NDP Steering Group Meetings

Now that the draft NDP has been approved by the Parish Council, the Steering Group has achieved its aim. It has now been wound up. However, this page will remain in place so that the notes on the Steering Group meetings can still be viewed...

Steering Group meetings are held on the second Tuesday of each month. They are held at 7.30pm in the Burley Gate Village Hall.

They are public meetings – all are welcome to attend.

The table below gives access to the agenda and notes of all the Steering Group meetings.


12th September 2017NDP SG 2017 09 12 AgendaNDP SG 2017 09 12 Notes
25th July 2017NDP SG 2017 07 25 AgendaNDP SG 2017 07 25 Notes
13th June 2017NDP SG 2017 06 13 AgendaNDP SG 2017 06 13 Notes
23rd May 2017NDP SG 2017 05 23 AgendaNDP SG 2017 05 23 Notes
11th April 2017NDP SG 2017 04 11 AgendaNDP SG 2017 04 11 Notes
14th March 2017NDP SG 2017 03 14 AgendaNDP SG 2017 03 14 Notes
14th February 2017NDP SG 2017 02 14 AgendaNDP SG 2017 02 14 Notes
10th January 2017NDP SG 2017 01 10 AgendaNDP SG 2017 01 10 Notes
13th December 2016NDP SG 2016 12 13 AgendaNDP SG 2016 12 13 Notes
8th November 2016NDP SG 2016 11 08 AgendaNDP SG 2016 11 08 Notes
11th October 2016NDP SG 2016 10 11 AgendaNDP SG 2016 10 11 Notes
13th September 2016NDP SG 2016 09 13 AgendaNDP SG 2016 09 13 Notes
12th July 2016NDP SG 2016 07 12 AgendaNDP SG 2016 07 12 Notes


8 thoughts on “NDP Steering Group Meetings”

  1. Hi
    I’ve just read the following paragraph from the meeting notes, & wondered if you could let me know where the development may be in Burley Gate please as I can’t seem to find out from the website:
    These options showed David’s professional recommendations for where our new development should be in Burley Gate. Following this Open Day, and the previous public meeting on 23rd May, his recommendations are now open for everyone to discuss and give us their opinions.

    1. David’s professional recommendations are in a document called the Housing Site Assessment. This link will take you to the Housing Site Assessment page of the website. On that page you can find the document itself and the responses from a questionnaire that was carried out on the Open Day meeting. The questionnaire shows that Option B is the publically favoured option.
      David is now taking the feedback from the Housing Site Assessment and bringing it together in a Revised Housing Option which will focus everyone’s feedback. Once it is complete it will be published on the Revised Housing Option page of the website.

  2. With the experience of attending most steering group meetings open to all residents since the start of the NDP process, we welcome the inclusive, receptive and refreshingly non-bureaucratic and well documented approach, which is very much in accord with the HC Guidance Note 28 as well as practical and effective for this NDP.

    Regarding regulations, we note that, in Guidance Note 4 also linked as a reference from this website, HC has usefully outlined some simple steps in order for the Neighbourhood Development Plan to meet these.

    Alan and Judith Debenham

    1. Thank you for your kind comment, it is much appreciated.
      We are trying to run the NDP in a clear, approachable manner whilst being compliant with the HC guidelines.

  3. Having attended the SG meeting of 25th July and read the notes of the meeting, I have the following comments:

    Question 5 of the Residents’ Questionnaire addressed affordable housing as reported in the Results Report on the website (24% for, 42% against). This compares with low cost housing for sale (53% for, 19% against) and privately owned houses (76% for, 4% against).

    Policy H1 of the Herefordshire Local Plan Core Strategy(2011-2031) (adopted 2015) gives a 40% value (for Bromyard) as an INDICATIVE TARGET (for sites of more than 10 dwellings), based on evidence of need and viability in the COUNTY’S housing market.
    Policy RA2 states that housing proposals will be permitted where the size, type, and tenure of houses in particular settlements REFLECTS LOCAL DEMAND.

    Given the above, I do not think that the provision of subsidised (ie ‘affordable’) houses at Burley Gate should cause houses to be built on more sites than Site 2. Indeed, it could well lead to the number of houses at the preferred lower market price to be less than maximised. (See Judy’s and my comments on the Revised Housing Option which already elaborate on my subsequent reference to the Option in the notes of the meeting as a ‘more robust solution’). Fifteen such houses should give a good contribution, along with the other identified sites in the Revised Housing Option, to alleviating the shortfall in numbers of children at the school.

    Regarding attendance at the Open Day and completion of the associated questionnaire, I think it is appropriate that those with the most knowledge of and interest in the situation at Burley Gate be taken into account, particularly when almost unanimous in selection of only Site 2.

    Regarding the issues raised concerning SG processes, I expressed my opinion to the effect that these issues have been raised unreasonably late and are anyway immaterial to the proposal reached in the Revised Housing Option. In particular, with regard to the “Part 5 – The Codes” document for councillors, most participants in the SG are, like myself, not councillors. Also, with regard to the sites outside the settlement boundaries, assessments of these have been given in the draft Housing Site Assessment Rev B for all to see on the website. One can pick out from the list those that have been included or not, with explanations. I expect that the identified sites and explanations will be shown clearly in the draft NDP.

    Alan Debenham

    1. Thank you for your comments.
      The Revised Housing Option has been approved by the Parish Council. Our planning consultant is now using it to generate the Draft NDP. This will be distributed to everyone in our parishes for public consultation.

  4. Having attended the Steering Group meeting of the 12 September at which the draft NDP was presented, I have the following comments after reading the notes of the meeting and in anticipation of the forthcoming consultation:

    I think it is important for the consultation and the NDP for the word ‘affordable’ to be used and understood only as defined by Hereford County Council. See the following link and its contained link and pdf entitled ‘Definitions of affordable housing across Herefordshire’:


    So ‘affordable’ means below market price in some form and the document refers to the subsidy.

    I referred in the meeting to the majority support for shared ownership (part rented, part owned) in the residents’ survey, as well as the larger majority against social and affordable rented houses (Question 5). The significance of this for the NDP is that the majority is in favour of the affordable houses at Burley Gate being for shared ownership. It does not mean, contrary to other strongly expressed preferences in the overall feedback, that, owing to the Council’s stated percentage of affordable houses, there is support for more housing in Burley Gate than is suited to the form of the village or is needed to fulfil the Council’s overall housing requirement (ie the tail wagging the dog).

    Regarding the need for affordable houses for local people, having attended most SG meetings since the middle of 2016, I am not aware of any evidence being given that the need is greater than the number provided in the draft NDP. An earlier study referenced in the draft NDP indicates that this number could well meet the need.

    Alan Debenham

    1. Thank you for taking the time and trouble to give us your views and provide the link about affordable housing to the Herefordshire Council website. It sounds is if you feel quite positive about how the draft plan has been compiled. We welcome all comments and want to hear as many views and opinions as possible.

      The Draft NDP was approved by the Parish Council at its September meeting. We can now prepare for the public consultation. More details can be found on the Draft Neighbourhood Development Plan page.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *