Appendix B Terms of Reference 1. The Steering Group chaired by the chairman of the GS parish council is answerable to the parish council. 2. The balance of ‘socially affordable’ and ‘open market’ housing will be aligned to local needs; similarly the balance between 1/2 bedroom homes, bungalows and flats. 3. It is essential that a comprehensive two way communication plan is in place to ensure that all parishioners, who are interested, have their say in the development of the NP. 4. Regular liaison with Wiltshire Council is required to ensure that the NP is prepared consistent with good practice and latest thinking. 5. The Steering Group will provide minutes of all meetings, whether formal or informal. 6. The NP will be prepared based entirely on the information provided by parishioners, as the Steering Group will remain neutral at all times. 7. The NP will be prepared, in line with feedback from the community with the objective of producing a plan that a majority (50.1% minimum) of Parishioners voting will support at a referendum administered by Wiltshire Council. 8. Consideration will be given to the need for the safety of children and elderly people so that any new development puts safety first. 9. Meet with landowners, who have proposed development land, to discuss the comments and issues raised by parishioners to see whether mitigation is possible. 10. Establish whether parts of some of the proposed Local Green Spaces are suitable for limited development as identified by some Parishioners. 11. Consult with the community on proposals by holding meetings and by written communications before and after development proposals. 12. Prepare a draft Neighbourhood Plan with appropriate maps, plans and data from surveys and public meetings, and submit to the Parish for consultation, then to Wiltshire Council for review, then to independent examination, then to referendum. 13. Copies of the proposed NP will be available to the community by a) the GS website, b) hard copies placed in the church the pub, village school and public meetings will be held to ensure maximum participation in the referendum. Appendix F 1 – Site selection methodology (This appendix should be read in conjunction with F2 and F3) 1. The initial driver for selection was given by the Wiltshire Core Strategy and the Wiltshire Council Rural Housing Needs Survey in early 2014. 2. In line with the Wiltshire Core Strategy, the requirement for new houses in the village of Great Somerford was then 33 with 12 of these being affordable homes. With the additional 7 affordable homes planned for the already approved Brook Farm development, this would bring the total of 19 new affordable homes in Great Somerford. 3. The Housing Needs Survey identified 25 affordable homes in the parish, all of which are in the village of Great Somerford. This represents 8.2% of the 304 total dwellings in the parish compared to 14.7% which is the average for Wiltshire (source: Wiltshire Housing Needs Survey). By introducing 33 new homes, of which 12 will be affordable, the percentage of affordable homes rises to 37 out of 337 homes, which is 11%. However, when the additional 7 affordable homes in the already agreed Brook Farm development are considered, the percentage of affordable homes becomes 44 out of a total of 367 homes, which is 12%. Considering the village of Great Somerford alone (i.e. excluding Startley) there would be 13.6% affordable homes which is much closer to the Wiltshire average especially when the rural nature of the Parish is considered. 4. In early April 2014 a one page questionnaire, prepared by the Steering Group, was mail dropped to all houses in the parish. 105 households responded and the key feedback was: • 95% wished to retain the existing local open green spaces within the village; seven open spaces (LGS 1-8) were identified including the children’s play area & the free gardens/allotments • 84% wanted small groups of houses within the limit of the village, 7% wanted a new estate. 3% wanted both, 3% wanted neither and the balance were left blank A copy of the questionnaire is reproduced at annex 1.1 and an analysis of the results is at annex 1.2. Assuming the local green spaces are retained (the Free Gardens site was later added to them), there were only a few other small sites within the village suitable for small developments and no landowners wished to develop the sites. 5. The first open meeting for parishioners was held on 22 April 2014, primarily to discuss the potential need for a NP in the parish of Great Somerford; 37 parishioners attended and provided feedback to the SG. At this stage no potential sites had been identified. Subsequently there were meetings at every stage of the plan’s progress - as potential developments became available and/or the number of proposed dwellings changed. The evolution of the plan’s site selection is shown in the table at the end of this appendix. 6. In the next few weeks following the meeting several landowners proposed land for development. Only two of the SHLAA holders expressed an interest. A total of eight sites were initially suggested by landowners but one landowner subsequently withdrew three sites before any details regarding house numbers were discussed. This left five potential development areas. These sites are designated NP1, NP2, NP3, NP4, and NP5. The total number of houses proposed at this stage was seventy seven. 7. A mail drop in early July invited parishioners to a second open meeting on 17 July 2014 to see a presentation on the possible sites for development and the proposed open spaces; 68 parishioners attended. Identified demand for new houses in the parish in the period to 2026 was 33 including 12 affordable as detailed in section 7.1 above, whereas proposed houses on the five NPs totalled 77. 8. The Steering Group reviewed the feedback from parishioners and had meetings with the landowners to discuss the feedback and to agree revised plans. These discussions resulted in the house numbers being reduced on sites NP1, NP2, and NP5. At this time another landowner proposed development of two houses on his land, NP6. The six proposed developments (NP1 to NP6, inclusive) now resulted in a total of thirty four houses. (September column, in the table at the end of this appendix). 9. Two further open public meetings were held on 21 and 23 September 2014 to present the latest proposals. For these meetings the Steering Group had produced a site scoring sheet for the proposed development sites (reproduced at annex 3.1). At the meetings parishioners were also able to view a fact sheet together with a site plan for each development site and each open space. Parishioners were asked to rank each site on a scale of 1 to 10. For development sites (NPs), 10 means highly recommended for development, whilst 10 for local green spaces (LGS) means they should not be developed. 162 parishioners took part, mostly from Great Somerford, which was 48% of households in Great Somerford participating. Parishioners were asked to comment on each site and this feedback is shown as annex 4 and the site ranking is shown as annex 5. 10. From the many comments made, the SG noted that a significant number of parishioners recommended some limited development on two of the local green spaces (LGS 2 & 4). The two landowners were subsequently asked if they wished to submit proposals. Both landowners did so; site LGS 4 proposed 10 houses, but the landowner withdrew the site, as it transpired that there is a restrictive covenant on the land preventing development. The SG then used the ranking from the September meetings, together with the many comments from parishioners, to re-examine the proposals which resulted in a new total of 45 houses, including the 10 new houses proposed for LGS2 which then became NP7. At the same time, mitigation statements were obtained from the landowners (to address issues of concern expressed primarily by parishioners) and the site scoring sheet was revised (annex 5). 11. At a meeting on 12 November 2014, Wiltshire Council advised the SG that they should use all the information they had gathered to recommend to the parishioners the sites for development. In doing so, the number of sites and houses proposed was six and 34 respectively, with twelve of the latter being affordable homes. 12. In January 2015 a voting form detailing these recommended developments (annex 6) was mail dropped to all houses in the parish inviting all members, who were on the electoral register to vote on the question “Do you agree or disagree with the recommended development?” The total number of votes cast was 278. Of these, 64.3% agreed with the recommendation, 12.3% disagreed with the whole proposal and 21.2% disagreed with one or more of the developments; there were 6 spoilt forms. These results were recorded and delivered by letter drop to all houses in the parish. The letter drop also included the SG’s attempt to answer a number of commonly asked questions/comments raised both on the return forms and in previous consultations/correspondence. In addition, an invitation was given to two further consultation sessions. 13. These sessions were held on 8 March and 12 March 2015, respectively. The purpose of these sessions was to address any outstanding questions or clarifications. The SG reviewed the feedback from parishioners and had meetings with the landowners to discuss the feedback and agree revised plans. During this process a landowner proposed an additional site in Hollow Street. 14.