Welcome

1. Welcome Middleton Cheney Neighbourhood Plan Meeting April 2019

2. Agenda 1. Apologies for absence 2. Minutes of previous meeting - Approval 3. Local Housing Need. • Existing housing need survey • Current specific local need information • LPA Guidance 4. Update on Playing Fields – Astrop Road 5. Criteria to assess housing sites • Agree assessment criteria for categorising which sites could be identified for development. 6. A.O.B. 7. Date of Next Meeting.

3. Local Housing Need • South Northamptonshire Housing and Homelessness Strategy 2015-18 • Rural Housing • The importance of rural sustainability should not be under-estimated. As highlighted in Priority 1, affordability is a significant issue in the rural areas where house prices are significantly higher than the market towns. Some villages require more homes that are affordable to local people to meet local need, prevent younger people and families moving away and to protect vital services such as schools and shops disappearing from the communities. However, our policy remains to protect what is special about the district therefore new affordable homes in rural areas would need to be focused on meeting local need, high quality, comply with planning policy relating to village confines and pay attention to conservation areas and village design statements.

4. Local Housing Need • South Northamptonshire CouncilPlanning Policy and Regeneration Strategy Committee 20 January 2016 • Conclusion and Reasons for Recommendations • 3.1  This report sets out that: • The Council has effectively met the housing targets for both the urban and rural areas as set out in the WNJCS • The Council will exceed the figure particularly in the rural areas to meet local needs • There is a need to plan for starter homes and self-build plots • There is a need to boost the supply of affordable housing in the District • There is a need for smaller house sizes in the District

5. Local Housing Need • Middleton Cheney Parish - Housing Sites & Monitoring information • Summary and Conclusions: • Middleton Cheney is one of the most sustainable villages within the district and is identified as a Primary Service Village. The Neighbourhood Plan should seek to plan for a housing requirement of between 0*-150 to take into account additional commitments in the village since 1st April 2015. However, due to the majority of past development being ‘speculative’, the Policy team do not consider it sustainable to continue to roll forward unplanned increases in the housing requirement, without considering this in the context of the wider implications on the spatial strategy for the area. As such, a range of between 0-73 is considered most appropriate and consistent with the current adopted and emerging Local Plan.

6. Local Housing Need • Identifying an indicative housing figure April 2019 • In the absence of a detailed housing needs (carried out for a robust housing need assessment) the Neighbourhood Plan should seek to identify a site to accommodate between 0 – 124 homes in the period 2018-2029 (11 years). • Once the housing requirement for the rural areas has been met, Policy R1 states development will only be permitted where it would result in environmental improvements (e.g. use of previously developed land or high quality design) or support the retention or improvement to essential local services. One way in which developments can come forward is where they are agreed through an adopted (or ‘made’) Neighbourhood Plan.

7. Identifying an indicative housing figure April 2019 • The reason for this significant range is due to a number of sites that were brought forward on allocated sites (1997 Local Plan), but also those that came forward under the Interim Rural Housing Policy. The upper figure is based on past delivery rates and projected these forward. A lower figure, based around natural growth (sites that have come forward separately) and a pro-rate requirement that is based on the assumptions that underpin the WNJCS may be more acceptable locally. The policy team do not consider it sustainable to continue to roll forward unplanned increases in the housing requirements, without considering this in the context of the wider implications on the spatial strategy for the area. As such a range of between 0-124 is considered most appropriate and consistent with the current adopted and emerging Local Plan. • A residual requirement of 0 does not, in the view of the planning policy team, equate to a moratorium on development for a particular settlement and should not be interpreted as such. If considering a figure of 0, independent evidence should be prepared to demonstrate that all housing needs are currently being met, including needs for affordable housing. • Note: 0 is used to indicate Local Housing Needs only. E.g. as assessed through a housing needs survey.

8. Update on Playing Fields – Astrop Road • Title Deed shows Parish Council as Proprietor under ‘Title Absolute’, but contains restrictions and charges. • Legal position being investigated. • Trust document dated 1952. • States the council was appointed to be the trustee for the foundation and the endowment thereof of certain land with buildings. • The property forming the foundation to be administered and managed by the committee in accordance with the schedule. • The schedule being that management and control of the trust premises be vested in the PFA.

9. Update on Playing Fields – Astrop Road (Response from Acre) • Under the trust deed, the Parish Council is appointed to be Custodian Trustee.  Although this term isn’t used in the deed, that is the effect of Clause 1 which states:  “The Council shall stand possessed of all property forming the Foundation upon trust for the same to be used…”.  The trust deed then goes on to state that the property/trust premises will be administered, managed, and controlled by the “Committee” – see clause 2 in the declaration of trust and clauses 1, 20, and 21 (amongst others) in the Schedule.  This means the committee members, who are Charity Trustees (even though they aren’t given that name in the deed), have economic control over the trust’s property. • Having two sets of trustees – custodian/holding trustees on the one hand and charity trustees on the other – is absolutely standard for a playing field or village hall charitable trust and works as follows.  Legal title in the property is held by a custodian trustee (often a parish council as a body corporate) or by individually named holding trustees.  This is an entirely residual role, the purpose being to allow legal title to be held with continuity.  If legal title were vested in the charity trustees, then every time the composition of the committee changed, the title deeds to the trust’s property would have to be amended or, if the land were registered, the land registry entry would need to be amended.  So the vesting of legal title in a custodian trustee or holding trustees is a construction designed for convenience and doesn’t confer any rights or obligations on the custodian/holding trustees to do anything other than to act in accordance with the lawful instructions of the committee of management. To quote from the Charity Commission’s guidance:  “Holding and custodian trustees aren’t charity trustees; they can’t make decisions about the management of the charity or its property, and must follow the lawful directions of the charity trustees.”. • Day-to-day economic, administrative, and management control of a PFA/village hall trust resides with the committee of management in their capacity as charity trustees (sometimes also referred to as managing trustees).  It is the names of the committee members which should appear on the Charity Commission register and not the custodian or holding trustees. I notice that the entry for Middleton Cheney PFA gives your name, Caroline, and also Alan Gascoigne and Paul Christie, suggesting the PFA has three charity trustees. • Here is a link to the Charity Commission’s guidance referred to above, in case you’d like to read about this in more detail: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-essential-trustee-what-you-need-to-know-cc3/the-essential-trustee-what-you-need-to-know-what-you-need-to-do

10. Update on Playing Fields – Astrop Road (Response from NCALC) • With regards to the Council acting as a developer – again I am not sure what the issue here is. The Council is the land owner, and therefore it would not be unusual for the Council to seek development for the site. However, since the LPA is the decision making body for any development within the area, there is nothing preventing the council proposing sites for development, and what authority are the council therefore seeking? For the avoidance of doubt, it is for the local planning authority to satisfy itself that a draft neighbourhood plan or Order submitted to it for independent examination complies with all the relevant statutory requirements.

11. Suggestions received: • Support for Mr. Mobley's proposal to develop existing Astrop Road playing field for housing, enabling his field as replacement with new facilities. • Develop existing Astrop Road playing field for housing, enabling new playing field and new facilities on Waters Lane. • Develop a large site off Banbury Lane, partially for housing with a section then becoming a new playing field with new facilities. Then further develop existing playing field on Astrop Road.

12. Affordable Housing Defined • Affordable housing can be provided in the following tenures: • (i)  Rented housing normally provided in conjunction with a registered social landlord at rents below Housing Corporation target rents. This tenure will probably provide for most housing need in the District • (ii)  Low cost ownership, usually in partnership with a registered social landlord, to ensure the property remains affordable in the future. Several variations are available: • Shared ownership, where the occupier shares ownership of part of the house (paying a mortgage) and pays an affordable rent on the remainder to a registered social landlord. Depending on circumstances the occupier could eventually own the house completely or part of the property will remain with the landlord under fixed equity arrangements. Under the latter arrangement the proportions occupiers will be able to own will depend on Housing Corporation guidelines . In the case of rural exception sites social registered landlords will always retain an interest in the properties. • Low cost subsidized housing, provided at a discounted price by the developer to an eligible first time buyer. A legal agreement ensures that subsequent buyers are also eligible buyers • Discounted low cost market housing, made available to eligible buyers as above with the same controls over subsequent buyers.

13. Criteria to assess housing sites • Site assessment criteria – Draft 1 – • 16 April 2019 • Introduction - Members of the neighbourhood plan steering group have prepared this note for discussion at the Middleton Cheney Neighbourhood Plan meeting on 23 April 2019. The note identifies the criteria that we will use to assess potential development sites around the village. It is not a definitive list, and will need to evolve along with the plan making process. We will need to pay particular attention to how the site assessment criteria relates to the sustainability appraisal process. However, this is supposed to provide a starting point for discussion amongst the neighbourhood plan group, and the wider village. • The assessment criteria are split across a number of topic areas that broadly follow those we have set out in our vision and objectives document, that we consulted upon in November 2018. Where possible, we have identified specific questions that the site assessor will need to think of when undertaking the assessment. If you are attending the meeting on 23 April 2019, please feel free to come along and add your own ideas and contribute to the discussion.

14. Housing 1: How would development of the site help meet the specific housing needs of the village, including a provision of the following types and tenure of homes? • Market housing at a price that is affordable compared to local wages • Affordable housing (in line with government’s definition of affordable housing) • Smaller properties designed for first time buyers, particularly those with a strong local connection to the village • Properties designed for elderly people’s needs • Plots for people wanting to build their own home 2: How would the site’s development encourage the efficient use of land? • What densities can be achieved on the site? • Is the site Greenfield (undeveloped) or Brownfield (previously developed)?

15. Economy 3: How would development of the site help meet the specific commercial or business needs of the village? • What type of employment uses would be appropriate for this site, given its location? • How would the site’s development contribute to South Northamptonshire’s business plan to support our key employment sectors of High Performance Technology, Logistics, Food and Drink and the Visitor Economy? • If the site is brownfield, is the existing use still appropriate? Could the site be redeveloped to accommodate more, or different employment uses? 4: How would development of the site encourage working from home / remote working? • If the site includes homes, how would the homes be designed to accommodate this? • Is there capacity to introduce high speed broadband connections – both business and residential? • Can the development provide a communal / publicly accessible remote working venue? Examples of this could include the Engine Shed in Bristol. • South Northamptonshire Economic Growth Strategy: file:///C:/Users/Thomas%20Rice/Downloads/Economic_growth_strategy_2016_2019.pdf • Speed criteria for internet speeds to be determined (e.g. set criteria of a minimum of “X megabytes per second”

16. Landscape 5: Does the site form part of a “valued landscape”? Criteria for a valued landscape will be defined as follows: • Is the landscape in good quality?   • How rare is the landscape? Is it internationally unique, or is it locally significant? • How representative of the wider landscape is the site? • Does the site contribute to conservation – of either the built environment, or the natural environment? • Is the site publicly accessible via public rights of way, or through general public access? • How well used is this public right of way (surveys may be needed during key times – e.g. am/pm dog walkers, and summer / Easter holidays. • What do the public use the site for? • Will need to refine in light of High Court decision on valued landscapes (Para 16 onward): • http://www.swdevelopmentplan.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CALA-Homes-APP4-Matter-V.pdf

17. Is the site visible from public viewpoints, if so: • To what extent does the site dominate the view from the public viewpoint? • What are the physical attributes on this site that make it distinguished or unique? • Are there are any large, or old trees on the site? • Are there any water features on the site? • Does the plant life or grassland provide a picturesque view? • How do people perceive the site? How is it enjoyed by the public? (look at senses of smell, sound, touch etc..) • Do people associate the site with something significant? (this could be an event, an author, a painting etc.)

18. 6: Would development of the site negatively affect any of the criteria identified under the above question? 7: Should the site be designated as a protected landscape in the neighbourhood plan? 8: What are the results of the landscape assessment for this site? (TO BE CONFIRMED – CONSULTANT WILL BE NEEDED) 9: If the site is developed, what are the key landscape views that need to be retained?

19. Ecology 10: Is the site part of a designated ecological site? • Internationally significant site? (Ramsar Site, Special Area of Conservation, Special Protection Area) • Nationally significant site? (Sites of Special Scientific Interest) • Locally designated site? 11: What are the results of the ecological survey for this site? (TO BE CONFIRMED – CONSULTANT WILL BE NEEDED) 12: Are there any veteran trees or ancient woodland on the site? Would development of the site result in their loss? 13: Is there any “non-designated” biodiversity value to the site? This will include the presence of non-protected species or habitats. 14: If the site is developed, how could the biodiversity value of the site be at worst conserved, and at best enhanced?

20. Pollution 15: How would development of the site contribute to improving air quality in the village? Does it currently form an important open space that already assists in keeping air quality good? 16: How would development of the site affect light pollution and night sky views around the village? How could this be mitigated? 17: How would development of the site affect water quality in the surrounding area? Will it result in run offs into local water bodies (such as streams or ponds)? How could this be mitigated? 18: Will the site’s existing or previous uses likely to have caused ground contamination issues? 19: Are neighbouring land uses sensitive to pollution?

21. Flooding 20: Is the site subject to fluvial (river) or surface water flooding? Information can be sourced from the government’s website, or local evidence (such as photographs or reported incidents). 21: Would the site’s development result in increased flood risk elsewhere? How could this be mitigated? https://flood-map-for-planning.service.gov.uk/confirm-location?easting=449942&northing=241794&placeOrPostcode=middleton%20cheney

22. Climate change and resource efficiency 22: How would the site’s development make efficient use of water? What technologies could be employed as part of the development (such as water butts, or other rainwater recycling measures, or managed demands within the new homes)? 23: How would the site’s development make efficient use of sunlight? How can the development maximise solar gain (i.e. maximising the number of south facing roofs for solar panels, or south facing gardens and living areas) 24: How could the site’s development provide locally generated energy? (e.g. solar panels, wind turbines on homes etc) 25: How would development of the site minimise the needs of people to travel by private car?

23. Community facilities 26: Would the site’s development result in the loss of a community facility – if so, can this be replaced by a facility of equal or better standards? 27: Could the site provide for a new community facility? Infrastructure criteria 28: Would the site’s development result impact negatively on the local highway network? 29: Would the site’s development provide for sufficient utilities connections (water, gas, electricity, and broadband), without adversely affecting services in the village?