OneoftheVCAs(V1)alsoincludesthesitenowgrantedplanningpermissionandinanycasefallingwithinthevillagedevelopmentboundary.LP1996Policy7referstoproposal’sbeinginlinewiththepolicyaimsforeachVCA.NosuchaimshavebeenidentifiedfortheupdatedVCAsalthoughtheyarealsoreferredtoastransitionalzones.FurthermoreInotethattheCharacterAssessmentindicates“theyshouldbemaintainedandprotected”.Takingalltheseissuestogether,thereisfirstlylittlehintastohowadecisionmakermightmakeajudgmentabouttheeffectonanyofVCAsasrequiredbythepolicyasthereislittleinformationabouttheirparticularandspecialcharacteristics.Secondly,density,height,spacingandopenspacesarecoveredbyothercriteria.Thirdly,thereappearstobeapotentialconflictbetweenthewordingofthepolicyandtheCharacterAssessment.Asaresultthiscriterionshouldbedeletedasitdoesnothavethe

20

precisionandclarityrequiredbynationalpolicyandguidanceanddoesnotprovideapracticalframework.GiventhefirstpartofthepolicyindicatesproposalswillbesupportediftheyaccordwiththeCharacterAssessmentandthatdocumentindicatesthattheVCAsshouldbemaintainedandprotected,thefirstpartofthepolicyalsorequiresmodification.TheNPPFisclearthatgooddesignisakeyaspectofsustainabledevelopment,isindivisiblefromgoodplanningandshouldcontributepositivelytomakingplacesbetterforpeople.30ThepolicyalsotakesitsleadfromtheguidelinesinLP1996Policy57.Theothercriteriaareclearlywordedsettingoutthequalityofdevelopmentexpectedforthearea.ItreflectstheprinciplesofgoodplanningandwillhelptoensurethatdevelopmentreflectsandrespectsthedistinctivecharacterofPirtonvillageandtheParish.Subjecttothesemodifications,itwillmeetthebasicconditions.

§ Rewordcriterion2.3.toread:“Thedensityofanyschemeshouldbeconsistentandcompatiblewiththeexistingandprevailingdensityandreflectthelocallydistinctivecharacterofthelocalityinwhichthenewdevelopmentisproposedsothatthevillagefeelisretained.”

§ Deletecriterion2.5.initsentirety(asthisisnowcoveredbyrewordedcriterion2.3)

§ Altercriterion2.6.toread:“ShouldtakeintoaccounttheChilterns

ConservationBoardPositionStatement“DevelopmentaffectingthesettingoftheChilternsAONBJune2011”orasupdated.”

§ Add“orappearance”after“…thespecialcharacter”incriterion2.9

§ Deletecriterion2.13.initsentirety

§ Changethefirstsentenceofthepolicytoread:“Residentialdevelopment

proposalswillbesupportediftheyareinaccordancewiththeguidancecontainedinthePirtonCharacterAssessmentandthefollowingprinciples:”

PolicyPNP3ResidentialExtensions(ExcludingThoseCoveredby‘Permitted’Development)Thispolicysetsouttheexpectedqualityforresidentialextensionsrequiringplanningpermission.Thiscriteria-basedpolicyisclearlywordedandseekstoreinforceandpromotelocaldistinctivenessinlinewithnationalpolicy.31Itupdatesandprovidesa30NPPFpara5631Ibidpara60

21

locallydistinctivecontextforLP1996Policy28.Itwillhelptoachievesustainabledevelopment.Itisclearlyworded.Asaresultitmeetsthebasicconditionsandnomodificationsarerecommended.ItshouldbenotedthatthispolicycrossreferencesPolicyPNP13whichisrecommendedformodificationlateroninmyreport.However,themodificationdoesnotrequireanyconsequentialmodificationstothispolicy.5.3Biodiversity,EnvironmentandHeritagePolicyPNP4Hedgerows,TreesandVergesThispolicyseekstoensurethattreesandhedgerowsaresurveyedaspartofanydevelopmentproposalandretainedorreplacedasappropriate.Ifitisnecessarytoremoveatreeorhedgerow,areplacementof“nolessarboricultureoramenityvalue”inanappropriatelocationissought.Thepolicyalsodealswithvillageedgedevelopmentandseekstheintegrationofnewdevelopmentthroughtheretentionoflandscapingandtheprovisionofnewlandscapingtoenablesofterandgreeneredges.Landscapingisrequiredasanintegralpartofintegratingnewdevelopment.ThelastcriterionseekstoensurethatnewdevelopmentorconstructionprocessesfornewdevelopmentdonotdamagetheHeritageVergealongHitchinRoad.Iwasnotfamiliarwithsuchadesignationandsoaskedforfurtherinformation.TheParishCouncilhasadvisedthatthisisalocalwildlifesiteandpriorityhabitatmanagedbytheParishCouncilandtheHertfordshireandMiddlesexWildlifeTrust.ItisoneofonlytwosuchvergesinHertfordshire.Amaphasbeenprovidedwiththeanswertomyquery.ThepolicyisnotatoddswithLP1996Policies14and57.ItwillhelptoretainandestablishastrongsenseofplaceandensuredevelopmentisvisuallyattractiveinlinewiththeNPPF.32Itwillhelptoachievesustainabledevelopment.Subjecttotherecommendationsbelowitwillmeetthebasicconditions.

§ ShowtheextentoftheHitchinRoadHeritageVergeonamapandincludethemapwithinthePlan

§ Addthewords“asshownonMapXX”attheendofcriterion4.5

32NPPFpara58

22

PolicyPNP5WildlifePolicyPNP5seekstoensurethatappropriateconsiderationhasbeengiventowildlifehabitatsincludinganylegalrequirementsforsurveysandseekstoencouragehedgeplantingasboundarytreatmenttoencouragegreenwildliferoutes.TheCharacterAssessmentidentifiesfloraandfauna.TheParishalsohasanumberofwildlifesitesandaSiteofSpecialScentificInterest(SSSI)whichareshownonpage31ofthePlan.ItishowevernotparticularlyclearwheretheSSSIisandamodificationissuggestedtoaddressthis.Inaddition,thesentencedrawingattentiontothemaponpage31isduplicatedinthetextonpage30andthisshouldbeaddressedinordertoassistwiththepresentationandclarityofthePlan.TheNPPFisclearthattheplanningsystemshouldcontributetoandenhancethenaturalandlocalenvironmentincludingthroughminimsingimpactsonbiodiversityandprovidingnewgainswherepossible.33Iconsiderthatthispolicywillhelptoachievethis.ThepolicyalsobuildsonLP1996Policy14.However,therequirementforalldevelopmentproposalstodemonstratehowwildlifehabitatshavebeenconsideredcouldberegardedasonerous;forsmallerdevelopmentssuchashouseholderschemes,itwouldbereasonabletoexpectthataproportionateapproachwouldbetaken.Anadditiontothepolicytomakethisclearwouldensurethatthepolicyisflexibleonthispointandnotundulyonerousinitsrequirementsaboutwhatsupportinginformationistobesubmittedwithplanningapplications.ThesuggestedmodificationswouldensurethatthepolicytakesaccountoftheNPPFandinparticulartheneedforneighbourhoodplanstoprovideapracticalframeworkwithinwhichdecisionsonplanningapplicationscanbemade34anditsstanceoninformationrequirementstobeproportionatetothenatureandscaleoftheproposal.35Subjecttothesemodifications,thepolicywillmeetthebasicconditions.

§ Addakeytothemaponpage31ofthePlantoindicateboththewildlifesitesandtheSSSIandensurethatthelocationoftheSSSIisclearonthemap

§ Deleteoneoftheduplicatesentencesthatreads“Themapprovidedonpage31showsthelocationofwildlifeareas(shadedblue)andoneSiteofSpeicalScentificInterest(SSSI).”frompage30ofthePLan

§ Addanadditionalcriterion5.4totheendofthepolicywhichreads:“5.4.Itisexpectedthatdevelopmentproposalswouldmeetthispolicythroughthe

33NPPFpara10934Ibidpara1735Ibidpara193

23

submissionofappropriateandproportionateinformationtakingintoaccountboththetypeofdevelopmentproposedanditslocation.”

PolicyPNP6LocalGreenSpacesandOpenSpacesObjective1onpage33isnotexactlythesameasobjective8onpage16ofthePlan.Intheinterestsofaccuracythisinconsistencyshouldberemedied.PolicyPNP6seekstoachievethreethings;itseekstodesignateanumberofLocalGreenSpaces(LGS),ensurethatdevelopmentaroundtheboundariesoftheLGSsissensitiveinitsapproachtodesignandthatnewgreenspacesareencouragedinnewdevelopments.TakingthedesignationofLGSsfirst,theNPPFexplainsthatLGSsaregreenareasofparticularimportancetolocalcommunities.36Theeffectofsuchadesignationisthatnewdevelopmentwillberuledoutotherthaninveryspecialcircumstances.Identifyingsuchareasshouldbeconsistentwithlocalplanningofsustainabledevelopmentandcomplementinvestment.TheNPPFmakesitclearthatthisdesignationwillnotbeappropriateformostgreenareasoropenspace.FurtherguidanceaboutLGSsisgiveninPPG.Atableonpage33ofthePlanliststenproposedLGSsandexplainstheirsignificance.Itshouldbeclearlylinkedtothepolicy.Theheadingtothetableisinconsistentasitrefersto“designatedgreenspace”ratherthanLGS.Amaponpage32ofthePlanseekstoshowtheproposedLGSswhichishelpful,buttheyarenotindividuallyidentified.Inadditionthemapislabeled“VillageOpenSpaces”whichcouldalsopotentiallyleadtosomeconfusion.FurthermoretwooftheproposedLGSs(TheKnollandtheBlacksmithsPond)inthetablearenotshownonthemapandsothisneedstoberemedied.Twootherareas(thePrimarySchoolPlayingFieldsandtheallotmentsatBannistersClose)areshownonthemap,butareunfortunatelynotreferredtointhetable.Thereisthereforenojustificationputforwardforthedesignationofthesetwospaces.ThereisalsoanobjectiontothedesignationofthePrimarySchoolPlayingFields.Thismakeswhatisprobablyadraftinginconsistencyandlackofjustificationevenmoresignificant.Usuallywherethereisadiscrepancybetweenwordsandmaps,wordstakeprecedence.WhilstrecognisingthiswillcomeasadisappointmenttotheParishCouncil,IamleftwithnooptioninsayingthatthesetwoareascannotbeconsideredaspotentialLGSsandshouldbedeletedfromthemap.Thereforemodificationsaresuggestedtoaddresstheseissues.IvisitedeachproposedLGSonmysitevisitanddiscusseachinturnonthenextpage.

36NPPFparas76,77and78

24

GreatGreenThisisagrassedtrianglularareawithmaturetrees,seating,amaypoleandbusshelters.Itisdescribedastheremainsofahistoricvillagegreeni.e.vestigesofanancientgreen.Centreofthevillageandfocalpointforvillageactivitiese.g.theannualmaypoledancing.ChippingGreen,alsoknownasVillageGreen,BuryEnd.ThisisagrassedtriangularareawithtreesandavillagesignontheothersideoftheroadfromGreatGreen.Italsoconsistsoftheremainsofthehistoricvillage.LittleGreen,junctionofHighSt,WalnutTreeRoadandRoyalOakLaneHistoricGreen.Describedasafocalpointinthatareaofthevillagewhichhasawell-usedwoodenseatoftenusedbytheelderly,dogwalkersandhikersasarestingspotorjusttoenjoycontemplatingthatpartofthevillage;thereisamapoftheparishonthegreen.TheBlacksmithsPondiscloseto,andnearlyoppositeLittleGreen.DescribedasaregisteredCommon,thisisaniconicareaofthevillage,inhabitedbyducksandotherwildfowl,andpopularwithchildren.MiddleGreen,Coleman’sCloserecreationarea,isagrassedareawithaplayareaonitandanumberoftrees.Itisintegraltothesettingofthesurroundinghousing.ItisdescribedinthePlanasthelastvestigeofMiddleGreen,anhistoricGreennowpreservedasanopenspaceandchildren’srecreationareaintheColeman’sClosedevelopment.TheKnollRemainsofanancientGreenattheJunctionofHighStreet,ShillingtonRoad,WestLaneandBurgeEndLane.Allotments,LittleLaneaccessedbyasingletracklaneandthenfootpathsonly,thisisclearlyawellusedallotmentsite.TheBuryandTootHillScheduledAncientMonumentpurchasedforthevillagebythePPCandmanagedbytheBuryTrustforthebenefitofthevillagecommunity.Itisawellcontainedarea,wellusedatthetimeofmyvisitbydogwalkersandthegrazingcows.Itisatranquilareathatalsoaffordsglimpsesofthesurrouondingcountryside.PirtonVicarageNatureReserveThisisdescribedasawildspaceinthecentreofthevillagecreatedspecificallybythevillageforquietcontemplation.ThePirtoncraftgrouphasdesignedandmadeabeautifulmosaicseat.Thehedgingthatenclosesitismaintainedinaccordancewithtraditionalhedgingmethods.RecreationGroundandOutdoorSportsFacilities,offWalnutTreeRoadThisisamoreformallylaidoutrecreationandsportsandmulti-usegamesareawithtenniscourts,cricketpitchesandotherplayingpitcheslaidoutwithfloodlightingandchangingrooms.SomeoftheproposedLGSsfallwithinthevillageConservationArea.IhaveconsideredwhetherthereisanyadditionallocalbenefittobegainedfromdesignationasaLGSas

25

advisedbyPPG.37IconsiderthattheLGSdesignationexpressestheareasofparticularsignificanceandimportancetothelocalcommunityandthereforethereisaddedvalue.Inmyview,alloftheseproposedLGSsmeetthecriteriaintheNPPFsatisfactorily.Thesecondelementofthepolicyseekstoensurethatdevelopment“ontheedges”oftheseareasrequireaparticularlysensitiveapproachtodesign.Thereisnosupportingexplanationofwhythisisimportant.Inthelightofthis,andgiventheotherpoliciesinthePlanwhichseekahighstandardofdesignandeffectivelycoverthispoint,Iconsiderthiselementtobeunsatisfactorilyjustified.Thereforeitshouldbedeleted.Thelastelementofthepolicyencouragesnewgreenspaceswithindevelopmentstobeprovided.ThisisinlinewiththeNPPFwhichmakesthepointthataccesstoopenspacescanmakeanimportantcontributiontothehealthandwell-beingofCommunities.38Thepolicyissufficientlyflexibleinencouragingratherthanrequiringsuchspaces.

§ Changetheobjectiveonpage33ofthePlantoread“Toprotectimportantgreenandopenspaces…”

§ IdentifyeachoftheindividualLGSsidentifiedinthetableonpage33ofthePlanonamapbyrevisingthemaponpage32ofthePlanand/orbytheadditionofnewormoremapsgiventheclarityneeded

§ EnsurethatTheKnollandtheBlacksmithsPondareshownontherevisedmap

§ DeletethePrimarySchoolPlayingFieldsandtheallotmentsatBannistersClose

fromthemap

§ Changethetitleofthemaponpage32(oritsreplacement)to“LocalGreenSpaces”removingthereferencestoanythingelseincludingvillageopenspaces

§ Changetheheadinginthetableonpage33from“DesignatedGreenSpace”to

“DesignatedLocalGreenSpace”

§ Add“inthetable”after“Theareaslistedbelow…”incriterion6.1ofthepolicy

§ Deletecriterion6.2ofthepolicyinitsentirety

§ Renumbercriterion6.3ofthepolicy“6.2”37PPGpara010refid37-010-2014030638NPPFpara73

26

PolicyPNP7KeyViewsandVistasPartoftheParishfallswithintheChilternsAreaofOutstandingNaturalBeauty(AONB).ThefirstelementofPolicyPNP7supportsdevelopmentthatdoesnot“impactonanareaoftheChilternsAONB”.TheNPPFgivesgreatweighttoconservinglandscapeandscenicbeautyinAONBswhichitexplains,havethehigheststatusofprotectioninrelationtolandscapeandscenicbeautyalongsideNationalParksandtheBroads.39TheNPPFoutlinesthecircumstancesinwhichplanningpermissionshouldberefusedformajordevelopmentandhowplanningapplicationsshouldbedetermined.Thispartofthepolicyistoogeneralisedinnature,impreciseandvaguetoenablemetoconcludethatitmeetsthebasicconditions.Thesecondelementofthepolicyreferstokeyviewsandvistas.Itstatesthatdevelopmentproposalsshouldtakeaccountofthevisualimpactofproposalsonninekeyviewsandvistasthataredescribedandidentifiedonamaponpages35–39ofthePlan.Asthepolicyiscurrentlyworded,itistooimpreciseandvagueandwillnotachievemuchastheviewscouldbetakenintoaccountandthendismissed.However,itisclearfromthesupportingtextthattheintentbehindthispolicyistoconservethepositionofPirtoninthelandscapegiventheexpansiveviewsaroundthevillageinrelationtoviewsandvistastoandfromtheAONBandsurroundingrurallandscape.ThistiesinwiththeChilternsConservationBoardstatementreferredtoonpage34ofthePlanandinformationintheCharacterAssessment.AlthoughtheCharacterAssessmentidentifies16viewsofimportance,IhavetakenthenineidentifiedinthePlantobetheonesidentifiedbythecommunityasbeingofparticularimportance.DuringmysitevisitIsawhowthevillagesitswithinthelandscapeandhowimportanttheseviewsaretotheuniquecharacterandtopographyofthevillageanditssetting.ThearrowforView8(ViewonentrytoPirtonvillageatHolwellTurnacrossElmTreeFarmfieldtowardstheChilternRidge)ishowevershowndifferentlybetweenthePlanandtheCharacterAssessment.Inaddition,thisfieldhasthebenefitofplanningpermissionfordevelopmentandsothekeyfeaturesoftheviewhavealreadybeenlost.GiventhediscrepancybetweenthePlanandtheCharacterAssessmentandthiscircumstance,IconsiderView8shouldbedeletedfromthepolicyintheinterestsofachievingsustainabledevelopmentandsothatthepolicyprovidesapracticalframeworkfordecisionmakinginaccordancewithnationalpolicyandguidance.Giventhatbothelementsofthepolicyaretooimprecise,Irecommendamodificationthatseekstomakethepolicyclearerandmoreprecisetoenableittomeetthebasicconditions.Itseekstoensurethatnewsustainabledevelopmentisnotprevented,butthatanysuchdevelopmentrespectsthekeyaspectsoftheidentifiedviewsandIhavetakenmyleadfromthesupportingtext.Thenewpolicywordingwouldbean

39NPPFpara115

27

appropriatebalancebetweensustainabledevelopmentandtheconservationofuniquelocalcharacteranddistinctiveness.

§ RewordPolicyPNP7toread:“7.1.ThePlanseekstoprotectandenhancethesettingofPirtonvillageinrelationtotheChilternsAreaofOutstandingNaturalBeautyandthesurroundingrurallandscape.Anynewdevelopmentinanareawithintheviewsspecifiedbelow,describedonpages35–39andshownonthemaponpage36ofthePlanmustensurethatkeyfeaturesoftheviewcancontinuetobeenjoyedincludingdistantbuildingsandlandscapefeatures,sensitivevillageedgesandruralapproachestothevillage.1. TheviewfromHighdownnorthtotheBury,thevillageandthePirton

Lowlandsbeyond2. TheviewfromShillingtonRoadandtheDriftwaylookingsouthwardsto

PriorsHill(watertower)andStMary’sChurchTower3. TheviewfromPunch’sCrossonHitchinRoadnorthtotheSEcornerof

Pirtonvillage4. ViewacrosstotheChilternsAONBontheapproachtotheNEcornerof

villagefromHolwellRoad5. TheviewfromPriorsHillnortheasttowardsLangfordWaterTowerand

beyond6. ViewfromLittleLaneacrossthePirtonLowlands7. ViewfromHambridgeWayEacrossthePirtonLowlandsandHertfordshire

totheLetchworthridge8. [number9renumbered8]ViewNNWfromtheBaulkpublicfootpathacross

PriorsHilltowardsthewestardsextensionoftheChilternridgeandthefamouslocallandmarkofSharpenhoeClappers.”

§ DeleteView8fromthemaponpage36ofthePlan

§ DeletethephotographanddescriptionofView8fromthesupportingtexton

page38ofthePlan

§ Renumber[existing]View9as“8”onpages38/39ofthePlan

§ Fortheavoidanceofdoubttherestofthesupportingtext,descriptionsandphotographsofeachviewandthemapshouldberetained

28

PolicyPNP8HeritageAssetsandArchaeologicalHeritageObjective1onpage39isnotexactlythesameasobjective6onpage16ofthePlan.Intheinterestsofaccuracythisinconsistencyshouldberemedied.Giventhatinthiscasetheobjectiveonpage39ismorecomprehensivethantheoneonpage16,itisthisonethatshouldbesubstitutedasitreferstoarchaeologyaswellbetterreflectingthepolicy.PolicyPNP8isacriteriabasedpolicythatsetsoutthecircumstancesinwhichdevelopmentwillbesupportedinrelationtoheritageassets.AcoreplanningprincipleoftheNPPF40isto“conserveheritageassetsinamannerappropriatetotheirsignificance”.TheNPPFappliestoalltypesandscaleofdevelopment.TheNPPF41goesontoindicatetheweighttobeattachedtodesignatedandnon-designatedheritageassets.Thepolicydoesnotrefertosignificanceordifferentiatebetweendesignated(includingScheduledMonuments,ListedBuildings,ConservationAreas)andnon-designatedheritageassets.ThereforesothatthepolicytakesaccountoftheNPPF,amodificationisrecommendedtocriterion8.1.Criteria8.2.and8.4.requiretheapplicanttoconsultappropriatesourcesofinformationandtheParishCouncilwhoarewellplacedtoofferlocalknowledge.Whilstbothcriteriaarewordedflexiblyandwell,thepolicywouldflowmoretoprovideapracticalframeworkfordecisionmakingifthesetwocriteriawereconnected.Amodificationissuggestedtoachievethis.Theexistingcriterion8.3.referstodevelopmentthataffectsarchaeologyalertareaswhicharethenshownonamaponpage42ofthePlan.Whilstthiscriterion’sgeneralthrusttakesaccountoftheadviceintheNPPF,42thispartofthepolicyshouldrefertoallheritageassetswitharchaeologicalinteresttoalignbetterwiththeNPPF.InadditionitmaybethatthedesignationofthealertareasmaychangeduringthelifetimeofthePlan.ThereforeinordertotakebetteraccountoftheNPPFandtoensurethatsustainabledevelopmentisachieved,amodificationisrecommended.Inaddition,asIhavesuggestedtwooftheothercriteriaareamalagated,thisoneneedsrenumbering.Itisalsousefultohaveamapofthelocalinterestbuildingsonpage40ofthePlanandofthearchaeologicalalertareasonpage42whichalongsidethesupportingtextforthispolicyandthemaponpage13,provideasoundbasisforit.Subjecttothesemodifications,thepolicywillhelptoconserveandenhancethehistoricenvironmenttakingintoaccountnationalpolicyandguidance,willbeingeneralconformitywithLP1996Policy16andwillhelptoachievesustainabledevelopment.

§ Changeobjective6onpage16ofthePlantoread“ToensureconservationandenhancementofPirton’sricharchaeologyandheritage.”

40NPPFpara1741IbidSection1242Ibidpara128

29

§ Rewordcriterion8.1.toread:“ProposalsconserveorenhancetheheritageassetsoftheParishandtheirsettingsinawaythatisappropriatetotheirsignificance.Heritageassetsincludedesignatedheritageassetsandnon-designatedheritageassets;

§ Joincriterion8.2.and8.4.togethermakinganewcriterion8.3.

§ Changethefirstsentenceoftheexistingcriterion8.3.toread:“Development

proposalsonsitesthatincludeorhasthepotentialtoincludeheritageassetswitharchaeologicalinterestandplanningapplicationsfordevelopmentaffectingthearchaeologyalertareasshouldbe…”[retainexistingcriterionasis]

§ Renumbertheexistingcriterion8.3.to“8.2.”

5.4AmenitiesandFacilitiesPolicyPNP9CommunityFacilitiesObjective1onpage44isnotexactlythesameasobjective9onpage16ofthePlan.Intheinterestsofaccuracythisinconsistencyshouldberemedied.Therearefourcriteriainthispolicy.IngeneraltermsthepolicyplanspositivelyforcommunityfacilitiesandguardsagainsttheirlossinlinewiththeNPPF.43However,thefirstcriterion,9.1.,supportsalldevelopmentthatsustainsandenhancescommunityfacilities.This‘blanket’supportmayinadvertentlyresultinotherwiseunacceptabledevelopmentbeingpermitted.Amodificationisthereforerecommendedtoensurethisisavoidedintheinterestsofclarity.Thesecondcriterionrequiresdevelopmenttoidentifytheirimpactonfacilities,servicesandinfrastructure.WhilstIunderstandtherationaleforthispolicy,thispotentiallyisanonerousrequirementparticularlyforsmallerscaledevelopment.Thereforeamodificationisrecommendedtoincludeflexiblyinthepolicysothatapracticalframeworkfordecisionmakingcanbeprovided.Likethefirstcriterion,thethirdcriterionsupportsdevelopmentinageneralisedway.Thereforeamodificationismadetoaddressthisintheinterestsofclarity.Thelastcriterionreferstothelossofcommunityfacilitiesandisclearlyworded,relyingonviabilitytests.

§ Changeobjective1onpage44ofthePlantoread“Tosustainandenhance

43NPPFparas28and70

30

communityfacilitiesforthebenefitofallresidentsandthewiderlocalcommunity(includingthosewithadisability)”

§ Rewordcriterion9.1.toread:“Neworimprovedcommunityfacilitiesforthebenefitofresidents(includingthosewithadisability)willbesupportedsubjecttotheircompatibilitywithotherpoliciesinthedevelopmentplan.”

§ Add“Non-householderresidentialdevelopmentandmajor…”atthebeginning

ofcriterion9.2.

§ Rewordcriterion9.3.toread:“Developmentwhichmakesacontributiontotheruraleconomybycreating,facilitatingorimprovingopportunitiestoworkintheParishorbyprovidingorenhancingrecreationalfacilitiesandopportunitiestoimprovehealthandwell-beingwillusuallybesupported.”

PolicyPNP10SupportforLocalBusinessPolicyPNP10coversanumberofissuestakingapositiveapproachtosustainablenewdevelopmentthatwillhelptopromoteastrongruraleconomyinlinewiththeNPPF.44Aswellassupportingbusinessopportunities,homebasedworkingandthediversificationoffarmbuildings,itpromotespublictransportandvisitoraccesstothearea.Itmeetsthebasicconditionsandwillhelptoachievesustainabledevelopmentwithoneexception;criterion10.6.whichreferstosignageandinformationboardsisnotadevelopmentanduseoflandmatter.Thereforethiscriterionshouldberemovedfromthepolicy,butcanbeincludedasaclearlyidentifiablecommunityaspirationifdesired.

• Deletecriterion10.6.fromPolicyPNP10andincludeitasacommunityaspirationifdesired

5.5TransportandConnectivityPolicyPNP11SafetyofPedestrians,Cyclists,EquestriansandMotoristsSimilartopointsmadebeforeinrelationtootherpoliciesinthePlan,thepolicybeginsbygiving‘blanket’supporttodevelopmentthatprovidesappropriateaccess.Thereforeintheinterestsofclarity,amodificationismadetoaddressthis.SubjecttothismodificationthepolicyisclearlywordedandwillpromotesustainabletransportintheParishinlinewiththethrustoftheNPPF.

44NPPFpara28

31

§ Deletethewords“willbesupportedthat:”fromthefirstsentenceofthepolicyandreplacewith“Developmentproposalswillberequiredto:”

PolicyPNP12ConnectivityThebasicpremiseofthispolicywhichistoprotectandenhanceconnectivityandopportunitiesfortheuseofsustainabletravelmodesisinlinewiththebasicconditions.However,thefourcriteriaofthepolicyallneedsomerevisiontoensurethatthepolicyisbothreasonableandclearinordertoprovidethepracticalframeworkfordecisionmakingsoughtbynationalpolicyandguidance.Again,similartoPolicyPNP11,thefirstsentenceoffers‘blanket’supportfordevelopmentproposalsandsoshouldbechangedintheinterestsofclarity.Itisimportantthatthepolicyhassufficientflexibilityinprovidingabalancebetweenensuringthatanyopportunitiesaretakentoimproveconnectivityandtheviabilityanddeliverabilityofanydevelopmentproposal.Thisisparticularlythecasewhereitwouldbeunreasonabletoexpecthouseholderdevelopmenttoprovideanewfootpathlinkforexample.Inordertoensurethisbalance,amodificationismadetocriterion12.1.Criterion12.2.requiressomeamendmenttotieittotheroutesprovidedasaresultofthedevelopmentasotherwiseitistoowidelyapplicableandsomeoftheitemslistedarenotdevelopmentanduseoflandrelated.Criterion12.3requiresasmallamendmentatthestartsothatthepolicyreadswell.Inadditionlikecriterion12.1.,itisimportanttoensurethatabalanceisstruckandthatsuchrequirementswouldnotpreventotherwisesustainabledevelopmentfromtakingplace.Thelastcriterion,12.4.,againrequiresmoreflexibilitysothatitprovidesapracticalframeworkfordecisionmaking.

§ Deletethewords“willbesupportedthat:”fromthefirstsentenceofthepolicyandreplacewith“Developmentproposalswillberequiredto:”

§ Addthewords“whereveritisappropriategiventhescaleofthedevelopmentandthereisanopportunitytodoso”attheendofcriterion12.1.

§ Changecriterion12.2toread:“Ensurethatstreetscapefeaturesalongany

pedestrianorcycleroutesprovidedorimprovedbytheproposalareofadesignwhichreinforcesorenhancesthecharacterofPirton.”

§ Changethefirstwordincriterion12.3.“Improves”to“Improve”andaddthe

words“whereverthereisanopportunitytodosoinrelationtothenetworkofpublicfootpathsintheParish”attheendofthiscriterion

32

§ Addthewords“unlessasatisfactoryalternativeprovidingequivalentorbetterprovisioncanbeachieved.”totheendofcriterion12.4.

PolicyPNP13CarParkingThispolicyseekstoensurethatsufficientparkingisprovidedfornewdevelopments.ItreferstoNHDCrequirements,butincreasestheprovisionforlargerhousesof3bedroomsormore.ThepresentNHDCrequirementsarecurrentlycontainedinaSupplementaryPlanningDocument(SPD)“VehicleParkingAtNewDevelopments”,adoptedbyNHDCon10November2011.ThesamestandardsarecontainedinAppendix4oftheemergingLocalPlan.Foronebedroomedproperties,thestandardisaminimumofonespaceisrequiredandfortwoormorebedrooms,aminimumoftwospaces.Bothdocumentsexplainthatareducedprovisionwillonlybeconsideredinexceptionalcircumstances.PolicyPNP13refersandreliesonNHDCstandards,butinrelationtothreeormorebedroomedhousesseeks“atleast3carparkingspaces”.Itthereforeintroducesanewtierofparkingstandarddifferentiatingbetweentwoandthreebedroomedhouses.TheNPPF45permitsthesettingoflocalparkingstandards.ThepolicyhasbeenderivedtakingthelevelofcarownershipintheParishintoaccountaswellasconcernsaboutnarrowvillageroads,congestionandtheavailabilityofpublictransport.Thepolicy’sjustificationprovidesacasetointroduceahigherstandardforthissizeofhousetohelpmanagethelocalroadnetwork.Inaddition,thepolicyalsooffersflexibilityintheprovisionofparkingbaysifon-siteprovisioncannotbeachieved.However,therequirementfor“atleast3carparkingspaces”ineffectmeansthatfourwouldberequired.Thisisexcessiveandlittlecompellingevidencehasbeenpresentedtosupportthisfigure.ThereforetoensurethatthepolicyisreasonableandmirrorsthelanguageusedinNHDC’sstandards,therebyprovidingapracticalframeworkfordecisionmakinginlinewithnationalpolicyandguidance,amodificationisrecommended.Thiswillmeanthatthreespacesaretobeprovidedasaminimum,onemorethantheDistrictcurrentlyseeks.Itshouldbenotedthatpage71oftheCharacterAssessmentrefersto“atleast”threespaces.Giventhemodificationrecommendedbelow,considerationshouldbegiventoensuringthatthetwodocumentsareconsistent.

§ Replacethewords“atleast”incriterion13.1ofthepolicywith“aminimumof”

45NPPFpara39

33

6.NonPlanningPolicyIssuesThefirstpartofthissectionencouragesdeveloperstohaveanongoingdialoguewiththeParishCouncilandthecommunity.Thispositivestanceistobewelcomed.Thesecondpartreferstomonitoring.Whilstthisisnotamandatoryrequirement,IregardthisasgoodpracticeandIwelcomeitsinclusioninthePlan.7.EvidenceBaseDocumentsAlistofsupportingdocumentsandlinksisusefullyincluded.8.ListofAbbreviationsandGlossaryAgainbothlistsarehelpfullyincluded.Therearetwominorrevisions;under“Examiner”,examinersdonothavetobesanctionedbyLocalityandthedefinitionofstrategicpoliciesisconfusingsointheinterestsofaccuracytheseshouldbemodified.

§ Deletethewords“sanctionedbyLocality”intheexplanationof“Examiner”intheglossaryoftermsonpage54ofthePlan

§ Changethedefinitionof“StrategicPolicies”onpage55ofthePlantoread:“ThepoliciesintheLocalPlanwhichcoversuchmattersashousing,employment,retail,leisureandothercommercialdevelopment,infrastructure,health,communityandculturalfacilities,climatechange,naturalandhistoricenvironmentsandotherstrategicpolicyissuesthattheNeighbourhoodPlanmustbeingeneralconformitywith.”

7.0ConclusionsandrecommendationsIamsatisfiedthatthePirtonNeighbourhoodDevelopmentPlan,subjecttothemodificationsIhaverecommended,meetsthebasicconditionsandtheotherstatutoryrequirementsoutlinedearlierinthisreport.IamthereforepleasedtorecommendtoNorthHertfordshireDistrictCouncilthat,subjecttothemodificationsproposedinthisreport,thePirtonNeighbourhoodDevelopmentPlancanproceedtoareferendum.Followingonfromthat,IamrequiredtoconsiderwhetherthereferendumareashouldbeextendedbeyondthePirtonNeighbourhoodPlanarea.IseenoreasontoalterorextendthePlanareaforthepurposeofholdingareferendumandnorepresentationshavebeenmadethatwouldleadmetoreachadifferentconclusion.IthereforeconsiderthatthePlanshouldproceedtoareferendumbasedonthePirton

34

NeighbourhoodPlanareaasapprovedbyNorthHertofrdshireDistrictCouncilon28January2014.Ann SkippersMRTPIAnnSkippersPlanning19December2017

35

Appendix1ListofkeydocumentsspecifictothisexaminationPirtonNeighbourhoodDevelopmentPlan2011-2031Pre-ExaminationVersionOctober2016BasicConditionsStatementdatedOctober2016ConsultationStatementdatedOctober2016StrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentScreeningDeterminationdatedApril2016(CAGconsultants)DistrictLocalPlanNo.2withAlterations,SavedpoliciesunderPlannigandComplusoryPurchaseAct2004WrittenStatementSeptember2007VehicleParkingAtNewDevelopmentsSupplementaryPlanningDocument(adoptedNovember2011)LocalPlan2011–2031ProposedSubmissionOctober2016andSheet1SideAHitchin,LetchworthGardenCityandBaldockAreas NorthHertfordshireLocalPlan2011-2031ScheduleofProposedAdditionalModificationsNorthHertfordshireDistrictCouncilHabitatRegulationAssessmentScreeningReportSeptember2016Variousdocumentsontheneighbourhoodplanwebsite:www.pirtonneighbourhoodplan.org.ukListends

36

Appendix2QuestionsofclarificationtoNHDCandtheParishCouncilPirtonNeighbourhoodPlanExaminationQuestionsofclarificationfromtheExaminertotheParishCouncilandNHDCHavingcompletedmyinitialreviewoftheNeighbourhoodPlan(thePlan),IwouldbegratefulifbothCouncilscouldkindlyassistmeasappropriateinansweringthefollowingquestionswhicheitherrelatetomattersoffactorareareasinwhichIseekclarificationorfurtherinformation.Pleasedonotsendordirectmetoevidencethatisnotalreadypubliclyavailable.1. TworepresentationsfromtheHealthandSafetyExecutiveandHertsCountyCouncil

refertotheWymondleyNP.PleasecanNHDCconfirmthatthesearesenttomeormadeinerrorandwhetheranyrepresentationswerereceivedfromtheseorganisationsinrespectofthePNP.Iappreciateyoumayneedtocheckwiththeorganisationsbeforecomingbacktome.

2. AStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment(SEA)ScreeningDeterminationdatedApril2016hasbeensubmitted.Pleasei)confirmwhichversionofthePNPwasassessed,ii)whetherthestatutoryconsultees(EnvironmentAgency,HistoricEnglandandNaturalEngland)werespecificallyconsultedontheScreeningDetermination,iii)whetheranyreplywasreceivedfromeithertheEnvironmentAgencyorHistoricEnglandandifsopleasesendmecopiesofthoserepliesandiv)confirmthatpublicityforthedeterminationmadehasbeenundertakeninaccordancewithRegulation11oftheEnvironmentalAssessmentofPlansandProgrammesRegulations2004(EAPPR).

3. Regulations32and33oftheNeighbourhoodPlanning(General)Regulations2012

(asamended)setouttwoadditionalbasicconditionstothosesetoutinprimarylegislation.OnlyRegulation32isapplicabletoneighbourhoodplansandthisstates“ThemakingoftheneighbourhoodplanisnotlikelytohaveasignificanteffectonaEuropeansite46oraEuropeanoffshoremarinesite47eitheraloneorincombinationwithotherplansorprojects.”Pleaseadvisemewhatassessmenthasbeencarriedoutinrespectofthisbasicconditionorprovidemewithsufficientinformationtoenablemetoconsiderwhetherthisbasicconditioncanbecompliedwith.

4. Pleaseupdatemeonthelatestpositioninrelationtoanyplanningapplicationson

thesitereferredtoasPT2inthePNP.PleasealsodrawmyattentiontoanyotherapplicationsorappealsforsitesintheParishofrelevancetohousingnumbersorhousingsupplyorsendmethelatestrelevantinformationinthisrespect.

5. ThePNPusestheproposedvillagedevelopmentboundaryforPirtonfromanearlier

versionoftheemergingLocalPlanasIunderstandit.Thisseemstohavebeen

46AsdefinedintheConservationofHabitatsandSpeciesRegulations201247AsdefinedintheOffshoreMarineConservation(NaturalHabitats,&c.)Regulations2007

37

revisedinthesubmissionversionoftheemergingLocalPlan.IsthiscorrectandwouldtherebebenefitinupdatingthevillagedevelopmentboundarytoalignwiththeemergingLocalPlanwhilstrecognisingthisissubjecttoexamination?Ifnot,whynot?

6. InrelationtotheproposedLocalGreenSpaces(LGS)subjecttoPolicyPNP6,itis

helpfulfortheproposedareastobeshownonamaponpage32ofthePNP,butImustadmittofindingitquitehardtolocateeachofthetenproposedspacesonit.WoulditbepossibletoindicateonthemapwhereeachproposedLGSispleaseortoprovidemoredetailedmapsofeachproposedareasoIcanbecertaintoviewthecorrectareasonmysitevisit.

7. Onarelatedmatter,arepresentationfromHertsCountyCouncilsuggeststhatthe

mapandthetableonpages32and33respectivelydonottieup.Isthiscorrect?Ifso,pleaseletmeknowwhatthedifferencesareandhowthisshouldberemedied.

ItmaybethecasethatonreceiptofyouranticipatedassistanceonthesemattersthatImayneedtoaskforfurtherclarificationorthatfurtherquerieswilloccurastheexaminationprogresses.Pleasenotethatthislistofclarificationquestionsisapublicdocumentandthatyouranswerswillalsobeinthepublicdomain.BothmyquestionsandyourresponsesshouldbeplacedontheCouncils’websitesasappropriate.Withmanythanks.AnnSkippers10October2017Thefollowingfurtherquerywasraisedon30October:8. AHeritageVergeisreferredtoinPolicyPNP4.Icannotfindanyreferencetothis

anywhereelse(apartfromaphotointheCharacterAssessment)andIamnotfamiliarwiththisdesignation.Couldmoreinformationbeprovidedastoitsnatureandextentplease?