Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan 2018-2033 Consultation Statement

Old Windsor Parish Council

June 2018

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 2

2 SUMMARY OF ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ...... 3

3 KEY MESSAGES FROM THE CONSULTATION...... 7

4 REGULATION 14 CONSULTATION ...... 10

Appendix A Summary of Comments and Responses to Pre-Submission Consultation

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1. The policies contained in the Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan (OWNP) have been developed as a result of extensive interaction and consultation with residents, businesses, and others, which has taken place over more than 2 years and has included surveys, public exhibitions and face-to-face activity.

1.2. This Consultation Statement has been prepared to fulfil the legal obligations of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012 in respect of the OWNP.

1.3. The legal basis of this Consultation Statement is provided by Section 15(2) of Part 5 of the 2012 Neighbourhood Planning Regulations (as amended), which requires that a Consultation Statement should:

 contain details of the persons and bodies who were consulted about the proposed neighbourhood development plan;

 explain how they were consulted;

 summarise the main issues and concerns raised by the persons consulted; and

 describe how those issues and concerns have been considered and, where relevant, addressed in the proposed neighbourhood development plan.

Establishing the Neighbourhood Area and Steering Group

1.4. In October 2012, Old Windsor Parish Council applied to the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead for the area covered by the parish to become a Neighbourhood Area. This application was accepted and the Old Windsor Neighbourhood Area was formally designated on 28th January 2013. The area is shown in Figure 1.1.

1.5. A steering group, was established to lead the development of the Plan. This is referred to as the OWNP group. Figure 1.1: Old Windsor Neighbourhood Area

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

2 SUMMARY OF ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

2.1. From the beginning, the OWNP group felt it essential to gain input from the community. A structured yet varied approach was taken to engage with as wide a range of people as possible, the output from which was collated and analysed so that it could form the basis of the vision, objective and emerging policies.

2.2. The following summary provides a timeline of the main engagement activities undertaken throughout the planning process following the establishment of the neighbourhood area: Gathering initial information and publicising the Plan

2.3. Parish website – a set of pages were set up on the existing parish website to provide information about the emerging Plan.

2.4. Facebook – the group pushed messages out about the Plan using the ‘we LOVE Old Windsor’ Facebook group, which has over 4,200 members.

2.5. Focus groups - an initial series of focus groups were put together comprising members from a range of village organisations including the school PTA, the football club and the guides. These aimed to seek views on the future of the parish including what was important to local people and what could be improved.

2.6. Community group feedback - in parallel to this activity, representatives of the many community groups and other local facilities were approached directly for their views and also to encourage their involvement in the emerging Plan. 51 people were approached at this stage and all proactively engaged. This included groups such as the Allotment and Horticultural Association and also King’s Court First School PTA, the latter being a helpful way of garnering the views of younger residents.

2.7. Estate agents - the two local estate agents were contacted with a view to obtaining their opinion on the housing needs of both existing residents and those looking to move to the village. In particular they shared information about the kind of housing – type, price, location and tenure – that was being sought in the area. Seeking views from the community on a series of topics

2.8. Parish survey - using the information gleaned so far, a parish-wide questionnaire was constructed around a set of local topics and delivered to all 2,000 households, including those in the more remote areas of the parish. This sought information on community priorities, needs and wants and 95 were completed for analysis. The survey was also available to complete online.

2.9. Drop in day exhibitions - a series of public engagement events was carried out with displays about the area, key information and statistics and opportunities for people to input their views into specific topics, for instance history and heritage, housing and economy. These were advertised locally via the local newspaper, village noticeboards, the newsletter, via local businesses and the parish website. Over 150 people attended a two day exhibition at the day centre and a further 90 attended an interactive exhibition on the ‘History of Windsor and its future’ held in the Youth Club.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

2.10. Wishing wall – the drop in events invited local people to submit their thoughts using post-it notes. This had the added benefit of sharing ideas among the community as people could read what others had written.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

2.11. Hard to reach audiences – one of the challenges that the group faced was how to encourage the ‘harder to reach groups’ to get involved. In particular, young people and families as well as those working outside the parish, were not necessarily compelled to visit drop in days and were felt less likely to complete surveys and questionnaires. The OWNP group decided to take a stall at the annual Carnival, a popular local event which attracts approximately 300 residents from a cross section of the community. This proved successful at raising awareness of the Plan and ensuring that as many people as possible knew how to input into the work. Establishing a draft vision, objectives and policies

2.12. The wealth of information gained through the activities described above enabled the OWNP group set out a draft Vision for Old Windsor and set of Objectives that the Plan would seek to deliver. During this time, the group also consolidated the hard evidence and data it had collected in order to begin to set out potential policies to address the objectives.

2.13. Local events - a further stall at the 2015 Carnival was undertaken to inform local people on progress to date and gain feedback on the emerging vision and objectives. Over 250 people attended.

2.14. Regular updates – throughout this time, the group utilised the village newsletter to issue regular updates about the Plan and seek feedback. In addition, leaflets about the Plan were available in local shops and eateries, and updates were regularly posted on the village notice boards. The Facebook page and local press also provided a space to advertise local events and exhibitions. Focussed engagement on specific issues

2.15. Ham Island consultation – a micro-consultation was carried out with stakeholders on Ham Island. This was felt necessary because of the special nature of the island and the complex set of issues – including the sewage works, local heritage and flooding - that needed to be understood in readiness for the Plan. 2.16. Archaeology report – the group also commissioned two specialist studies, one on archaeology from Oxford Archaeology, and another on the environment from Acorn Consultants. This was felt to be appropriate given the unique nature of the village; being historically rich, sited within the greenbelt and also within a flood zone.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

3 KEY MESSAGES FROM THE CONSULTATION

3.1. The following main points were raised during the local engagement: Housing  A need to provide smaller more affordable homes.

 Provide housing that allows existing and future generations to remain in the village.

 To have sustainable high quality design.

 Discourage high density development.

 Development must be appropriate and sympathetic to the village character.

 Neighbourhood amenity must be protected

Flooding and Drainage

 Grave concerns were recorded regarding fluvial, surface and groundwater. In addition capacity at the Ham Island sewerage works operated by Thames water would be unable to cope with any significant increase in development in the area including Windsor as it is within the catchment area therefore the OWNP group instructed a survey into capacity issues by the Stilwell partnership.

 Developments would in the future need to demonstrate how they would reduce flood risk overall.

 Provision must be made using sustainable urban drainage systems.

 Conditions should be in place within development to mitigate drainage and other flooding problems.

 Building in a high risk flood zone should be discouraged and relevant national and local policies adhered to.

 Extensions which add extra bathrooms or bedrooms should be subject to the same conditions.

 Developments should not exacerbate known existing problems.

 Development should only be permitted if the sewer network can accommodate the additional demands and Thames water should be consulted.

 People and property should not be put at additional risk.

Character, design and heritage

 Development should reflect the character of the surrounding area

 Neighbouring amenity should be protected

 Development should provide a positive contribution to the village

 Historic, listed and architecturally interesting buildings should be protected

 Old Windsor history and heritage should be promoted and maintained

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

Environment

 Wildlife habitat must be looked after and it is vital they are protected.

 Development that harms wildlife should not be permitted.

 Development should not only maintain but enhance wildlife corridors.

 Trees and hedgerows should be protected and green spaces kept.

 Maintaining the greenbelt was overwhelmingly supported and it was felt essential that development should not chip away at it.

Parking and transport

 Utilising the results from both the consultations and the census parking and transport results demonstrated that there was a huge problem in the village.

 Insufficient parking resulting in high levels of dangerous on street parking.

 Dangerous and overly congested roads and junctions.

 Historically developments had not provided adequate parking facilities.

 It was felt essential that when future development was considered adequate parking and visitor parking needed to be included.

 Roads were highly congested especially in key junctions in the village leading to over-capacity and pollution problems.

 Straight Road traffic volumes had increased by 50% in only 5 years.

 Old Windsor has the highest level of car ownership in the Royal Borough but current development parking strategy does not reflect this and this issue needs to be addressed.

 Development should not be detrimental to roads and junctions.

 Walking and cycling should be encouraged.

Community facilities

 More could be done to engage the youth of the village.

 Existing community facilities needed to be improved.

 Public spaces and walking routes/paths should be promoted and protected.

 Great concern was shown about the overstretched medical facilities in Old Windsor.

 Residents admitted that the inability to provide doctors’ appointments was worrying.

 The medical centre would be unable to support another care home in the village.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

3.2. These points led to the creation of the vision for Old Windsor:

Vision

‘In 2033, Old Windsor continues to be a large rural village, a thriving community where a mix of generations live, work and enjoy access to the unique natural environment of the area. New development has addressed the need to provide housing for the older generations to downsize and young families to stay in the community. This has been achieved by utilising brownfield sites within the village. Facilities at the Recreation Ground have been enhanced. In particular the new Community Centre, which provides activity space with catering facilities, has helped to enhance community activities and bring the community together. The historic environment of Old Windsor, including both designated (listed buildings, scheduled monuments, the conservation area and registered parks and gardens) and non- designated heritage assets has been conserved and enhanced. Development has been sympathetic to the existing heritage of Old Windsor, particularly within the Conservation Area and around the numerous important ancient monument sites and their settings. The biodiversity, wildlife and its habitat, trees and hedgerows of the area have continued to thrive. The sewerage and drainage infrastructure issues affecting Old Windsor have been resolved by the sewerage provider. The strict enforcement of policies for flood risk relating to new development has served to not only prevent a worsening of flood risk in Old Windsor but has improved the situation.’

Objectives

3.3. Nine objectives were derived, beneath which the 17 policies are couched: 1. To maintain the character and the vitality of Old Windsor village.

2. To provide future and existing generations with the opportunity to remain in the community. 3. To maintain, protect and enhance the areas of biodiversity within Old Windsor. 4. To encourage development that is sustainable and of a high quality design which respects amenity and is sympathetic to the local townscape, particularly in terms of density.

5. To protect, conserve and enhance the historic environment of Old Windsor, including both designated (listed buildings, scheduled monuments, the conservation area and registered historic parks and gardens) and non- designated heritage assets.

6. To ensure that new development is supported by adequate infrastructure. 7. To ensure that development comes with suitable off-street parking. 8. To reduce harm to the community by seeking to minimise pollution.

9. To enhance the facilities available to the community.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

4 REGULATION 14 CONSULTATION

4.1. The OWNP group finalised the draft Plan in May 2016. The Regulation 14 Pre-Submission Consultation ran initially for six weeks but was extended until 23 September 2016 to give more people an opportunity to input. A coordinated campaign to publicise the draft Plan was undertaken comprising:

 Paper copies of the document available on request and via the parish council website.  Regular updates on the website.  An exhibition at the 2016 Carnival with over 270 people attending.  An online survey to collate comments.  Regular editorial within the village newsletter.  Articles in the local press.  Regular updates on the ‘we LOVE Old Windsor’ Facebook page.

Distribution to Statutory and Non-Statutory Consultees

4.2. In accordance with requirements of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations, relevant statutory consultees were notified. In addition, a range of parties that the OWNP Group considered were likely to have a particular interest in the plan were also written to.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement

4.3. In addition to local residents, consultees that were written to included:

The Crown Estate Environment Agency Berks, Bucks and Oxon Wildlife Trust Buckinghamshire County Council Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service Historic England Highways England Natural England The National Grid Thames Valley Police Thames Water Datchet Parish Council Sunningdale Parish Council Wraysbury Parish Council Runnymede Borough Council Berkshire Archaeology Society Windsor Ascot and Maidenhead Clinical Commissioning Group

4.4. A summary of the responses received and how the OWNP group has responded to these can be found in Appendix A. Using this information, the Plan was appropriately amended in order to create the Submission version.

SEA and HRA Screening

4.5. At the Pre-Submission (Regulation 14) stage (June 2016), RBWM requested an initial screening opinion on the Reg 14 Plan to ascertain the need for a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the draft Plan. Statutory consultees provided their formal responses in July and August 2016.

4.6. As a result of comments from Historic England and Natural England, the Plan was updated to reflect their views. The Environment Agency made no specific comments.

4.7. Following on from this, in May 2017, a further SEA screening and Habitats Regulation Assessment was undertaken on the updated Plan, along with an assessment of Policies OW9 (Windsor Sewage Treatment Works) and OW13 (Archaeological Assets) – these being the two specific policy areas where issues had been raised by Historic England in its response to the initial SEA screening request in 2016. This assessment reviewed the amendments to these policies in light of the comments from Historic England in order to determine whether they would have a significant environmental impact and therefore trigger the need for an SEA. The assessment considered that the amendments would not have a significant environmental impact and therefore an SEA was not required. In the Submission Version (Regulation 16) of the Plan, the amendments to Policy OW9 were included as a final paragraph of Policy OW7 (Sewerage Disposal and Windsor Sewage Treatment Works) and the amendments to Policy OW13 were included as a renumbered Policy OW10 (Archaeological Assets). The relevant documents have been included as part of the evidence base informing the Plan.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement APPENDIX A SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION

Respondent Summary of comment Response from OWNP group

Organisations Highways England No comment No amendments required. Historic England Para 2.1: welcome description and clarify that Noted. the ‘Copper Horse’ statue is Grade I listed.

Para 2.4: clarification sought on whether the Noted and reflected in the document. floodplain is wholly outside the Green Belt. Note too that large proportion of the parish is Grade I Registered Historic Park and Garden and Garden of Windsor Great Park.

Challenges: Welcome challenges cited related Noted. to heritage.

Vision: welcome references to existing heritage Text amended to reflect suggested text change. etc. but note that development is not the only threat to the significance of heritage assets. Text change offered to reflect this.

Objectives: welcome 1, 4 and 5 and note that Reflected in the objectives. ‘historic environment’ in objective 5 will include historic parks; additional objective offered to focus specifically on the historic environment of Old Windsor.

Policy OW4: offered an additional criterion; Additional criterion added.

Para 6.20: suggest that the wording ‘clear and Text added to reflect this. convincing justification’ is added to qualify ‘less than substantial harm’; suggest that consideration should be given to development outside the scheduled monument area (for example the case on Ham Island). 12

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement Respondent Summary of comment Response from OWNP group

Policy OW9: object to this proposal as it allows The policy has been amended following comments for the possibility of harm (albeit less than received including via the SEA screening. substantial) to the scheduled monument and there is no evidence to suggest that such harm is justified. Rewording of the policy is suggested; note that any strengthening/refurbishing of Ham Island Bridge/roadway would need to be assessed for its likely impact on the Monument, as would any proposals for instance for landscaping, tree planting etc.

Section 7: welcome this section and the Noted. reference to the Townscape Assessment.

Policy OW11: welcome this policy and its Noted. references to Para 58 of the NPPF.

Policy OW12: welcome the heritage Second bullet amended. assessment; minor change offered to the second bullet. See comment below on Proposals Map, which if amended as per comment, would mean that this policy covers the Conservation Areas.

Policy OW14: welcome this policy. Noted.

Para 7.11: call for additional detail about the Noted and reflected in the Plan. Conservation Area and either a Conservation Area policy, or reference to the CA in Policy OW11.

Provision of detail on entries included in the Noted. National Heritage List for England.

Welcome identification of locally important

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement Respondent Summary of comment Response from OWNP group

buildings, which is in accordance with NPPF. Noted.

Para 7.17: welcome reference to the HER. Noted. Condition of heritage assets: has this been taken into account? Information about the assets is contained in Appendix C of the Plan. Proposals Map: suggest that ‘designated areas’ also includes the Conservation Areas. Noted. Natural England Para 3.1: recommend additional wording in Text changed to reflect this. penultimate bullet to include ‘maintain’.

Challenges: there is no reference to the high This is cited in the challenges. quality biodiversity resources within the parish.

Para 3.3: as per 3.1, include the word Text changed to reflect this. ‘maintain’.

Para 9.4: Correction to the name of the SSSI to Text amended to reflect this. ‘Langham Pond SSSI’.

Policy OW19: should make reference to the Noted. hierarchy of sites, and reinforce that development will not be accepted anywhere in the Parish which is likely to threaten and designated site or protected species (not just those covered in NERC Act). Royal Borough of Windsor and Para 1.8: saved policies are not considered to Noted. Maidenhead be out of date; major parts of Plan are being updated.

The Village Today: no mention of young These issues were not raised by the community and people, play areas, employment, jobs or the so they are not dealt with in the plan policies. No workforce; retail uses only briefly mentioned. change.

Local infrastructure: query about how

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement Respondent Summary of comment Response from OWNP group

satisfied residents are with current provision and These issues were not raised by the community and whether other concerns or improvements were so they are not dealt with in the plan policies. No raised. change.

Para 2.15: the OWNP only has to be in general Noted. conformity with the strategic policies of the Local Plan.

Challenges: Are these based on survey or public consultation These were based on engagement with the results? community.

Could the second bullet be clarified – does it It is a major issue along the entire length of the affect all areas or just parts of the parish? River Thames in the parish. No change.

OW1: repeats either the NPPF or the Local Plan The settlement boundary is a key issue and, given – the settlement boundary should be the same the dated nature of the Local Plan, it is felt necessary as the Local Plan - might lead to confusion. to review the settlement boundary. This review has not recommended any changes but it is still considered important to show the settlement boundary in policy. No change. It is not clear how the policy does not relate to the NPPF and we note that this wording is in line with other NPs with a settlement boundary policy. No change.

OW2: concern that this is creating 2 tiers of Agreed, however it is considered that the map in Green Belt policy – perhaps you should establish Figure 4.1 adequately defines the gap. what the gap is and define it.

Para 5.1: could the para be clearer? Minor changes made.

OW3: without a size threshold this may be The approach to applying this policy would require a difficult to implement. degree of logic and pragmatism, We agree regarding the size threshold. Policy amended to clarify

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement Respondent Summary of comment Response from OWNP group

approach on small sites.

OW4: Concerns about how policy might be Agreed. Amendments made. implemented in its current state. Suggestions provided on how to improve the wording.

OW5: The policy appears to confuse the 4 types The point regarding the different types of flooding is of flooding and repeats the NPPF. noted and additional text has been included in the policy justification to clarify this. Text from SFRA brought into justification.

OW6: additional wording suggested to first Noted and text amended. sentence.

Should this apply to all developments or should This should apply to all development, which is why there be a threshold? no threshold is stated.

Is there additional supporting evidence? Yes – see supporting evidence base.

OW8: not considered implementable. The policy reflects Thames Water’s policy position Suggestion to discuss with Thames Water. and has been amended following further comments by Thames Water at the Regulation 14 stage. Amendments made to Policy OW8.

OW9: current policy does not comply with The policy has been amended following consultation NPPF. Advised to speak to Historic England and with Historic England. reconsider policy.

Para 6.26: the wording for a condition is not This relates to a non-policy action rather than a considered to meet the test of reasonableness. policy. However, it follows an approach taken forward by Hart District Council to address the same issue through Grampian conditions. No change.

OW10: much of the policy is outside the control Improvements to Ham Island bridge have now been of the planning system. Is this better as a completed so Policy OW10 has been deleted. Delete

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement Respondent Summary of comment Response from OWNP group

project as opposed to a policy? What evidence is policy OW10. there?

OW11: unclear if this complied with NPPF. It is not clear how this does not meet the NPPF requirements. No change.

Heritage assets: you might wish to consider This was not an issue raised by the community. Two protecting pubs and other community assets. pub buildings were identified as buildings of character, but this is distinct from their use. No change.

OW12: repeats NPPF. The policy mainly relates to local buildings or structures, so is locally specific.

OW13: delete bullet point; much of the policy is Noted. The policy has been changed to ‘encourage’ either covered in the development management rather than ‘require’ advice to be sought. process or NPPF, and consultations may be Amendments made to OW13 (now OW12). required before an application is submitted.

Important views: show these on a map. Noted. Figure 7.1 – add cones to help interpretation – see the advice from the Landscape Institute.

OW14: check the Landscape Character This policy has been deleted. Policy OW14 deleted. Assessment and remove the last line.

OW15: more evidence is required and the It is considered that the evidence, both technical and policy requires more clarity. from the community, demonstrates the need for a more robust local policy. It is noted that the policy needs to be more clearly worded. Amendments made to OW15 (now OW13).

Para 8.4: Green Travel Plans should be ‘Travel Noted. Changes made. Plans’.

OW16: text changes recommended. Noted. Changes made.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement Respondent Summary of comment Response from OWNP group

OW17: may have to be dealt with by CIL – Disagree. The policy signposts where a TA has to should they be projects rather than policies? focus its work. Minor amendments made to OW17 (now OW15) to clarify requirements for TAs and TSs.

OW18: Cycle paths may be better as ‘projects’ Disagree – to identify key routes may imply that and key routes should be identified on a map. others have less value.

OW19: first part repeats NPPF; are there any OW19 (now OW17) has been amended following wildlife corridors to identify on a map? comments from Natural England.

OW20: concern over clarity of text. The supporting text is considered to be clear. No change.

OW22: suggestion to show on a map. Noted. Private amenity spaces have been added, including a map. Thames Water Section 6.13-6.32 and Policies OW8-10: Various amendments noted and made to policies support this, however OW8 and supporting text have some inaccuracies and should be amended.

OW8: text changes set out in their submission.

OW9: support for this policy.

OW10: details provided on the timetable for strengthening the bridge. Residents 19 written responses were received, the majority of which reinforced existing community No changes required. evidence about the need to address traffic problems, create more greenery, encourage maintenance of public and private spaces, ensure adequate drainage, safeguard the Green Belt and the need to control pollution.

Old Windsor Neighbourhood Plan Consultation Statement