Minutes of the LNPG Steering Committee on 5th Oct 2016
Minutes of a meeting held at The Talbot Hotel on the 05th October 2016
Peter Gelardi, Chairman, (PG)(Chairman) (Secretary)
Richard Ayears (Ripley) (RA)
Annie Cross (Ripley) (AC)
Jan Jewers (Ripley) (JJ)
Apologies: Cameron Brown (Wisley) (CAB)
Chris Baker (Ockham) (CB)
Jim Morris, Treasurer, (Ripley) (JM)
Not present: Michael Jenkins (Wisley) (MJ)
In attendance: Jim Allen (JA)
1. The minutes of the meeting on 14 September 2016 were agreed and signed by the chairman.
It was noted that a sub-committee had met since this meeting and agreed a set of Drafting Principles for the Plan, which were attached as an appendix to these minutes.
2. Review of GBC Local Plan:
GBC were still reviewing consultation responses and there were now rumours of a further re-write and consultation. The TFM (Three Farms Meadow) application had now gone to appeal. The committee agreed to proceed on the assumption that this was likely to take at least nine months and to be turned down. In this case, any fresh application would be after the plan LNP had become ‘emerging’ and would therefore be subject to the stipulations of the LNP policies.
3. Review Status of Air Quality Project:
Still no readings from the GBC diffusion tubes placed on Ripley High St.
It was agreed that if these readings have not been made available by the date of the next meeting, the committee would make a final decision on this, one way or the other, at that meeting.
4. Draft Neighbourhood Plan:
PG had met JA to brief him re the current draft. JA was waiting for additional contributions from RA re the Housing section and for the Ockham survey summary, to include these and re-format the plan document to create Draft 1a. He would revise and edit the document as he saw fit, to produce version 1b. The committee would then re-work and update this into version 1c, in time for the next meeting. The objective would be to have a draft ready for consultation with Navigus (and subsequently with Dan Knowles) in November. Final re-drafts and decisions on specific sites would take place in December with a view to the Section 14 consultation in January.
5. Treasurer’s Report:
JM had applied for the next tranche of grant (£6,000) and also for further free assistance from AECOM. PG will negotiate the additional AECOM activity once any holes in the evidence base become apparent and it becomes clear how they can help.
6. General Communication:
The website continues provide very basic information. JJ suggested that as now is the time to try and involve the community once again, we should consider using some of our grant money to pay someone to act as the LNPG Communications Officer. Their task would be to upgrade the website, keep it current, provide interesting editorial and establish and sustain social media links. AC undertook to try and recruit someone.
7. Road Map:
The new plan for the drafting and revision process would necessitate a delay to the Section 14 consultation until December/January. This would mean a revised Road Map. This is attached. The objective of having a plan ready to submit to GBC by April 2017 remains in place.
JA was now plugged into the plan production process and we would use Navigus, Montague Evans, AECOM, the GBC Planning Department and an additional ‘Health Checker’ as required to get the draft plan into shape by April. The process is described in the Road Map.
There was no other business.
10. Next Meeting
The next meeting will be Sunday 6th November, at 7pm at The Talbot.
LOVELACE PLAN – DRAFTING PRINCIPLES
These are some notes from a meeting of the Policy Group Heads on Thursday the 25th August 2016 which included conversations with Dan Knowles of the Guildford Borough Council Planning Department. They include a set of guiding principles for the drafting of the Lovelace Neighbourhood Plan which were agreed at the meeting
ITEMS WHICH WERE NOTED OR DECIDED AT THE MEETING
1 AIR QUALITY – After consultation with Jim Allen and others it was decided that it was important to understand the air quality position on Ripley High St. because this could represent a valuable tool with which to limit developments in the whole area, if this was ever considered necessary. It was therefore agreed to proceed with the minimum proposed TRL survey as soon as possible. This would be a single point survey supplemented by tubes at Burt Common and the Ockham Roundabout.
2 SITE ALLOCATION BY THE PLAN – GBC confirmed that, even if specific sites were ruled out by the neighbourhood plan, the Borough Council planning committee could overrule these decisions if this was necessary for the borough to meet its housing targets.
3 CIL MONEY – Current legislation is changing the Community Infrastructure Levy rules and percentages. If a parish council has a neighbourhood plan in place it can secure 25% of all CIL levies to be applied to whatever area improvement projects it sees fit. It was noted that should the proposed Wisley Airfield strategic site for 2,000+ dwellings ever proceed, the Lovelace parish councils will be entitled to receive a very substantial sum which could be used to mitigate (to some extent) the worst effects of the development. The same will apply to any large development, including Garlic’s Arch.
PLAN DRAFTING POLICIES
The structure OF THE PLAN will follow that of the Guildford Borough Local Plan, for easy reference.
The plan will be edited down to be as compact as possible, along the lines of the Yapton and Burpham plans, which will provide a reference template.
The objective of the plan is not to oppose the policies of the Local Plan but to supplement these and to mitigate the adverse effects of Local Plan policies for Lovelace, where these exist.
The plan will not oppose the proposed insetting of Ripley within the Green Belt as this is the result of specific legislation and was therefore not something which a neighbourhood plan could influence. It was also noted that development with the settlement boundary in Ripley had continued unabated for several years while the village was notionally in the Green Belt. So insetting would make little practical difference. The ‘green spaces’ provisions in the neighbourhood plan would provide stronger protection for sensitive areas in the village anyway.
Given the preconditions laid down by GBC for the Wisley Airfield development, it is very unlikely that this will actually take place for several years, if it happens at all. It was therefore resolved that the neighbourhood plan would be drafted to deal with the period during which Wisley Airfield was not developed – which might be five years or extend to the end of the plan period. The plan would then include a second section, which would provide an assessment of the benefits and ill effects which would result from the implementation of the current plans for this site and would lay out a further series of polices to mitigate these ill effects, given the fact that they will then have considerable resources at their disposal.