1. Limits to Development October 4th 2016 Frisby on the Wreake Neighbourhood Plan

2. Frisby on the Wreake Allocation by MBC 19/9/16
At the Extraordinary meeting of the full MBC on 19/9/16 the “considerations of sites allocations” report was discussed
This proposed that Frisby “by % of population” be allocated 72 new homes, however after taking away the 3 new homes we have under construction /in the pipeline (approved) we should have been allocated a total of 69.
The burning issue is that some rural hubs cant find SHLAA sites and are therefore claiming that they cannot take their share, which in turn has been reallocated to the remaining rural development service centres and hubs. This has resulted in Frisby taking an extra 9 new homes that results in a total of 78.
Frisby has also been allocated a further 24 reserve sites that could be pushed our way in the event of other not being able to fulfil their allocation.
For the record the vote was in favour of the allocation, this was mainly due to the fear of missing the MLP delivery deadline, however two councillors voted against it, our councillor Edward Hutchinson was one of them

3. Neighbourhood Plan Legislation (test case Uppingham)
Can a neighbourhood plan allocate additional or alternative sites to those in a Local Plan?
A neighbourhood plan can allocate additional sites to those in a Local Plan where this is supported by evidence to demonstrate need above that identified in the Local Plan.
A neighbourhood plan can propose allocating alternative sites to those in a Local Plan, but a qualifying body (Parish Council) should discuss with the local planning authority why it considers the Local Plan allocations no longer appropriate.
The resulting draft neighbourhood plan must meet the basic conditions if it is to proceed. National planning policy states that it should support the strategic development needs set out in the Local Plan, plan positively to support local development and should not promote less development than set out in the Local Plan or undermine its strategic policies. Nor should it be used to constrain the delivery of a strategic site allocated for development in the Local Plan. Should there be a conflict between a policy in a neighbourhood plan and a policy
Source Practice Planning Guidance para 44 id41044

4. MBC SHLAA assessments for all land put forward
GREEN – proceed able
AMBER – proceed with caution
RED –DO NOT PROCEED

5. NP needs to allocate sites for 78 houses ONLY
THIS IS MBC Local Plan for Frisby
4x sites
Total houses 118
FOTW Allocation 78
NP needs to allocate sites for 78 houses ONLY

6. MBC assessment and Rankings of the Sites

8. Village Envelope 2005

9. Great Lane Summary MBC assessed at 40 houses
Planning application for houses
Proposed services for houses
Housing Number likely to be houses

10. Water Lane Summary MBC assessed at 14 houses
Application figure houses
Housing Number could be houses

11. Land to the South (HO) Summary
MBC assessed at houses
Consultation proposal houses
Application submitted to MBC 28/9/16 (48 houses)
Housing Number as advised by our consultants realistically could be anywhere between houses on the total land available. Mr Cook has never muted any figure above 48.

12. Rotherby Lane Summary MBC assessed at 24 houses
Restrictions to building due to grade 2 listed property, renovation would have to be part of the development. SITE differs as a brownfield site (i.e. buildings already on site).
HISTORICALLY BROWNFIELD SITES TEND TO BE PREFERENCE SITES FOR DEVELOPMENT BY COUNCILS
Housing Number likely to be houses

13. Limits to Development Options
Housing numbers utilised for Great Lane and Land to South (Hall Orchard) are from actual planning applications that have been submitted to Melton Borough Council by the developers.
Housing numbers utilised for Water Lane were supplied by Mrs Desmond Noble on 28/9/16 to Lisa Bailey and they are the numbers that will be utilised in the planning application that will be submitted shortly.
“Two options were proposed at the consultation but the 30 house scheme was deemed more suitable for the village in its current situation and the feedback from the forms at the consultation supported the 30 also” .
Housing numbers for Rotherby Lane are from the MBC SHLAA assessments and what they have submitted into the draft local plan

14. OPTION 1 TOTAL 102- 375 HOUSES Water Lane – 30 houses
Land to South (HO) – 48 houses
Rotherby Lane- 24 houses, restrictions of building apply so houses would have to be in keeping. Field behind not accepted as developable for years
TOTAL HOUSES
Field Not Included
Field Not Included

15. (+ Rotherby Lane 24 houses?)
OPTION 2
GT Lane – 48 houses
Land to South (HO) – 48 houses
TOTAL HOUSES
(+ Rotherby Lane 24 houses?)
Field Not Included

16. OPTION 3 TOTAL 102-115 HOUSES GT Lane – 48 houses
Water Lane – 30 houses
Rotherby Lane- 24 houses, restrictions of building apply so houses would have to be in keeping. Field behind not accepted as developable for years
TOTAL HOUSES

17. (+ Rotherby Lane 24 houses?)
OPTION 4
GT Lane – 48 houses
Water Lane – 30 houses
TOTAL HOUSES
(+ Rotherby Lane 24 houses?)

18. OPTION 5 TOTAL 72-85 HOUSES GT Lane – 48 houses
Rotherby Lane- 24 houses, restrictions of building apply so houses would have to be in keeping. Field behind not accepted as developable for years
TOTAL HOUSES

19. Questionnaire Delivery Volunteers from October 5th 2016
What we need to do:-
Deliver to your allocated households
Explain to those who are unaware of what the situation is and make sure they understand we want ONE OPTION ONLY
Give them time to complete the questionnaire
Collect the completed questionnaires and return to Lisa Bailey