PLEASE NOTE THE LINKS ON THE POSTER ARE AGAINST THE WRONG DATES.
https://youtu.be/6iLlb8Ret8M is for February 22nd
https://youtu.be/pZmdufb7LgI is for March 15th
Click on the image for a full sized poster
4 thoughts on “NDP Informal Consultation Dates”
We still haven’t had a good enough justification from the Parish Council as to why they ignored the letter of the 3rd June 2020 to Andrew De La Hay from Ross Town Council which states:~
Herefordshire Council does not support large developments to the South West of the Town due to the restrictions on the B4234?
In addition proposed developments at Leys Hill were rejected siting concerns over increased traffic on the B4234.
If this holds true for Arbour Hill and Leys Hill Road, surely it holds true for any site which substantially increase traffic and requires access to the B4234. such as 11R and 21
Why haven’t the Parish Council taken this into consideration and challenged Hereford council on the number of houses required?
If they have challenged the numbers, could they confirm when and confirm the response from Hereford Council.
If they haven’t, why not?
Again we note this was done by Bridstow Parish Council and they had their housing allocation reviewed and changed.
All housing development in the parish will need to use the B4234 no matter where it is located, and Herefordshire Council will allocate a minimum of 14% increase by 2031 as laid down by Central Government.
In producing an NDP, it may be that the constraints are so major as to indicate that the required minimum number of houses cannot be achieved. There must be strong evidence for this. Currently it is advised that we do not have the evidence to show there are insufficient viable, suitable and available development sites to meet the Core Strategy requirements
The numbers set for Walford Parish Council by Herefordshire Council have not been challenged because, unless a Parish Council can demonstrate that they have insufficient viable, development sites to meet the Core Strategy requirements then that provision cannot be challenged. The figures and relevant planning requirements are defined in the Core Strategy, which was open to public consultation from 2012 to 2015. The figures were open to question at that time but once the Plan was adopted, in 2015, they became mandatory on all Parishes. The Core Strategy is now being revised by Herefordshire Council and there will be opportunities, during that revision process, for Parish Councils and members of the public to submit comments on the content, including any housing development numbers.
The statement made regarding Bridstow Parish Council is incorrect.
Extract from Bridstow’s NDP~
Option 1: A number of large sites that would enable this approach were available although they would have significant adverse effects upon the landscape of the Wye Valley AONB. Residents were strongly opposed to this approach and no suitable and available options were considered to provide sufficient public benefits to outweigh objections to ‘major development’ that would result, as required by NPPF paragraph 172.
Why have we not followed suit????
Why are you still pursuing large developments against public sentiment ?
We do not believe there is a requirement to propose a development that goes against the wishes of the parishioners, despite this been inferred at the NDP meeting on Wednesday by Andrew De La Haye.
The Bridstow NDP, which has been submitted to Herefordshire council, removed the large sites from their proposed options as it was against the wishes of the parishioners, why?????
We still haven’t had a good enough justification from the Parish Council as to why they ignored the letter of the 3rd June 2020 to Andrew De La Hay from Ross Town Council which states:~
Herefordshire Council does not support large developments to the South West of the Town due to the restrictions on the B4234?
In addition proposed developments at Leys Hill were rejected siting concerns over increased traffic on the B4234.
If this holds true for Arbour Hill and Leys Hill Road, surely it holds true for any site which substantially increase traffic and requires access to the B4234. such as 11R and 21
Why haven’t the Parish Council taken this into consideration and challenged Hereford council on the number of houses required?
If they have challenged the numbers, could they confirm when and confirm the response from Hereford Council.
If they haven’t, why not?
Again we note this was done by Bridstow Parish Council and they had their housing allocation reviewed and changed.
All housing development in the parish will need to use the B4234 no matter where it is located, and Herefordshire Council will allocate a minimum of 14% increase by 2031 as laid down by Central Government.
In producing an NDP, it may be that the constraints are so major as to indicate that the required minimum number of houses cannot be achieved. There must be strong evidence for this. Currently it is advised that we do not have the evidence to show there are insufficient viable, suitable and available development sites to meet the Core Strategy requirements
The numbers set for Walford Parish Council by Herefordshire Council have not been challenged because, unless a Parish Council can demonstrate that they have insufficient viable, development sites to meet the Core Strategy requirements then that provision cannot be challenged. The figures and relevant planning requirements are defined in the Core Strategy, which was open to public consultation from 2012 to 2015. The figures were open to question at that time but once the Plan was adopted, in 2015, they became mandatory on all Parishes. The Core Strategy is now being revised by Herefordshire Council and there will be opportunities, during that revision process, for Parish Councils and members of the public to submit comments on the content, including any housing development numbers.
The statement made regarding Bridstow Parish Council is incorrect.
On behalf of the NDP Committee
Extract from Bridstow’s NDP~
Option 1: A number of large sites that would enable this approach were available although they would have significant adverse effects upon the landscape of the Wye Valley AONB. Residents were strongly opposed to this approach and no suitable and available options were considered to provide sufficient public benefits to outweigh objections to ‘major development’ that would result, as required by NPPF paragraph 172.
Why have we not followed suit????
Why are you still pursuing large developments against public sentiment ?
We do not believe there is a requirement to propose a development that goes against the wishes of the parishioners, despite this been inferred at the NDP meeting on Wednesday by Andrew De La Haye.
The Bridstow NDP, which has been submitted to Herefordshire council, removed the large sites from their proposed options as it was against the wishes of the parishioners, why?????