This is to let you know that, despite the fact that over 240 residents voted for the Neighbourhood Plan at the referendum, we were unsuccessful. The NO group received over 100 more votes. This is only the third time in the history of neighbourhood plans that a plan has been rejected.
On behalf of the Forum I would like to thank all of you who voted for the Plan.
With very best wishes
On page 14 of Fareham Today – Local Plan Update June 2019 the residents are asked “Should the Council continue to protect this area from development?”
If you support this please to reply to Fareham Borough Council by 26 July 2019. The more support the better and it could result in the Meon Valley being designated as a highly valued landscape and a greenbelt area.
Details on how to reply are set out on pages 18 and 19 of this version of Fareham Today.
* a web page with a link to a comment form which can be accessed via www.fareham.gov.uk/localplanconsultation
* an email to email@example.com
* by writing to the Consultation Team at the Civic Offices
* by phoning the Consultation Team on 01329 824409.
Here is a copy of letter that Ross Underwood sent to Nick Girdler of TVT, with regard to its “Vote No” flyer (reproduced here with Ross’s persmission):
Your main point of dissension about the Neighbourhood Plan is about the building of houses in the village. I will leave aside the national crisis and any local need for housing and consider the TVT position. You have attempted to frighten people into rejection of the Plan on the basis of housing development, but what alternative is there? Without the Plan the village will have no say when faced with developers seeking to build on whatever site, however unsuitable (ref. the Posbrook Lane). However with a legally constituted Neighbourhood Plan, part of the official Fareham Plan, the village must be consulted on any development.
I find the position of TVT, regarding the referendum, disingenuous. It appears that the organisation has sat on its hands during the period of its preparation, ignoring the work, the research, and the public consultations. When the Plan is published you have mounted a campaign to stop it yet I have not seen you seeking local people’s views other than those of your own close circle.
It appears that TVT is more concerned about its own position because the organisation will have even less relevance if the referendum votes yes.
However, on another matter I welcome the plans and involvement of TVT with the Parish Rooms as this is something useful in the village. Perhaps at this late hour you could save the £13,000 you propose to spend on ‘village gates’ and put it to better use.
Have you not heard that people are suffering from ten years of austerity and reduction of public services? It is an insult to ordinary people to spend money needlessly sanitising the village.
|FBC Press Release states:
‘Residents will be asked to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the question: ‘Do you want Fareham Borough Council to use the Neighbourhood Plan for Titchfield to help it decide planning applications in the neighbourhood area?’
If more than 50 per cent vote ‘yes’, then Fareham Borough Council will ‘make’ the Titchfield Neighbourhood Plan. This means the plan will help determine planning applications in the Titchfield Neighbourhood Area and it will also form part of the statutory development plan for Fareham.’
|Independent External Examination:
The examiner, Mr Timothy Jones, Barrister FCIArb, a member of the Planning Bar, considered all the documentation submitted and also visited the area twice to gain a full impression of Titchfield. He examined the Consultation Statement to the written Plan to ensure that all the Basic Conditions were met. He writes in his summary “I commend the Draft TNP for being in an easy -to- read style”. He was satisfied with the Consultation Statement and says “I am impressed by the Consultation Statement, which shows more extensive consultation than is often the case.”
In housing matters, Barrister Jones states that the report on housing numbers has been produced by reputable consultants and is specific to Titchfield. He sees the need for affordable housing but does not think this will be met totally by windfall sites. He agrees with the Plan that no development should take place on greenfield sites and concludes “that housing provision should be determined by national and district policy”
Timothy Jones also says: “I recommend that the modified NDP proceed to a referendum, the referendum area being the area of the Draft TNP.”
|The Posbrook Lane Appeal:
As the Neighbourhood Plan had been submitted to FBC at the time of the Appeal, then 80% of the Plan influenced the process. That is why David Phelan, our Forum representative, played such an integral and important part in the Appeal process and successful outcome. If it had been approved then 100% of the plan would have influenced the process.
The Neighbourhood Plan, in addition to legally binding policies, contains Community Aspirations. These are suggestions within the Plan area that residents have identified for change. Providing the Plan is approved, a group within each area will work hard to ensure these aspirations are achieved. The groups are housing/planning, traffic/parking, historic Titchfield, the building and natural environment, the economy and business.
“Without the safety net, that an endorsed Neighbourhood Plan offers, being in place, future changes that FBC might need to visit upon us will be very much harder to rebut.
I absolutely recognise that housing is one of the issues closest to our hearts, but the NP addresses a host of other initiatives. If unsighted on the Plan, I would encourage a quick read to get a feel for the span of policies that set criteria that the Council would be obliged to recognise should the Plan be endorsed.
That a massive amount of hard work has been put into development of the NP is no argument to vote for its endorsement at the referendum. But it is worth noting that to vote against it would deprive us all of a degree of legislative protection against future Council initiatives, some of which could be extremely unpalatable, unwelcome and ultimately impossible to adjust regardless of the degree of lobbying on our part.”
|It gives the community a real say in its future|
|It is an official legal document that sits alongside the Council's Local Plan|
|It sets future housing policy for the neighbourhood over the next 20 years. After assessing all sites in the area the Plan does not identify any sites suitable for large scale housing development|
|It preserves village life and amenities|
|It ensures Titchfield remains a vibrant and sustainable community|
|It respects the history and heritage of the area|
|It helps address traffic and parking issues|
|It ensures the Landscape of Distinction (previously known as Strategic Gap) is maintained|
|It ensures the environment and habitat of the area are protected|
|Without a Neighbourhood Plan, planners or developers could run ‘rough-shod’ over Titchfield|
|Why you should vote ‘YES’||What happens if you vote ‘NO’|
|In the last 25 years over 170 new properties have been built. These have enhanced the village. The Neighbourhood Plan is stating that in the next 20 years Titchfield may need an additional 153 houses though FBC believes that most of the housing need for the area will be met by what is known locally as the Hambrook site soon to be built. However, with a Neighbourhood Plan the location, style and type of house within Titchfield Boundary Plan area will all be protected.||Without a Neighbourhood Plan any developer may apply to develop land in Titchfield and there will be very few safeguards.|
|The Neighbourhood Plan, if approved at the referendum, will be a legally binding document that sits alongside the Fareham plan. The Council must take 100% of the Plan into consideration regarding any planning decisions for the village||FBC will be free to agree to any development they wish for the village|
|Apart from housing, the Plan is concerned with traffic policies, designed to reduce the impact of traffic so that safety and environmental needs of residents are given priority.|
The Plan is concerned with maintaining this thriving economic community so that we can continue to enjoy the services on offer and at the same time give employment opportunities.
The Plan is concerned to ensure that Titchfield remains a village with an enhanced environment and valued open spaces.
The Plan wants to respect and preserve the history of the area for future generations whilst allowing it to develop gracefully.
|The policies shown in the Plan will have no legal status|
|Policies in all the above are a legal part of the Neighbourhood Plan|
18th July is the date for the referendum. We hope you will vote YES
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about the Neighbourhood Plan so here on the website we are trying to put things right.
We have posted:
The Referendum Version of the Neighbourhood Plan, also available to read at Daisey B’s and the Queen’s Head
Summary of the External Examiner’s Report
A map showing the Boundary Plan of the NP area
Some thoughts from others about the Plan
A message from John Hiett, also included in the flyer shortly being sent to you
Plus The FBC timetable for the Referendum