Pirton Neighbourhood Development Plan 2011 - 2031

I would wish to make a representation in relation to the Pirton Neighbourhood Development Plan (PNDP) and I contend that through the adoption of certain policies Pirton Parish Council has failed to meet the basic conditions for Neighbourhood Plans and other legal requirements.

Whilst I understand that the Examiner may wish to hold a public hearing, I confirm that I shall be prepared to submit further written representations if required by the Examiner. Would North Herts District Council please accept
this initial representation to include a request that I should be notified regarding North Hertfordshire District Council's decision under Regulation 19 (making a plan) to make the submitted neighbourhood plan for Pirton.

James F Sheridan FRICS and my company, Stratton Estates Ltd, have been retained by the estate and beneficiaries of the late Jonathan Weeden. In particular my instructions have been to promote the development of land opposite Rectory Manor Farm on Shillington Road, Pirton, extending to approx. 7.23 acres (2.924 hectares) known as site 064(N) or more recently PT1(N) by NHDC, and with title no XXXXX.

On behalf of the beneficiaries I wrote to Stephen Smith, clerk to Pirton Parish Council, on 4th February 2015 and stated that we wanted to make development representations under the proposed Pirton Neighbourhood Plan for the
Shillington Road land - no reply was received and no literature on the plan process was ever sent to me. I attended a public meeting on the draft plan on 19 April 2016 and in response to a question from a local landowner, Mr Phil Cooke, as to why landowners had not been consulted on the plan, the Chair of the Pirton Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, Diane Burleigh, said that the Group had decided not to talk to owners and they were not interested in site allocations at all. I completed a response form which was posted on 13th May 2016 which pointed out that the Draft Plan claimed to support appropriate sustainable development, but the steering committee were refusing any contact with local landowners. With a plan period up to 2031 I believe this intransigence invalidates the whole PNDP process. A hastily arranged meeting for landowners was called at short notice by Diane Burleigh for 19 July 2016, but I do not believe this late effort at a token consultation was sufficient. Indeed it is not clear if the meeting ever took place or, if it did, who attended. Copy correspondence in relation to the above is available for the Examiner.

I request that the attached submission for Shillington Road by Vincent and Gorbing for the draft NHDC Local Plan should be considered as a future development opportunity in Pirton in relation to the PNDP and over the plan period of the PNDP. The lack of any consideration of possible site allocations in the PNDP is a serious weakness which I believe should be addressed by the Examiner.

May I also make the following detailed comments:

TCPA 1990 Schedule 4b para 4,para 6(2)(d) and NP (General) Regs 2012 Regulations 14 and 15(2)(a) - in view of what I have stated the qualifying body has not complied with the requirements regarding the scope of pre-submission consultation.

PCPA 2004 2004 Section 38A(2) - the PNDP is overly restrictive and does not set out policies in relation to the realistic development and use of land in the neighbourhood area. No sites are allocated for any housing development
even though Pirton is a Category A village (suitable for housing expansion) and not in the Green Belt.. There is a significant shortage of suitable, non Green Belt, housing sites in the North Herts District Council area. (Plan ref. 1.4.1 to 1.4.4)

PNP1 - the proposed (but not finalised) village development boundary is unduly restricting and should naturally extend to Shillington Road and Priors Hill to the north west. (Plan ref.1.1)
The 30 unit housing cap is arbitrary and illogical as it has no connection to the size of a site. It should be removed. (Plan ref.1.2)

PNP7 - Key views and vistas (and visual character areas) are restrictive and artificial and are designed to prevent any development. The impact of new developments on views should be assessed on an individual basis.

One of the most important of the criteria for a neighbourhood plan is: How the plan contributes to the achievement of sustainable development . The PNDP fails to achieve this goal and it does not support a strong. vibrant and healthy community, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations.

I look forward to hearing the views of the Examiner and on behalf of my clients I propose that the PNDP should be deemed unacceptable in its present form.

I would wish to make a representation in relation to the Pirton Neighbourhood Development Plan (PNDP) and I contend that through the adoption of certain policies Pirton Parish Council has failed to meet the basic conditions for Neighbourhood Plans and other legal requirements.

Whilst I understand that the Examiner may wish to hold a public hearing, I confirm that I shall be prepared to submit further written representations if required by the Examiner. Would North Herts District Council please accept
this initial representation to include a request that I should be notified regarding North Hertfordshire District Council's decision under Regulation 19 (making a plan) to make the submitted neighbourhood plan for Pirton.

James F Sheridan FRICS and my company, Stratton Estates Ltd, have been retained by the estate and beneficiaries of the late Jonathan Weeden. In particular my instructions have been to promote the development of land opposite Rectory Manor Farm on Shillington Road, Pirton, extending to approx. 7.23 acres (2.924 hectares) known as site 064(N) or more recently PT1(N) by NHDC, and with title no XXXXX.

On behalf of the beneficiaries I wrote to Stephen Smith, clerk to Pirton Parish Council, on 4th February 2015 and stated that we wanted to make development representations under the proposed Pirton Neighbourhood Plan for the
Shillington Road land - no reply was received and no literature on the plan process was ever sent to me. I attended a public meeting on the draft plan on 19 April 2016 and in response to a question from a local landowner, Mr Phil Cooke, as to why landowners had not been consulted on the plan, the Chair of the Pirton Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, Diane Burleigh, said that the Group had decided not to talk to owners and they were not interested in site allocations at all. I completed a response form which was posted on 13th May 2016 which pointed out that the Draft Plan claimed to support appropriate sustainable development, but the steering committee were refusing any contact with local landowners. With a plan period up to 2031 I believe this intransigence invalidates the whole PNDP process. A hastily arranged meeting for landowners was called at short notice by Diane Burleigh for 19 July 2016, but I do not believe this late effort at a token consultation was sufficient. Indeed it is not clear if the meeting ever took place or, if it did, who attended. Copy correspondence in relation to the above is available for the Examiner.

I request that the attached submission for Shillington Road by Vincent and Gorbing for the draft NHDC Local Plan should be considered as a future development opportunity in Pirton in relation to the PNDP and over the plan period of the PNDP. The lack of any consideration of possible site allocations in the PNDP is a serious weakness which I believe should be addressed by the Examiner.

May I also make the following detailed comments:

TCPA 1990 Schedule 4b para 4,para 6(2)(d) and NP (General) Regs 2012 Regulations 14 and 15(2)(a) - in view of what I have stated the qualifying body has not complied with the requirements regarding the scope of pre-submission consultation.

PCPA 2004 2004 Section 38A(2) - the PNDP is overly restrictive and does not set out policies in relation to the realistic development and use of land in the neighbourhood area. No sites are allocated for any housing development
even though Pirton is a Category A village (suitable for housing expansion) and not in the Green Belt.. There is a significant shortage of suitable, non Green Belt, housing sites in the North Herts District Council area. (Plan ref. 1.4.1 to 1.4.4)

PNP1 - the proposed (but not finalised) village development boundary is unduly restricting and should naturally extend to Shillington Road and Priors Hill to the north west. (Plan ref.1.1)
The 30 unit housing cap is arbitrary and illogical as it has no connection to the size of a site. It should be removed. (Plan ref.1.2)

PNP7 - Key views and vistas (and visual character areas) are restrictive and artificial and are designed to prevent any development. The impact of new developments on views should be assessed on an individual basis.

One of the most important of the criteria for a neighbourhood plan is: How the plan contributes to the achievement of sustainable development . The PNDP fails to achieve this goal and it does not support a strong. vibrant and healthy community, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations.

I look forward to hearing the views of the Examiner and on behalf of my clients I propose that the PNDP should be deemed unacceptable in its present form.

I would wish to make a representation in relation to the Pirton Neighbourhood Development Plan (PNDP) and I contend that through the adoption of certain policies Pirton Parish Council has failed to meet the basic conditions for Neighbourhood Plans and other legal requirements.

Whilst I understand that the Examiner may wish to hold a public hearing, I confirm that I shall be prepared to submit further written representations if required by the Examiner. Would North Herts District Council please accept
this initial representation to include a request that I should be notified regarding North Hertfordshire District Council's decision under Regulation 19 (making a plan) to make the submitted neighbourhood plan for Pirton.

James F Sheridan FRICS and my company, Stratton Estates Ltd, have been retained by the estate and beneficiaries of the late Jonathan Weeden. In particular my instructions have been to promote the development of land opposite Rectory Manor Farm on Shillington Road, Pirton, extending to approx. 7.23 acres (2.924 hectares) known as site 064(N) or more recently PT1(N) by NHDC, and with title no XXXXX.

On behalf of the beneficiaries I wrote to Stephen Smith, clerk to Pirton Parish Council, on 4th February 2015 and stated that we wanted to make development representations under the proposed Pirton Neighbourhood Plan for the
Shillington Road land - no reply was received and no literature on the plan process was ever sent to me. I attended a public meeting on the draft plan on 19 April 2016 and in response to a question from a local landowner, Mr Phil Cooke, as to why landowners had not been consulted on the plan, the Chair of the Pirton Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, Diane Burleigh, said that the Group had decided not to talk to owners and they were not interested in site allocations at all. I completed a response form which was posted on 13th May 2016 which pointed out that the Draft Plan claimed to support appropriate sustainable development, but the steering committee were refusing any contact with local landowners. With a plan period up to 2031 I believe this intransigence invalidates the whole PNDP process. A hastily arranged meeting for landowners was called at short notice by Diane Burleigh for 19 July 2016, but I do not believe this late effort at a token consultation was sufficient. Indeed it is not clear if the meeting ever took place or, if it did, who attended. Copy correspondence in relation to the above is available for the Examiner.

I request that the attached submission for Shillington Road by Vincent and Gorbing for the draft NHDC Local Plan should be considered as a future development opportunity in Pirton in relation to the PNDP and over the plan period of the PNDP. The lack of any consideration of possible site allocations in the PNDP is a serious weakness which I believe should be addressed by the Examiner.

May I also make the following detailed comments:

TCPA 1990 Schedule 4b para 4,para 6(2)(d) and NP (General) Regs 2012 Regulations 14 and 15(2)(a) - in view of what I have stated the qualifying body has not complied with the requirements regarding the scope of pre-submission consultation.

PCPA 2004 2004 Section 38A(2) - the PNDP is overly restrictive and does not set out policies in relation to the realistic development and use of land in the neighbourhood area. No sites are allocated for any housing development
even though Pirton is a Category A village (suitable for housing expansion) and not in the Green Belt.. There is a significant shortage of suitable, non Green Belt, housing sites in the North Herts District Council area. (Plan ref. 1.4.1 to 1.4.4)

PNP1 - the proposed (but not finalised) village development boundary is unduly restricting and should naturally extend to Shillington Road and Priors Hill to the north west. (Plan ref.1.1)
The 30 unit housing cap is arbitrary and illogical as it has no connection to the size of a site. It should be removed. (Plan ref.1.2)

PNP7 - Key views and vistas (and visual character areas) are restrictive and artificial and are designed to prevent any development. The impact of new developments on views should be assessed on an individual basis.

One of the most important of the criteria for a neighbourhood plan is: How the plan contributes to the achievement of sustainable development . The PNDP fails to achieve this goal and it does not support a strong. vibrant and healthy community, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations.

I look forward to hearing the views of the Examiner and on behalf of my clients I propose that the PNDP should be deemed unacceptable in its present form.