Daws Hill Neighbourhood Forum decision 'called in'

8:59am Thursday 6th September 2012 in News By Simon Farr

The entrance to RAF Daws Hill The entrance to RAF Daws Hill

COUNCIL chiefs have been asked to re-consider their decision to omit two key sites from the proposed Daws Hill Neighbourhood Forum area.

RAF Daws Hill and the Wycombe Sports Centre sites were taken off the original area the Neighbourhood Forum would serve by Wycombe District Council’s Cabinet last month after WDC sought legal advice.

The decision sparked outrage from the Daws Hill Residents Association, which has threatened legal action, because a major reason for it making the forum application was to influence the proposals for a new Wycombe Sports Centre and major housing development on the RAF base.

Wycombe District Council’s Improvement and Review Commission elected to go ahead with the call-in led by Cllr Alan Hill on Tuesday night.

Cllr Hill questioned the reasons for removing the two battlegrounds and said: “Cabinet has ignored the spirit of the Localism Act whereby the local community should be engaged in decisions that affect their community.”

Cllr Hugh McCarthy, Cabinet member for planning, told the meeting that the original decision had not been taken lightly and was based on legal advice.

He added the council was “in-between a rock and a hard place” as the issue was a matter of “timeliness”, with live planning applications in motion or in the pipeline for both sites which would have to be considered before the Neighbourhood Forum was ratified and active.

Cllr David Shakespeare, Cabinet member for the Big Society, added the new development on the RAF base would be a “brand new community” and, therefore, not part of the existing neighbourhood.

But, after a lively debate, I&R members decided the proposed development projects would heavily impact upon the Daws Hill community and the Neighbourhood Form should be able help shape the projects.

Cabinet will now be asked to consider an amended application with the sold off RAF camp and sport centre sites back on the forum map.

The I&R commission’s ruling was met with approval by Ken Tyson from the Daws Hill Residents Association – which he said has been busy lobbying Cabinet members ahead of Monday night’s crunch meeting.

Neighbourhood Forums were born out of the Localism Act, which introduced new planning tools for community groups.

The idea is to give residents – through parish councils or Neighbourhood Forums – the opportunity to shape their communities, including giving them a voice to say where shops and houses should be built.

Comments (12)

9:09am Thu 6 Sep 12

Darren Hayday says...

Of course housing has been pre-planned to be on this site - also the Abbey Barn Lane fields.

Only a strong and organised campaign will stop it - otherwise WDC will get their own way (as they mostly always do!) - it’s all about the money (even though they have about £10 mill kicking around in their banks)
Of course housing has been pre-planned to be on this site - also the Abbey Barn Lane fields. Only a strong and organised campaign will stop it - otherwise WDC will get their own way (as they mostly always do!) - it’s all about the money (even though they have about £10 mill kicking around in their banks) Darren Hayday

9:17am Thu 6 Sep 12

Kania 2000 says...

What no running track!
What no running track! Kania 2000

9:30am Thu 6 Sep 12

gpn01 says...

"Neighbourhood Forums were born out of the Localism Act, which introduced new planning tools for community groups.

The idea is to give residents – through parish councils or Neighbourhood Forums – the opportunity to shape their communities, including giving them a voice to say where shops and houses should or should not be built"

Really? The Localism Act (along with BPPF seems to be about cgiving the community a voice about where things SHOULD be built. In fact much of it is designed to make a YES decision faster. There's not much in the legislation to PREVENT things from being built.
"Neighbourhood Forums were born out of the Localism Act, which introduced new planning tools for community groups. The idea is to give residents – through parish councils or Neighbourhood Forums – the opportunity to shape their communities, including giving them a voice to say where shops and houses should or should not be built" Really? The Localism Act (along with BPPF seems to be about cgiving the community a voice about where things SHOULD be built. In fact much of it is designed to make a YES decision faster. There's not much in the legislation to PREVENT things from being built. gpn01

10:08am Thu 6 Sep 12

townraider says...

The real key to protecting all of High Wycombe is for the residents to have their own Town Council.
A town council would represent the issues of local people -- something WDC and the Rural led Tory cabinet doesn't do!!
The real key to protecting all of High Wycombe is for the residents to have their own Town Council. A town council would represent the issues of local people -- something WDC and the Rural led Tory cabinet doesn't do!! townraider

10:44am Thu 6 Sep 12

Darren Hayday says...

townraider wrote:
The real key to protecting all of High Wycombe is for the residents to have their own Town Council.
A town council would represent the issues of local people -- something WDC and the Rural led Tory cabinet doesn't do!!
here here!
[quote][p][bold]townraider[/bold] wrote: The real key to protecting all of High Wycombe is for the residents to have their own Town Council. A town council would represent the issues of local people -- something WDC and the Rural led Tory cabinet doesn't do!![/p][/quote]here here! Darren Hayday

11:15am Thu 6 Sep 12

BOOKERite says...

I would expect it to be called in because it is in Lesley Clarke's manor. But it will not make an ounce of difference in the end because this council is determined to build as many houses as they possibly can regardless of the infrastructure and local resident's objections.
.
At least Daws Hill is not green belt!
I would expect it to be called in because it is in Lesley Clarke's manor. But it will not make an ounce of difference in the end because this council is determined to build as many houses as they possibly can regardless of the infrastructure and local resident's objections. . At least Daws Hill is not green belt! BOOKERite

1:30pm Thu 6 Sep 12

miccles says...

Since when has any council, not just WDC, listened to the general public, never, from what i can remember.
Since when has any council, not just WDC, listened to the general public, never, from what i can remember. miccles

8:47pm Thu 6 Sep 12

yog says...

We need housing and this is an ideal site for it.
We need housing and this is an ideal site for it. yog

9:13pm Thu 6 Sep 12

washondo says...

yog wrote:
We need housing and this is an ideal site for it.
Why is everyone out of step but yog?
[quote][p][bold]yog[/bold] wrote: We need housing and this is an ideal site for it.[/p][/quote]Why is everyone out of step but yog? washondo

11:12pm Thu 6 Sep 12

gpn01 says...

townraider wrote:
The real key to protecting all of High Wycombe is for the residents to have their own Town Council.
A town council would represent the issues of local people -- something WDC and the Rural led Tory cabinet doesn't do!!
Wouldn't a Town Council be run by....errr.....Counc
illors? Who is it who is elected by local ratepayers to represent their interests at WDC...errr...Council
lors.

The structure, composition, aims and agendas of those who sit on a Council, whether it be Town, District or County means that they're not the same as a Neighbourhood Forum - which is made up of people who want to be involved in decisions that affect the area that they live in.
[quote][p][bold]townraider[/bold] wrote: The real key to protecting all of High Wycombe is for the residents to have their own Town Council. A town council would represent the issues of local people -- something WDC and the Rural led Tory cabinet doesn't do!![/p][/quote]Wouldn't a Town Council be run by....errr.....Counc illors? Who is it who is elected by local ratepayers to represent their interests at WDC...errr...Council lors. The structure, composition, aims and agendas of those who sit on a Council, whether it be Town, District or County means that they're not the same as a Neighbourhood Forum - which is made up of people who want to be involved in decisions that affect the area that they live in. gpn01

12:00am Sat 8 Sep 12

gpn01 says...

Interesting observation made in the options analysis being presented to WDC Cabinet on Monday 10th September:

"An alternative would be to not adopt a Development Brief and instead rely on potential guidance for the site through a Neighbourhood Plan, as promoted by the Daws Hill Residents Association. The advantage of the brief is that guidance and clarity on issues is required now if that guidance is to inform and influence the submission of a planning application and its determination. Whilst the timing of submission is in the hands of the developer/ site owner (Taylor Wimpey) they have indicated it is programmed for this November, with the Council having a 13 week determination period. In contrast any Neighbourhood Plan would have to go through its statutory stages before an Independent Examination and then (if found sound) a vote in a Referendum. Only after that would an approved Plan be in place (or not). This lengthy process could not be completed in time to inform the expected application and it is not therefore seen as a suitable alternative option to approving a Development Brief now, which itself has gone through a consultation and engagement process."

I read this as "we can't use the neighbourhood plan because it would take too long".
Interesting observation made in the options analysis being presented to WDC Cabinet on Monday 10th September: "An alternative would be to not adopt a Development Brief and instead rely on potential guidance for the site through a Neighbourhood Plan, as promoted by the Daws Hill Residents Association. The advantage of the brief is that guidance and clarity on issues is required now if that guidance is to inform and influence the submission of a planning application and its determination. Whilst the timing of submission is in the hands of the developer/ site owner (Taylor Wimpey) they have indicated it is programmed for this November, with the Council having a 13 week determination period. In contrast any Neighbourhood Plan would have to go through its statutory stages before an Independent Examination and then (if found sound) a vote in a Referendum. Only after that would an approved Plan be in place (or not). This lengthy process could not be completed in time to inform the expected application and it is not therefore seen as a suitable alternative option to approving a Development Brief now, which itself has gone through a consultation and engagement process." I read this as "we can't use the neighbourhood plan because it would take too long". gpn01

4:04pm Sun 9 Sep 12

Mike Galloway says...

Best wishes to those involved in this. Some similarities to what we are working on in Wolverton.

If there is a Parish (Town) Council in place for even part of the NP area then they "are in charge" and a Neighbourhood Forum is not relevant. Of course where one has a good, representative, forward thinking, active, parish council this should not be a problem. However not all parish councils are the same and I looking forward I can forsee problems of conflict between inactive parish councils and local communities. I don't belive the government have fully considered all of this.

There are now powers to create Parish (Town, Neighbourhood, Village, Community etc) Councils. With
keen and willing people involved this can be very positive. If you don't already have details about this feel free to contact me for more details.
The ability for decisions to be called in is something that is not used as often as it might be. In my area (Milton Keynes) the right to call-in is very wide, including by a parish council or by 20 residents (ie no need for a councillor to be involved). Of course this this does not guarantee a decision will be changed, but robust challenge can bring positive change.

From what I know it does sound like a Neighbourhood Plan would be unlikely to be able to alter what is already approved. However even then it would - I believe - be very reasonable to include the area in a plan - but with the realisation the NP could not "stop" what is already planned.

There is a lot of good advice around from a number of bodies who may be able to provide help to communities - again contact me for more details if you don't have them.

Mike Galloway
Twitter: @MikeGalloway
Best wishes to those involved in this. Some similarities to what we are working on in Wolverton. If there is a Parish (Town) Council in place for even part of the NP area then they "are in charge" and a Neighbourhood Forum is not relevant. Of course where one has a good, representative, forward thinking, active, parish council this should not be a problem. However not all parish councils are the same and I looking forward I can forsee problems of conflict between inactive parish councils and local communities. I don't belive the government have fully considered all of this. There are now powers to create Parish (Town, Neighbourhood, Village, Community etc) Councils. With keen and willing people involved this can be very positive. If you don't already have details about this feel free to contact me for more details. The ability for decisions to be called in is something that is not used as often as it might be. In my area (Milton Keynes) the right to call-in is very wide, including by a parish council or by 20 residents (ie no need for a councillor to be involved). Of course this this does not guarantee a decision will be changed, but robust challenge can bring positive change. From what I know it does sound like a Neighbourhood Plan would be unlikely to be able to alter what is already approved. However even then it would - I believe - be very reasonable to include the area in a plan - but with the realisation the NP could not "stop" what is already planned. There is a lot of good advice around from a number of bodies who may be able to provide help to communities - again contact me for more details if you don't have them. Mike Galloway Twitter: @MikeGalloway Mike Galloway

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree