April 29, 2014 | Malcolm Bell | 2 Comments Thursday 15th and Thursday 22nd of May at 7pm in the Pavilion, Clift Meadow. The Parish Council via The Steering Committee is preparing a Neighbourhood Plan for Bramley which will enable the local community to have more say over the way the village develops over the next 15 years. The Bramley Neighbourhood Plan will be part of the statutory development plan for the parish and will have to be taken into account when decisions are made on planning applications. Neighbourhood Plans are a new kind of plan. Before they can be brought into force they must receive a majority vote in a local referendum. Over the past year the Neighbourhood Steering Group has been working hard to get local people actively involved in the production of the Neighbourhood Plan, so that the Plan will help Bramley become the kind of place that the community wants it to be and will be supported by a majority of people at the referendum. Work on the Neighbourhood Plan has reached the stage where a decision will soon be made on the preferred level of growth for the village to 2029. In other words how many additional new houses are going to be built in Bramley and how much of other kinds of development will be provided by 2029. Before making this decision the Steering Committee will be holding two consultation events open to all members of the local community to seek people’s views on how much growth Bramley should plan for, what kind of development is needed, and where that development should go. The Neighbourhood Plan will be part of the statutory development plan for Bramley, and by law it must be “in general conformity with local strategic policy”. This means that where the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan has a housing or employment growth allocation for an area, the Neighbourhood Plan must accommodate at least the level of growth specified in the Local Plan. The Neighbourhood Plan can determine where the new dwellings or business units will go, and it can allow a higher level of growth than the local planning authority requires, but it cannot reduce the scale of these allocations. Urban Vision are the consultants working with Bramley NDP Basingstoke and Deane’s emerging Local Plan is proposing 200 additional new homes in Bramley to 2029. This is the minimum that the Neighbourhood Plan must accommodate. However, if Bramley continues to grow at the same rate that it has since 1981, then the village would have around 580 additional homes by 2029. The Steering Group with the support of the Parish Council is looking at these as minimum and maximum growth options for the village. It may choose one of these or an alternative somewhere in between. Higher levels of growth can bring greater benefits for the local community in the form of developer contributions. But a balance has to be struck with another of the Neighbourhood Plan’s key aims which is to protect the rural character of the village. The Neighbourhood Steering Committee and the Parish Council would very much welcome the views of local people before making its decision. Public meetings will be held on: Thursday 15th and Thursday 22nd of May at 7pm in the Pavilion, Clift Meadow. After a short presentation of progress to date with the Neighbourhood Plan there will be an opportunity for people to ask questions and make comments. After that we will have a workshop session in smaller groups where specific issues can be discussed in more detail. People’s feedback and ideas will then be taken into account when the draft Neighbourhood Plan is written. Your views and ideas will be vital in making the Neighbourhood Plan a success, so please join us at this crucial stage. Last updated: May 23, 2014 at 5:09 am
Please can I make clear the point raised at the recently held meeting. My calculation on housing in Bramley is 200 homes for Minchen’s Lane, a further 200 homes at Germans Road where the fence has been recently erected to allow for access, and a further 200 homes in the plan. By my calculation this makes 600 houses – welcome to the new town of Bramleystoke! Reply
Unfortunately I am unable to attend either workshop, However I have attended previous consultations at which the Charles Church site was presented as the final solution due to misguided, misinformed logic related to what is an is not required of any Developer in providing suitable infrastructure to support any application. From the Parish Council’s side I have also seen little if any evidence base on strategic infrastructure, sustainability or highways & Transport. that supports their (not the local communities) preferred site adjacent to Clift Meadow.. It is noted that Charles Church have already submitted their planning application for this site, prematurely when looking at neighborhood plan policy but not so due the deficient in the 5 yr land supply for the Borough Council due to the lack of an Adopted LP. As such the production of this Neighborhood Plan appears to be a waste of tax payers money as the horse has already bolted as they say. Turning to the misinformation in the public domain and being utilized to support the Charles Church option. It is a requirement for the Developer to enter into a legally binding Section 106 agreement to provide sufficient Strategic Infrastructure to support the proposed development this should include for: 1. Education Contributions 2. Health Contributions 3. Other neg Contributions or legal requirements such as highways improvements sustainable travel new play areas or community halls etc There is also a need to provide a CIL contribution per dwelling. This should all be neg with the Local Planning Authority on the Communities behalf. It is definitely not a gift as has been suggested and there are strict legal requirements not to provide planning gain not directly related to the development. Therefore this leaves the true requirement that any development must be undertaken in the most sustainable location. It is clear that this land is NOT in a sustainable location for the following reasons: 1. It takes access from a substandard country lane 2. The junction with The Street will not have sufficient capacity to accept development traffic from 200 dwellings 3 Michens lane is substandard in every way for additional traffic which will attempt to rat run to avoid the Railway gates 4. As the majority of traffic will distribute to the A33 due to the need to get to employment areas in Reading and Basingstoke further queues and delays will occur at the already congested railway crossing creating not just delay but pollution and saftey issues 5. Due to the location of ALL amenities except the Doctors Surgery being the other side of the railway further delays and safety issues arise for pedestrians and cyclists. It is not acceptable to utilize traditional transport planning standards with respect to distance to amenities with the barrier of the railway line in the way. 6. It is well know that the existing public sewerage network is at or near capacity. The recently installed pumping station for the TW development is again to the opposite side of the railway. It will not be possible for the Developer to requisition a rising main or gravity sewer across the Network Rail land as they are protected by law against this. As such a negotiated position with Network Rail will need to be reached to allow this. Which could effect the viability of the scheme via ransom It is clear from the above that the site is NOT in a sustainable location. It is accepted that the draft local plan requires 200 dwellings to be constructed within Bramley, however other options are much more sustainable to the A33 side of the railway line. One in particular is the Duke of Wellingtons Land that is closer to all amenities, has direct access onto a better standard road already heading in the right direction for commuters and not through the heart of the Village as the Charles Church site will. Already has footpaths etc on the existing Highway.as such infrastructure already exists. Is adjacent to the existing pumping station. Finally I am sure it would be in a position to release and/or provide buildings under a 106 to provide valuable community/open space facilities on the A33 side of Bramley that do not currently exist These are but a few of the benefits over the Charles Church site which clearly show that it is in a much more sustainable location As such the Charles Church should not be included within the Neighborhood Plan for the reasons set out above. Reply