|
In 2013, Burbage Parish Council set up a Neighbourhood Steering Group. However, while initial research indicated that there was strong support for a Neighbourhood Plan, wading through Regulations and finding sufficient committed volunteers to carry out all of the work proved to be obstacles to rapid progress, given all the other tasks that the Parish Council had to do.
In 2016 the Steering Group formally appointed PlanningStreet as consultants, with a brief to project manage, produce key documents and generally support the Steering Group. |
|
|
Burbage is a medium-sized village in Wiltshire, located in an AONB and with an historic core. The Steering Group wanted to protect the local landscape and village character, especially in the conservation area, but recognised that carefully controlled growth would help pay for badly-needed improvements in infrastructure.
|
|
It was realised that involving the entire community was essential from the start. Without community approval the plan might not pass referendum, and PlanningStreet advised that poor consultation coulsd also cause the plan to fail one of the legal 'Basic Conditions'.
More importantly, it was hoped that the ideas for the plan would actually come from the residents of Burbage itself. So, every effort was made to involve people; drop-in meetings, leaflets, questionnaires and events were all used to encourage locals of all ages to get involved. |
Later in the process, strong disagreements emerged about the direction the plan was taking, and an additional round of consultation , above and beyond that required by the Regulations, was used to reconcile differences. In the final plan, considerable changes were made to reflect these concerns. This was considered to be a successful demonstration that the plan was democratically based, and featured in the 'Consultation Statement' that must accompany all Neighbourhood Plans.
One of the first things to emerge from community involvement was a Vision and a set of Objectives.
These would form the early part of the Plan, and then policies would be developed to bring about the objectives. Policy ideas were noted at this stage, but not developed.
Because plans must be based on evidence, not just the wishes of the community, a Scoping Report was produced by the Steering Group and PlanningStreet working together. This research provided hard data on every issue that might be feature in the Plan. The data eventually found an additional use as the basis for the SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) Report that it was necessary for PlanningStreet to produce.
Firstly however, PlanningStreet used the Scoping Report to produce a table showing the issues that had been discovered (such as the importance of local wildlife, heritage and issues with transport and facilities).
At the recommendation of PlanningStreet, more research was also done including a Housing Needs Survey.
Using all of the research data, PlanningStreet then showed what legally-workable policy options there were for each issue. The Steering Group used these and its own ideas to select which ones to take forward.
Firstly however, PlanningStreet used the Scoping Report to produce a table showing the issues that had been discovered (such as the importance of local wildlife, heritage and issues with transport and facilities).
At the recommendation of PlanningStreet, more research was also done including a Housing Needs Survey.
Using all of the research data, PlanningStreet then showed what legally-workable policy options there were for each issue. The Steering Group used these and its own ideas to select which ones to take forward.
Once initial consultation and research had taken place, PlanningStreet produced a draft Plan, which went to and from between the consultancy and the Steering Group as ideas were developed and refined.
Eventually, a consultation draft was produced and published for the statutory consultation period.
Many critical comments were received and accordingly PlanningStreet advised that the plan should be comprehensively revised and a second, non statutory consultation undertaken. This was done and the plan was then well received.
Eventually, a consultation draft was produced and published for the statutory consultation period.
Many critical comments were received and accordingly PlanningStreet advised that the plan should be comprehensively revised and a second, non statutory consultation undertaken. This was done and the plan was then well received.
|
Additional changes were made to the Plan following consultation, and additional material such as revised maps obtained. The Plan underwent examination and this led to further changes.The plan went to referendum in July 2017 (4 years after starting). Of the 470 votes cast, 414 were in favour and 56 against.The difficult and winding story of the Plan indicates how important good professional advice is steering a way past the obstacles that can arise.
The final Plan allocated sites for employment and housing; protected green space, infrastructure and protected the heritage. 
|