LITTON CHENEY NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN STEERING GROUP

Notes of the Meeting held on Tuesday

13th December 2016 at LATCH

Present: Richard Jones (Chairman), Elizabeth Kingston (Deputy Chairman), John Firrell (Secretary), Kathryn Brooks, Hannah Bunting, Sally Dyke, Steve Kourik, Nicola Miller and Gill Newell.

Apologies: Mary Anderson, Robin Barbour, Nick Bunting, David Hearn, Jamie Miller and Freddie Spicer.

1. The Chairman opened the meeting and welcomed all present.

2. Apologies: As shown above.

3. Acceptance of the Minutes of the last Meeting and matters arising: As the Minutes had been widely distributed well in advance of this meeting they were accepted as read. The Chairman informed the meeting that he had attended the Parish Council meeting in November to make a progress report on the SG. The Parish Council had also approved the Steering Group's Terms of Reference and agreed that for the purposes of discussion with the principal authorities the parish boundary would be used as the NP template.

4. WDDC Working Group Progress Report (Kathryn Brooks, Hannah Bunting & David Hearn) – A report of the group's meeting with Terry Sneller, Team Leader on West Dorset's Local Plan, had been circulated with the agenda and is attached to these Notes. The “message” emanating from WDDC was if you don't want development you don't need a Neighbourhood Plan as the Local Plan as it currently stands gives that form of protection. Several lines of discussion ensued along the lines as to what circumstances could give grounds for development within the parish boundary, if development was favoured by local residents what form would it take if permitted and what constituted affordable housing. If there is a desire to see growth in the village, then a neighbourhood plan would be of benefit.A reinstatement of the Defined Development Boundary could also be a consideration and, if it would help, an updating on the Parish Plan although it was pointed out that the reason Loders “plan” took so long was that they involved themselves in a PP prior to embarking on their NP.

As a result of a recent newspaper article indicating that more building land needed to be identified in order for WDDC to maintain their five-year land stock, and where the additional development might take place, HB had emailed Terry Sneller who had confirmed that Litton Cheney remained protected within the Local Plan.

5. Demographics Working Group Progress Report (Elizabeth Kingston & Gill Newell) – Considerable research of records and census information had been gathered and together formed a demographic picture of Litton Cheney in 2011 and in fact provided projections up to 2035. This had been incorporated into a written report circulated with the meeting agenda and attached to these Notes. After some discussion GN offered to carry out some more research on the demographics relating to the 30-59 age group which might explain why the population of the village had declined during the period 2001 and 2011. There was a need to collate the number of households with the number of dwellings. The Chairman suggested that although accurate demographic data would be important if we proceed with a NP, furtherwork need not currently be a priority.

6. Questionnaire/Survey Working Group (Elizabeth Kingston, Gill Newell & Hannah Bunting) – The questionnaire survey group are grateful to David Hearn who copied the Loders Survey to the Steering Group. Although some work had started on taking the best from the Loders Survey combined with questions from the Litton Vital Village Survey this has been curtailed because of the advice from WDDC. The meeting with WDDC advised that consultation and a vote by the Parish as to whether to develop a Neighbourhood Plan was the essential next step. The group had not yet got to the point of producing a report but had concentrated their discussions on the form that an initial questionnaire would take. They had come to the conclusion that it would be one single question – Do you want to have a Neighbourhood (Development) Plan, Yes/No? Community consultation is the essential next step. We envisage a 'pros & cons' piece of material and the 'yes/no' questionnaire circulated to every household, probably early in March, coordinating together with several events along the lines of a village cafe at which SG members would answer questions, clarify and generally help residents to reach their decision. Clarity within the written material distributed to village residents was of the utmost importance.

These events will also be the first fulfillment of our commitment to hold six-monthly open meetings. The Survey working group, augmented by Chairman Richard and possibly Sally Dyke, will meet on 9th January at GN's house to develop draft material before the next SG meeting. HB had looked into using Facebook as a means of reaching younger elements of the village and those who don't read the BVN or village website, and HB would progress this prior to the next meeting. SK would research what similar parishes to Litton Cheney in terms of size and rural location had adopted in their plans. Initial research has shown that there are very few completed plans in West Dorset so he will need to extend searches to the remainder of rural Dorset, east Devon, south Somerset and southWiltshire. It was agreed that although we had opted to use Loders NP process as a template, we should also look outside of that process so that we obtained the best of both worlds.

7. Summary of Progress so far: So far, so good with each working group fulfilling their brief. It remained to be seen how quickly various matters could be progressed and of course much would depend on the outcome of the unofficial “referendum” in March. It was however of paramount importance that a balanced view be exhibited so that considered decisions could be made by all residents. Whilst at this point it would be the individual's opinion that would be sought, in the event there was a wish for an NP a consultation would take place on a wider scale with other interest groups within the village.

It was agreed that reports generated by Working Groups and SG members would be circulated internally and only placed on the website once they had been discussed and confirmed by the SG.

8. Possible New Objectives: It was considered there was enough to occupy the SG currently.

9. Date of Next Meeting: Monday 6th February, 7.30 pm, LATCH.

10. There being no further business the Chairman thanked all for attending and closed the meeting.

John Firrell

Secretary LCNPSG