Appendix A: Schedule of comments on the Draft Kislingbury Neighbourhood Plan (November ...modgov.southnorthants.gov.uk/documents/s14367/KNP Policy... · 2016-01-20 · Appendix A:

Appendix A: Schedule of comments on the Draft Kislingbury Neighbourhood Plan (November 2015)

Reference Plan Text Comment

General (Formatting) Paragraph numbering would assist navigation of the Plan

General (Maps and Plans) Some of the Plans could be clearer. Plans could be prepared by SNC for KPC if requested.

General (Omissions) The Council notes that the Plan does not propose any of the following that could be included in a Development Plan.

Alterations to the village confines

Local Green Spaces

Green Wedges

Provision for Starter Homes

Provision for Self-build plots

Local employment opportunities

Gypsy and Traveller site allocations

These will be considered in the Councils Part 2A Local Plan and where appropriate policies included for Kislingbury Parish.

Page 16 Heritage There are 33 listed buildings within the Parish, of which one is St Lukes Church, which is a Grade 1 Listed building dating from the 14th Century still in use.

Reference should be made to the recently revised and adopted Kislingbury conservation area and Management Plan

Policy C1 (Page 18)

Green space and Landscaping

When appropriate, a landscape strategy shall be submitted with all new development proposals which will incorporate the following details: (i) existing and proposed hard and soft landscaping; (ii) a condition survey of all existing trees and hedgerows; (iii) an outline of the measures to be taken to protect existing trees and hedgerows during construction; (iv) consideration of both near and distant views of the development from the Conservation Area vantage points (see Map Appendix

Clarification should be given as to when it will be ‘appropriate’ to submit a landscape strategy. It is unlikely that such a strategy will be required with ‘all development proposals’.



J) showing existing landscaping and how it will appear after 10 years; and (v) details, where appropriate, of how those areas to be retained for open space, as well as any retained trees and hedgerows, will be managed in the future.

Policy C2 (Page 18)

Assets of Community Value

Proposals that will result in either the loss of an Asset of Community Value or in significant harm to the community value of an asset will be strongly resisted.

It is unclear as to what the Plan considers to be ‘Assets of Community Value’ that the policy is seeking to protect. These should be clearly stated in the Policy. The loss of an asset would be considered as ‘significant harm’. Therefore the inclusion of ‘loss’ is considered to be unnecessary. The Policy should also be considered in the context of the NPPF and the Impact Assessment to the Framework. Paragraph 70 of the NPPF relates only to development proposals directly affecting (i.e. through redevelopment or change of use) the essential facilities and services involved. Paragraph 70’s second bullet point specifically relates to “guarding against” the unnecessary loss of facilities and services, particularly where this would reduce the community’s ability to meet its day-to-day needs. Government’s Impact Assessment of the Framework which at the second paragraph on page 59 explains: “This policy will help communities prevent the loss existing buildings and developments, which are locally important, valued and viable community facilities and services, to alternative higher value developments such as private housing and business. Planning policies may identify specific buildings or developments and / or set out criteria for assessing planning applications. Criteria may require applicants demonstrating the current building or



development is no longer required or viable for use by a community facility of service. The redevelopment and reuse of buildings and developments which are no longer viable, for community uses, will also be supported by the proposed policy”. Suggested re-wording: The redevelopment or change of use of the following essential facilities and services that meet community needs and support well-being will only be permitted where it can be clearly demonstrated that: a) The service or facility is no longer needed; or b) It is demonstrated that it is no longer viable to retain them; or c) The proposals will provide sufficient community benefit to outweigh the loss of the existing facility or service, meeting evidence of a local need. Insert list of identified essential services and facilities

Kislingbury Village Hall Kislingbury Playing Field

and equipped play area Sports Grounds for Bowls,

Cricket and Football Allotment gardens Shops Public Houses Post Office

The Parish Council will work positively with local communities and support proposals to retain, improve or re-use essential facilities and services. The Parish Council will be aware of the measure to give local communities greater control over the protection of valued local facilities under the Localism Act 2011. This provides community groups with the opportunity to nominate a local asset (such as a



local pub) for listing as an Asset of Community Value (ACV). The local planning authority must list any nominated building or other land as an ACV if it considers that (i) its current or recent use furthers the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community and (ii), it is realistic to think that its future use will do the same (whether or not in the same way). The listing of an asset as an ACV provides the community with an opportunity to safeguard its future. First, an asset’s status as an ACV should be treated as a material consideration in the determination of any planning application for development that would involve its loss. Second, if the owner of an ACV puts it up for sale, the community group can request a six-month moratorium on the sale and thereby gain time to raise funds and negotiate buying the asset. At present there are no designated community assets on the Register in Kislingbury Parish. The Parish Council is recommended to consider which of the identified facilities it considers should be included on the Register as this will provide for some additional protection over and above the development plan policy.

Policy C3 (Page 19)

Broadband – fibre to the premises

Proposals which seek the expansion of electronic communication networks and high speed broadband along with improvements to connectivity will be supported, so long as it is consistent with an efficient operational network without harming the character or appearance of the Village. Applications for Housing development must contain a ‘Connectivity Statement’ and will provide for appropriate facilities to

This is covered by Policy C1 of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy. The Policy is therefore not necessary. If retained the Policy will need to set out which types of ‘development’ require a connectivity statement – For example is it just for housing or would any commercial, industrial or community facility type development be included?



enable more than one service provider to provide a fibre connection to individual properties from connection chambers located on the public highway, or some alternative connection point available to different service providers.

Policy C4 (page 19)

Community Facilities and Services

Proposals for additional services and facilities within the village Confines will be supported subject to the following criteria being met: (i) the individual proposal will not generate unacceptable noise, fumes, smell or other disturbance to neighbouring residential properties; (ii) the particular proposal will not lead to traffic congestion or adversely affect the free-flow of traffic on the adjoining highway; and (iii) access arrangements and off- street parking can be satisfactorily provided without impinging on adjoining residential and non-residential uses.

Each aspect of this policy is already covered by existing policies of the WNJCS – namely a combination of Policies S10, C5, RC2, BN9, and Policy G3 of the Saved Policies of the 1997 Local Plan as well as Paragraph 28 of the NPPF. The Policy is considered to be too restrictive. There are examples where community services are appropriate on sites outside but adjoining the village confines, For example if a proposal for a community facility was made on a suitable site outside but adjoining the confines it would be contrary to this Policy. As worded it is highly unlikely that sites will be made available within confines where land values will be significantly higher for other uses including housing.

Policy T1 (Page 21)

Traffic Congestion

Proposals that accord with the policies in the NDP and do not exacerbate Traffic Congestion will be supported. Proposals requiring planning permission and which seek to increase the number of access points or which would involve an increase in traffic generation will need to demonstrate that they do not exacerbate traffic congestion in the following areas: (i) Bugbrooke Road; (ii) The Green; (iii) The High Street; (iv) Beech Lane; (v) Church Lane

This Policy is not supported as it is considered overly restrictive and contrary to the NPPF. There will inevitably be increased traffic movements from new development. Effectively this Policy places a blanket ban on any development proposals that generates one or more car movements in those areas identified in the Policy. To justify this Policy evidence will be required that demonstrates that traffic congestion in these areas is already a



problem and that critically that the problem is such so as to justify no further increase in movements. It is also likely that some form of transport statement will be required as a result of this policy for developments that generate one or more trips per day – this may be disproportionate to the development proposed. Policy C2 of the WNJCS and G3(f) of the saved Policies of the Local Plan considers the highway implications of proposed developments. In addition the policy could be considered to be more restrictive than para 32 of the framework that states that Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.

Policy T2 (Page 21)

Pedestrian Footways

All new housing developments must when appropriate and practical provide safe pedestrian access to link up with existing or proposed footpaths, ensuring that residents can walk safely to bus stops, schools and other village facilities.

This policy is unnecessary as it is covered by Policies C2 and R3 of the WNJCS.

4.3.7 (Page 21) (final sentence)

Inadequate provision for cars has led to high levels of on-street parking on narrow village streets. Future development in Kislingbury must provide for adequate off-street parking for residents

The NDP could include a policy that proposes maximum parking standards for new housing development. For example this could be: 5 bed plus: 3 spaces per dwelling 3 & 4 bed: 2 spaces per dwelling 1 & 2 bed: 1 space per dwelling

Policy EM1 (Page 22)

Heavy Goods Traffic

Any proposal requiring planning permission to change the use of land in the Parish to General Industrial Use, or other uses, which would generate heavy

The site allocated at J16 of the M1 in the WNJCS will need to demonstrate that it does not result in severe negative traffic impacts in accordance with the NPPF. This Policy is therefore consistent with this approach.



goods traffic, must demonstrate with the assistance of a Transport Statement that the proposal will not have a severe traffic impact within the Parish.

The Policy is a broad replication of the guidance contained in Policy C2 of the WNJCS.

Para 4.3.10

There are no local level designations but Kislingbury residents place a high value on the environment of the Nene River Valley and on the continued protection of the Gap that separates the Village from Northampton.

This ‘Gap’ Is also referred to in para 4.3.2 of the NDP. There is no policy on the Gap. If there should be one it would need careful consideration and justification.

Policy HE1 (Page 22)

Historic Environment

Any designated historic heritage assets in the Parish and their settings, both above and below ground and including listed buildings, and any monuments that have or may be scheduled, or conservation areas that have been or may be created, will be conserved and enhanced for their historic significance and their importance to local distinctiveness, character and sense of place.

It is not considered appropriate or reasonable to seek to conserve or enhance areas that ‘may be created’ at some point in the future. An area is either an Historic Asset or

not. The general thrust of the policy is in line with sustainable development principles although it is significantly covered by Section 12 of the NPPF and Policies S10 and BN5 of the JCS. The Policy is considered unnecessary but if retained then suggest the following: Any designated and non designated heritage assets and their settings, in the Parish will be conserved and enhanced for their significance and their importance to local distinctiveness, character and sense of place.

Para 5.2 (extracts)

The Number of New Homes The West Northants JCS Plan allocates 2360 homes to be shared between the Primary and Secondary Service villages in the district. These villages have been identified as the most sustainable settlements in the Rural area of the District and the SNC Part 2

The Local Plan Part 2A is yet to determine how the housing allocations across the villages in the District. Allocations may extend beyond primary and secondary service villages. These villages are yet to be identified.



Plan will seek to increase housing in these villages to provide a network of sustainable villages providing services to the district. SNC’s current view is that: i. the general starting point for

the Site Allocations in distributing housing allocations among the Primary and Secondary service villages will be in propotion to their existing number of dwellings,

ii. this will be modified by consideration of factors such as the individual vision for each village, the existence of designations such as Green Belt, the individual sustainability credentials of villages in relation to local facilities and transport links, and the existence of particular local needs and opportunities.

In discussions with SNC Planning it has been made clear to us that Kislingbury will be asked to contribute approximately 50 new dwellings, 40 by way of an Allocated site, and 10 from windfall housing that comes from infill development in the Village. (See Appendix D for Housing Needs Assessment and more detailed information)

The Kislingbury NDP identifies and allocates a site for approximately 40 new homes to be built in the village by 2029. The additional 10 houses to be developed on infill sites will be proposed by site owners during the Plan period. This will make the total of approximately 50 houses. (See Appendix F – Attachment B Sustainability Assessment for details on Site Selection). Planning permission will be granted for approximately 40 new homes to be built in Kislingbury in

The Council has yet to decide the scale of housing growth that each Parish will be expected to deliver. The reference to the proportion of existing dwellings is one option that the Council will be considering. There are no ‘Green Belt’ designations in South Northamptonshire. This will not be a determining factor in determining the scale or location of future growth. The Council has considered the methodology that concludes that here is a local need for 50 dwellings in Kislingbury and supports this conclusion. The proposed figure is considered to be consistent with the general provisions of the WNJCS. The Council also supports the proposed delivery of the housing on a single allocation and smaller windfall developments on unidentified sites. It is noted that the KNP does not propose to amend the existing village


Reference Plan Text Comment the period 2014 to 2029 on the site specifically allocated in the Kislingbury Neighbourhood Development Plan (Policy HS4) in order to meet the targets set in the West Northants JCS Plan. Planning permission will be granted for at least 10 Houses on Infill sites that meet the planning requirements (Policy HS2)

confines and so it is uncertain that there are sufficient suitable, available and deliverable sites within the existing confines to deliver these 10 dwellings.

Policy H1 (Page 25)

Tenancy and Ownership Mix

Proposals for development will need to consider local housing need and should normally provide a tenure mix of a maximum 50% of Affordable Houses, unless viability or other local factors show a robust justification for a different mix, as well as a mix of low cost market housing.

This is entirely covered by Policies H1 and H2 of the JCS. The Policy is a duplication of existing Policy does not add local value and is therefore unnecessary

Policy H2 (Page 25)

Homes for Sale to Local Residents

Proposals for housing on the allocated site which aim to give Local Residents preferential access to Waiting Lists, or released phases for Sale, of the development will be supported.

I am not aware of any legal mechanism to tie market housing to local ownership. The Plan should state how this policy will be enforced. As the Plan states I am not sure that this could be included as a planning condition or in a S106 agreement (if it could be then evidence would be helpful). Evidence of any discussions with the landowner / developer of the allocated site on this requirement would also be useful as any such requirement is more likely appropriate as a separate agreement between the developer and KPC outside the planning system. If retained perhaps the requirement should be time limited to 3 months

Policy H3 (Page 25)

Affordable Housing

Proposals for developments for five or more dwellings will be expected to provide a maximum of 50% of Affordable Housing on the site

This appears to duplicate Policy H1 of the KNP and is also covered by Policy H2 of the WNJCS. The Policy is a duplication of existing Policy does not add local value and is



which will be fully integrated into the development unless a Financial Viability Assessment or other material consideration demonstrates a robust justification for a different percentage.

therefore unnecessary

Policy H4 (Page 26)

Allocation of Affordable Housing

All new Affordable Housing in Kislingbury developed after the Policies of the NDP are adopted will initially be subject to a local connection. This means that people with a strong local connection to the Parish, and whose needs are not met by the open market, will be the first to be nominated (by the Council) accommodation for either rent or shared ownership. In this context a strong local connection means an applicant(s): (i) who has lived in the Parish for 5 of

the last 8 years and is currently resident there, or

(ii) who has immediate family members who have lived in the village continuously for at least 5 years prior to the date of application

All new affordable housing is already subject to a nominations process including those with a local connection. The initial test that the Local Authority would do for determining local connection for access to the housing register, would not conflict with the connection set out in this policy as the as this connection is much more restrictive. However it should be made clear that on the organisation that would be nominating to any new build affordable homes that come forward within the Parish. It is South Northants Council’s responsibility to hold a housing register and allocate via its Allocation policy to affordable homes across the District. The policy has provisions to engage with local lettings plans to allocate social housing to reflect local circumstances. Any local connection criteria attached to a development should be drafted into a legal agreement for example a S106 or nominations agreement. The Council’s current Allocations Policies local connection is as follows: “In order to be considered to have a local connection to the Council’s district the applicant will need to meet at least one of the following criteria: i)The applicant has lived in the Council’s district for a period of at least 6 out of the last 12 months continuously prior to acceptance onto the Housing



Register; ii)The applicant has previously lived in the Council’s district for 3 continuous years out of the past 5 years; iii) the applicant has permanent employment within the Council’s district; iv) the applicant has immediate family members who have lived in the Council’s district continuously for at least 5 years immediately prior to the date of application; or v) the applicant has special reason for needing to live in the Council’s district” I suggest that the Policy is amended to reflect the Council’s policy. The inclusion of an employment criteria would also be consistent with the objective (POE C2) is to provide low cost housing market to local employees. As drafted the Policy does not correspond with this and only relates to people currently living in the parish?

Policy H5 (Page 26)

Size of Homes

This policy directs that new development on the Allocated Site should favour smaller dwellings with a mix of 3 bedrooms and 2 bedroom dwellings, as well as some 1 bedroom dwellings.

The mix of house type and sizes could change over time and would best be informed by the latest available evidence at the time of application. This is covered by policy H1 of the WNJCS The Policy is a duplication of existing Policy does not add local value and is therefore unnecessary

Para 5.4 (Page 26)

Overall, the NDP delivers the requirement for Affordable housing while maintaining the flexibility needed to meet the specific requirements of the Parish within the housing developments.

This should also refer to the need for a development to be viable under the provisions of the NPPF.

Policy H6 Lifetime home standards Policy H4 of the WNJCS states that



(Page 27) All development proposals for New Houses should meet current Lifetime Home standards, unless viability or other local factors show a robust justification for a different design.

residential developments must be designed to provide accommodation that meets the requirements of the Lifetime Homes Standard subject to viability on a site by site basis.

The Policy is a duplication of existing Policy does not add local value and is therefore unnecessary

In future, planning authorities will be able to specify only housing standards provided in the ‘New National Technical Standards’ which provide specifications for accessible homes in three categories, ranging from a base line largely aligned with the existing Part M of the Building Regulations to a category designed to meet the needs of wheelchair users as occupants. Should the KNP seek to set different standards, other than the base line standard, and if so what evidence is available to demonstrate that the standards are required to “address a clearly evidenced need, and where their impact on viability has been considered, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Guidance’.

Policy HS1 (Page 27)

Scale of New Development

Planning permission will be granted for approximately 40 new homes on the site identified in this Plan.

This Policy is unnecessary. It can be merged with other policies in the Plan. If retained the Policy should refer to a Plan that shows the location and boundaries of the allocated site.

Para 5,7 (Page 27)

Kislingbury is designated a Secondary Service Village in the hierarchy of Rural Villages in South Northants.

The Settlement Hierarchy, including the position of Kislingbury, has yet to be agreed in the Part 2A Local Plan. This statement should therefore be removed from the Plan


Infill Housing

Applications for small residential developments on infill and

This Policy is supported. Suggest amending ‘meeting all relevant requirements set out in other policies in



redevelopment sites within Kislingbury will be supported subject to proposals being well designed and meeting all relevant requirements set out in other policies in this plan and the JCS Plan, and where such development:

a. fills a small, restricted gap in the continuity of existing frontage buildings or on other sites within the built-up area of the village where the site is closely surrounded by buildings.

b. will not involve the outward extension of the built-up area of the village;

c. is not considered to be intrusive development that requires unsuitable access, reduces the privacy of adjoining properties or is inconsistent with the character of the locality

this plan and the JCS Plan’ to ‘meeting all relevant requirements set out in other policies in this plan and other Development Plan documents covering the Parish’ There is a need to clarify ‘within Kislingbury’. If this means within the village confines for Kislingbury then this should be clarified.

Policy D1 (Page 28)

Good Design

Proposals for all forms of new development must plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design, at the same time demonstrating they have sought to conserve local distinctiveness and the aesthetic qualities of traditional rural settlements and buildings found in South Northants. Applications proposing unsympathetic designs which fail to respect the connections between people and places, or are inappropriate to its location, or pay inadequate regard to issues of renewable energy technologies, landscape and biodiversity considerations will be refused.

This is a general policy on design that could be equally applied to any area of the District. Much of its content is covered by policies in the WNJCS and Saved Policies of the Local Plan. Suggest the policy is revised to include local distinctiveness by drawing on aspects from the Conservation Area Management Plan, Landscape and Character Assessment and existing village design statement. The bullet points on pages 28/29 could be incorporated into a revised policy on Design together with references to local characteristics. If KPC wish to retain a more generic policy then the following wording is suggested: Proposals for all forms of new



development must plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design, at the same time demonstrating they have sought to conserve and reinforce local distinctiveness and the aesthetic qualities of traditional patterns of development, buildings (proportions, architectural detailing and materials) and setting (including man-made and natural features, important views and heritage) . Proposals for unsympathetic designs which fail to respect the connections between people and places, are inappropriate in location, or pay inadequate regard to issues of parking and access, minimising or reducing the risk of crime, renewable energy technologies, landscape and biodiversity considerations will be refused.

Policy HS3 (page 29)

Developer Contribution

New development must provide appropriate new facilities onsite and contribute to offsite facilities as required by the West Northants JCS Plan, the NDP, and South Northants District policy.

This is covered in far greater detail by INF1 and INF2 of the JCS. Aspects are also covered by RC2 of the JCS.

The Policy is a duplication of existing Policy does not add local value and is therefore unnecessary

Para 5.9 (Page 29)

Communities with a NDP will receive 25% of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This is a new charge that Local Authorities can levy on new developments in their area. The charges are set by the local council and are based upon the size and type of development.

This will only be applicable if the application for the allocated site is approved on or after April 1st 2016 and if the NP is adopted before the application is approved. The charges that would be applicable have now been agreed by the District Council. For this development the charges would be: £100 per square metre (gross internal area)

Para 5.10 (Page 29)

The Allocation of the Site indentified in this Policy for the development of approximately 40

It is noted that the Plan does not propose any changes to the village confines but effectively leaves that work



Houses will require that the Village Confines be redefined as that site lies outside the existing Confines, though it is Contiguous with them. Following the completion of the Development on the Allocated Site the Parish Council will apply to SNC for the Confines to be redefined to incorporate the new Development, as well as the existing Watts Close development, into the Village Confines.

to this Council through the Part 2A Local Plan. The Council will therefore reserve the right to amend the confines as it considers appropriate over and above including the 2 identified sites at Watts Close and the allocated site in the KNP.


Site allocation

Residential development will be permitted on the allocated site identified in Table 6.i. Sites proposed by the Owners/Developers for Infill Development are covered by Policy HS2. In the future it is possible that an Exception Site may be designated in order to meet a need for Affordable Housing in the Parish.

This Policy is covered by policies HS2, HS5. Exception site development is covered by H3 of the WNJCS. The Policy is a duplication of existing Policy does not add local value and is therefore unnecessary


SHLAA SNC397 Rothersthorpe Road, behind Watts Close Site Reference: KNP01 Area to be developed: 4.28ha Approx Number of homes:40 Approx number of Affordable Homes: 20

This Policy could be included in a new Policy that brings together all the polices concerned with the allocated site for housing. As stated it is not a Policy.

Para 5.11 (Page 31)

Site KNP01 is allocated for approximately 40 dwellings, subject to: (i) the proposed development

conforming to the policies contained in the Kislingbury NDP and the West Northants Joint Core Strategy; and

(ii) the following site specific requirements: a. The development will

occupy the area shaded Green (SHLAA reference SNC397) shown on Map 6.i

The Plan should clarify the preferred access point for the proposed allocated development. The text refers to access from Rothersthorpe Road but then states that the existing hedge along the full length of the site adjacent to Rothersthorpe Road will be retained with no additional vehicle access provided from Rothersthorpe Road; Suggest that policies HS1, HS3, HS5 and supporting text be merged into a new single policy as follows: The boundary of the 4.28ha, Kislingbury



above and shown in more detail on the Map 6.i.1 below. (Note: Watts Close development, which was made on part of this site, is not shown on the SHLAA Map);

b. The development will be sited away from the rear of the Watts Close site so as not to crowd in on Watts Close.

c. No vehicular access for the development to be taken through Millers Close, except for Emergency Vehicles;

d. Access to the site will be taken from Rothersthorpe Road;

e. Hedges and trees to the East should be planted to provide some screening from adjacent fields and Pineham Warehouse extension;

f. The existing hedge along the full length of the site adjacent to Rothersthorpe Road will be retained with no additional vehicle access provided from Rothersthorpe Road;

g. A pedestrian footpath to be provided through the site to link with the pedestrian ways in the rest of the Village;

h. The results of a tree and ecological survey will be provided and all significant trees and habitats will be retained or replanted or compensated.

Village housing allocation (Ref KNP01) on land at Rothersthorpe Road is shown on Figure X. The development will make provision for:

40 dwellings including 20 Affordable homes

All built development on the site will be sited at least x m away from the rear of the properties in the Watts Close site so as not to crowd in on Watts Close

No vehicular access for the development to be taken through Millers Close, except for Emergency Vehicles;

Access to the site will be taken from Rothersthorpe Road;

A landscaping scheme to be submitted including appropriate planting to the East to provide some screening from adjacent fields and Pineham Warehouse extension;

The existing hedge along the full length of the site adjacent to Rothersthorpe Road will be retained with no additional vehicle access provided from Rothersthorpe Road;

A pedestrian footpath to be provided through the site to link with the pedestrian ways in the rest of the Village;

An Archaeological and Ecological assessment of the site and required mitigation

A mix of house types and sizes to include 2 and 3 bed houses to meet local needs

Necessary Infrastructure will be required to be phased alongside the delivery of the development Any applications for this development will be considered against this Policy and other relevant development plan documents

Documents

Appendix A: Schedule of comments on the Draft Kislingbury Neighbourhood Plan (November ...modgov.southnorthants.gov.uk/documents/s14367/KNP Policy... · 2016-01-20 · Appendix A: