DNP Working Group minutes 4th December 2019

4.30 pm Desford Library


In Attendance: Bernard Grimshaw, Colin Crane, David Crocker,Gary Kirk, Jim Houghton, Judy Sharpe, Martyn Randle (chair)¸ Scott Wakefield, Terry Robinson,


Apologies: Pat Crane


  1. Welcome: Martyn welcomed everyone to the meeting and asked for apologies to be listed.


  1. Minutes of last meeting / matters arising:

The minutes were approved as a true record and signed by Martyn.

Bernard commented that in the sensitive information section of the 21.11.19 the minutes stated that ‘submission of the DNP to HBBC had been delayed by the current state of purdah for HBBC’ and that this was not strictly true. It was agreed that this should be changed to ‘the progress of the DNP to HBBC had been delayed by the current state of purdah for HBBC’.


  1. Declaration of Interest:

Bernard declared an interest as his property is on the Local Heritage List.


  1. Chairman’s Report:

Martyn apologised for the lack of a Chairman’s Report at recent meetings. He reported that emails about climate change and biodiversity had been received and circulated and asked whether anything needed to be done about these.  Gary said that nothing needed to be done at present.  However they could be added to the DNP in the future.


  1. Treasurer’s Report:

Bernard stated that there was no change in the financial situation from his previous report.


  1. Communication Officer’s Report:

Bernard commented that he had received and distributed the emails referred to in the Chairman’s Report.

There had been a NP meeting at County Hall the previous week, but no one from the group had been able to attend.

He also said that Fran from HBBC had sent a checklist submission email which he had circulated.


  1. Update on consultation:
  2. Actions needed to finalise DNP:

It was agreed to discuss these two items together.

Bernard commented that during the recent appeal he had received a polite request from HBBC requesting that the wording describing the view descriptions in the DNP should be similar. Comments were also made that there were no dates attached to the photos. If this applies to the draft plan rather than the appendices it will need looking at in more detail.  Bernard stated that he had reiterated that the view section had had not been designed for the appeal. Action: Pat and Judy and Environment Group to look at these and amend as necessary.

Gary stated that he had tabulated the responses to the recent consultation and added his draft responses. The responses in black indicated no major change was needed, but those in red needed discussion. The red draft responses were discussed individually and the response agreed by the group. Gary noted these and agreed to amend as necessary. Action: Gary

A number of general points were raised by this discussion.

Gary stated that there had been a lot of criticism that the consultation had only been for 3 weeks.  He said that HBBC had previously stated in a letter that a focused SEA consultation could be 3-4 weeks.  Bernard pointed out that there had only been minor changes to the draft DNP.

Bernard said that at the appeal the housing figure of 163 had been questioned.  However this figure had come from HBBC as the borough share, not from the DNPWG.  Gary said that the DNPWG do not have to justify this figure.

Gary noted that there had been criticism that the preferred site had not been the highest scoring.  It was confirmed by the DNPWG that it was the highest scoring.  He mentioned that developers were scoring their own sites resulting in different outcomes; whereas, to be consistent, all sites have to be scored by the same people, using the same criteria, and that this had been done by the DNPWG.  Colin stated that he had to be comfortable with this consistency as chair of the Parish Council.

Gary clarified that the recent consultation had been done on both the SEA and draft DNP.  This was agreed.

Gary commented that LCC had mentioned biodiversity, but that this was a criticism of the SEA itself.  Bernard said that if the comments improve the draft plan they should be considered.  Gary asked if these should be sent to Ian McClusky.  David said that the SEA report had been done already and that it was unlikely that AECOM would want to change it.  Gary thought that it would be useful for AECOM to see these comments and added that if there are questions about AECOM these could go to Ian McClusky after the 8.1.2020.

Colin stated that he wanted the draft DNP to go to the DPC meeting on the 18.12.19 and if approved be submitted to HBBC on 8.1.2020.

David asked what happened to the responses.  Gary stated they are submitted to HBBC with the draft plan.  They have been collated and do not have to be sent individually.  They are then sent to the examiner.

In relation to the submission of the DNP Gary said that HBBC will do a validation check first to ensure that they have received all the documentation.  This may take 2 weeks or so and will happen before the consultation period can begin.

Gary asked if there were any other changes.  Bernard replied that there were only those that had been previously listed.

David asked whether it was possible to ask for specific types of housing.  Gary stated that this wasn’t possible, although the examiner may comment on this and it could be added into the plan later.

Martyn asked what actions were needed to complete the plan.

Gary replied that the text will need to be updated as previously discussed and the view descriptions need to be discussed by the environment group and any changes incorporated.  Gary said that he would be able to provide a template letter to go with the submitted documents.  In addition to the DNP other documents were required. These include a map of the area, consultation documents including dates of all DNPWG meetings, the basic condition statement, SEA report and the draft minutes of the DPC meeting where the DNP was approved.  Judy reminded the group that Fran had emailed a checklist for this which Bernard had circulated.  Gary said that he would email the updates and check the appendices and hoped to do this before Thursday 12th in order for the DPC to have time to be able to read the documents before their meeting on 18.12.19. Action: Gary

Bernard reminded the group that HBBC had requested the documents both as hard copy as well as an online version.

David asked whether there was a set time scale for this to take place at HBBC.  Gary replied that it generally took 2 weeks from submission to the start of the consultation process.  HBBC will need to advertise the consultation and distribute the DNP.  They will have to appoint an examiner, which the DPC will need to approve.  Gary commented that he can advise on this if desired.  The examiner may send out queries to the DNPWG via HBBC. These will only be for the purposes of fact checking.  Gary stated that the DNPWG will have to be aware that the examiner will make changes to the DNP.  He stated that it usually takes 6 months from submission to referendum.


  1. Update on CERDA planning refusal appeal

Bernard reported that he, Terry and Colin had attended the appeal.  He said that Terry had done a very good job on the traffic section.  However the fact that HBBC does not have a 5 year land supply was a major issue.  He also commented that the landscape man and the two barristers (representing HBBC and CERDA) were very competent.  Bernard said that he was cross examined about the DNP.  He stated that in his opinion the HBBC barrister gave a very good closing submission, however this was destroyed by the CERDA barrister saying that the site should go ahead to help with the HBBC 5 year land supply.

Jim said that he was willing to help in any way. He also offered a vote of thanks to those who had attended the appeal and for all their work previously. This was endorsed by Colin.

Bernard said that he would write an email to Fran about what is happening. Action: Bernard.He also asked whether the DNPWG needed to present the DNP to the DPC at the December meeting.  Colin said that unfortunately there would be a lot to discuss at that meeting, so there was limited time for this.


  1. Web page/ Twitter/ Spotted Desford:

Jim stated that all the minutes were on the website apart from the October and November meetings.  It was agreed that these could be done.


  1. AOB:

There were no AOB items.

  1. Date of next meeting:

The date of the next meeting is Tuesday 11th February at 4.30 pm in the Library .


Meeting closed 6.12pm.


I confirm this is a true record of the meeting:


Signed……………………………………………………………..   Name……………………………………………………………




Pin It on Pinterest

Share This