BURSLEDON, HAMBLE-LE-RICE & HOUND Thursday 16 March 2017 Case Officer Andy Grandfield SITE: Berry Farm, Hamble Lane, Bursledon, Southampton, SO31 8GQ Ref. F/17/79863 Received: 23/01/2017 (24/04/2017) APPLICANT: Barratt David Wilson PROPOSAL: Construction of 166 dwellings with associated access off Cunningham Gardens, parking, landscaping and open space following demolition of existing dwellings and former agricultural buildings/workshop (amendment to planning application F/15/76582-deletion of vehicular access onto Hamble Lane only) AMENDMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: Subject to receipt and consideration of the outstanding consultees and the completion of a s106 agreement securing affordable housing, contributions to the infrastructure, public open site, off-site highway improvements, air quality monitoring and BREEAM post occupancy evaluation. PERMIT CONDITIONS AND REASONS: (1) The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans numbered: 22264-301 Rev C, 22264-302 Rev C, 22264-303 Rev C, 22264-305 Rev C, 18- 1822-106 Rev E, 18-1822-400 Rev B, 18-1822-400 Rev B, 18-
Transcript
BURSLEDON, HAMBLE-LE-RICE & HOUND Thursday 16 March 2017 Case Officer Andy Grandfield
PROPOSAL: Construction of 166 dwellings with associated access off Cunningham Gardens, parking, landscaping and open space following demolition of existing dwellings and former agricultural buildings/workshop (amendment to planning application F/15/76582-deletion of vehicular access onto Hamble Lane only)
AMENDMENTS:RECOMMENDATION:
Subject to receipt and consideration of the outstanding consultees and the completion of a s106 agreement securing affordable housing, contributions to the infrastructure, public open site, off-site highway improvements, air quality monitoring and BREEAM post occupancy evaluation.
PERMIT
CONDITIONS AND REASONS:
(1) The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans numbered: 22264-301 Rev C, 22264-302 Rev C, 22264-303 Rev C, 22264-305 Rev C, 18-1822-106 Rev E, 18-1822-400 Rev B, 18-1822-400 Rev B, 18-1822-401, 18-1822-402, 18-1822-403, 18-1822-404, 18-1822-405, 18-1822-406, 18-1822-409, 18-1822-412, 18-1822-415, 18-1822-BU-401, 18-1822-BU-402, 18-1822-GRE-ASH-401, 18-1822-GRE-ASH-402, 18-1822-GRE-ASH-403, 18-1822-GRE-ASH-404, 18-1822-GRE-ASH-405, 18-1822-GRE-CHE401, 18-1822-GRE-CHE402, 18-1822-GRE-CHE403, 18-1822-GRE-CHE404, 18-1822-GRE-CHE405, 18-1822-GRE-GAR-401, 18-1822-GRE-GAR-402, 18-1822-GRE-GAR-403, 18-1822-GRE-GAR-404, 18-1822-GRE-GAR-405, 18-1822-HAM-GAR-401, 18-1822-HAM-GAR-402, 18-1822-LIN-GAR-401, 18-1822-LIN-GAR-402, 18-1822-LIN-GAR-403, 18-1822-NBH-GAR-301, 18-1822-NBH-GAR-402, 18-1822-NBH-GAR-403, 18-1822-NBH-GAR-404, 18-1822-
(2) The development hereby permitted shall start no later than three years from the
date of this decision. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
(3) Unless otherwise appeared in writing by the LPA the development should accord
with the following plans and particulars.
a: Street lighting and/or external lighting (drawing 12342-2-C)b: Details of rainwater goods.c: Colour and materials for fascias and soffits.d: Balcony details.
Reason: In order that these matters may be considered by the Local Planning Authority.
(4) Development shall be in accordance with the Construction Method Statement
Rev D dated 20 January 2017 and Construction Drainage Plan for all demolition and construction activities. Reason: To limit the impact the development has on the amenity of the locality
(5) The development must accord with the design stage SAP data and a BRE water
calculator demonstrating The Code for Sustainable Homes level 4 standards for energy and water for residential buildings. A final statement shall be issued by the applicant confirming the standards have been achieved. Reason: To ensure the development meets the national requirements and the non-residential requirements of the adopted Supplementary Planning Document ‘Environmentally Sustainable Development’.
(6) Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a BREEAM
Communities final certificate at Excellent level shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in respect of the development. Reason: To demonstrate the required compliance with BREEAM Communities Excellent standard.
(7) The external facing and roofing materials shall accord with the submitted
material schedule (18-1822-109 Rev F). The development must then accord with these approved details. Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of any building is satisfactory.
(8) Final detailed proposals for the surface water shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development hereby permitted. The surface water drainage scheme shall include details of how the water will be filtered to exclude contaminants that may have a detrimental impact upon water quality. The approved details shall be fully implemented before the buildings hereby approved are occupied. Reason: To ensure satisfactory provision of foul and surface water drainage.
(9) The type of construction proposed for the roads and footways within each phase
of development including all relevant horizontal cross sections and longitudinal
sections showing the existing and proposed levels together with details method of disposing of surface water and details of the programme of implementation for the making up of the roads and footways accord with the submitted road construction schedule and drawing 1501. The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the roads are constructed to a standard which will enable them to be taken over as publicly maintainable highways.
(10) The roads and footways must be laid out and made up in accordance with the
specification, programme and details approved and in any event shall be so constructed that, by no later than the time any building erected on the land is occupied, there shall be a direct connection from it to an existing highway. The final carriageway and footway surfacing must be completed within six months from the date upon which the erection is commenced of the penultimate dwelling or building within the phase for which permission is hereby permitted. Reason: To ensure that the roads are constructed to a standard which will enable them to be taken over as publicly maintainable highways.
(11) The development shall accord with the details on crime prevention measures
associated with the dwellings set out within email from Barratts dated 16 December 2016. Reason. In the interest of crime prevention.
(12) Development shall accord with the submitted Written Scheme of Investigation
from LP Archaeology dated March 2016. Reason: To assess the extent, nature and date of any archaeological deposits that might be present and mitigate the impact of the development upon these heritage assets.
(13) Following completion of archaeological fieldwork a report will be produced in
accordance with an approved programme including where appropriate post-excavation assessment, specialist analysis and reports, publication and public engagement. Reason: To contribute to our knowledge and understanding of our past by ensuring that opportunities are taken to capture evidence from the historic environment and to make this publicly available.
(14) The development shall comply with the Estate Management and Management
Company Plan (P1228.CP.02 Rev A) for the management and maintenance plan for the footpaths, carriageways and public areas that are to be managed by a private management company. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority, the allocated parking areas are to be reserved for the use by occupiers of the property to which it is allocated through the use of a engraved anodised aluminium plaque. The development must accord with these approved details. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.
(15) Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted a plan for the
management, responsibility and maintenance of the sustainable urban drainage (SUDs) features shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The management plan shall ensure no part of the SUDs features are located within land that forms part of the curtilage of residential properties. The development must accord with these approved details. Reason: To ensure long terms management of the surface water drainage features.
(16) Unless otherwise agreed with the local planning authority, Sheffield bike stand
fixed to the concrete slab within shed shall be used for cycle storage at each dwelling. The approved works shall be provided before first occupation of the dwellings to which the associated storage relates. Reason: To ensure cycle storage is available in the interests of properly planned development.
(17) Prior to the commencement of development, details of a technology and
communication strategy for the provision of broadband, fibre optic or audio visual technology within the development must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The infrastructure must then be provided for use upon first occupation of the buildings hereby permitted and retained thereafter. Reason: To improve the opportunities to work from home and to reduce the proliferation of individual masts, aerials, satellite dishes and wiring on flatted and commercial blocks in the interests of visual amenity.
(18) Prior to the commencement of development a habitat creation, management
and monitoring plan for slow worms shall be submitted and approved by the local planning authority. The habitat creation and its management must accord with these details. Reason: To ensure the long term protection of the slow worm population.
(19) Prior to the commencement of development details of a strategy for swallow,
swift, house martin and house sparrow nest boxes to be incorporated into the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development must accord with these approved details. Reason: To ensure mitigation for the swallow population to be displaced and enhancement for other rare and declining bird species.
(20) Prior to the commencement of development a walk over badger survey will be
undertaken and if badgers are found on site, details of mitigation measures will be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development must accord with these details. Reason: To ensure no disturbance to badger setts.
(21) Prior to commencement of the development the developer shall submit to the
Local Planning Authority details of an agreed strategy with CLH Pipeline System the measures to be undertaken to protect the cathodic protection of the pipeline crossing the site including the site terms and conditions together with works consent orders the development must accord with these approved details. Reason: In the interest of safety and to protect the on-site apparatus.
(22) The development shall accord with the approved mineral extraction plan dated
April 2016. Reason: To ensure suitable prior extraction of materials. (23) No development shall commence until a site meeting has taken place with the
site manager, the retained consulting arboriculturalist and a representative from the Local Planning Authority. Work cannot commence until the LPA officer has inspected and approved the tree protection fencing and ground protection. Once approved no access by vehicles or placement of goods, chemicals, fuels,
soil or other materials shall take place within the fenced area. The fencing shall be retained in its approved form for the duration of the work. All other aspects of the Arboricultural Implications Assessment and Method Statement will be addressed at this meeting. Reason: To protect trees.
(24) No work shall commence on any phase of the development until the following
has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for that phase:
(i) A Report of Preliminary Investigation comprising a Desk Study, Conceptual Site Model, and Preliminary Risk Assessment documenting previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance and as set out in Contaminated Land Report Nos. 11, CLR11, and BS 10175:2011+A1:2013 Investigation of potentially contaminated sites - Code of Practice;
(ii) A Report of a site investigation documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as appropriate by the Preliminary Investigation and in accordance with BS 10175:2011+A1:2013, and BS 8576:2013 and unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority;
(iii) A detailed scheme (including a programme for implementation) for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to avoid the risk from contaminants and/or gases when each phase of the site is developed and proposals for future maintenance and monitoring. Such a scheme shall include nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works and development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schemes.
The development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To allow risk assessment and effective risk management solutions in order to minimise the risks of pollution and to ensure the site is satisfactorily decontaminated.
(25) The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until
there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person approved under the provisions of Condition 24 (iii) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of Condition 24 (iii) has been implemented in full in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written permission of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority such verification shall comprise:
(i) Built drawings of the implemented scheme;(ii)Photographs of the remediation works in progress;(iii) Certificates demonstrating that imported and /or material left in situ is free from contamination.
Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme under Condition 24 (iii). Reason: To minimise the risks of pollution and to ensure the site is satisfactorily de-contaminated.
(26) No construction or demolition work must take place except between the hours
0800 to 1800 Mondays to Fridays or 0900 to 1300 on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings.
(27) The development must be carried out in accordance with the recommendations
set out in chapter 6 of the Berry Farm, Bursledon Bat Activity and Emergence/ Return Survey of Buildings December 2013 published by WYG Planning. Reason: In the interest or protecting bats pre, during and post construction.
(28) The approved landscape scheme must be completed within 12 months from the
completion of the last building shell in each phase, or by such later date as the Local Planning Authority may determine. Any trees or plants which die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased during the first five years must be replaced during the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To ensure that the appearance of the development is satisfactory.
(29) The garages shall not be converted to living accommodation without the prior
written permission of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to provide adequate on-site car parking.
(30) No dwelling hereby permitted must occupied until the areas shown on the
approved plan for the parking of vehicles associated with that dwelling shall have been made available, surfaced and marked out, and the areas must be retained in perpetuity for those dwellings to which each parking bay is allocated. The unallocated parking areas must also be provided prior to occupation of the penultimate house and retained as such in perpetuity and in a condition to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, and reserved for those purposes at all times. Reason: In the interests of highway safety/amenity.
(31) The development must accord with the Arboricultural Impact Assessment and
Method Statement (ref. BDWS19941aia) produced by ACD Arboriculture for Barratt Homes dated 22/05/15. Tree Protection must be addressed as per the Tree Protection Plan (BDWS19941-03) enclosed within the report. Reason: To protect trees on the boundary of the site.
(32) Prior to occupation of each plot referenced in section 6 and Appendix B of the
WYG Noise Assessment May 2015 as requiring additional glazing and ventilation a letter confirming installation and compliance with these glazing specifications and ventilation measures installed shall be provided to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.
(33) No burning of materials obtained by site clearance or any other source shall take place during the demolition, construction and fitting out process. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties.
(34) Before two years from the final occupation of each phase, a post occupancy
evaluation report detailing compliance with BREEAM Communities Excellent must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the parameters of which must be agreed with the Local Planning Authority prior to submission. Reason: To ensure compliance to the required BREEAM Communities standard.
Note to Applicant: In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Eastleigh Borough Council takes a positive approach to the handling of development proposals so as to achieve, whenever possible, a positive outcome and to ensure all proposals are dealt with in a timely manner.
Report
This application has been referred to the Bursledon, Hamble-le-Rice and Hound Local Area Committee for determining as it is contrary to the Development Plan, is controversial and for consistency following the previous application being approved by the Local Area Committee.
Introduction
1. This is a full (detailed) planning application seeking permission for 166 dwellings (1 to 4 bed) with new access from Cunningham Gardens, associated parking, landscaping and open space following demolition of existing buildings and felling of trees. New footpath connections would be created west to the right of way (Strawberry Trail) which abuts the western boundary, northwards in to the Cunningham Gardens public open space and a new footpath/cycle path along the boundary with Hamble Lane.
2. The proposals is the same in terms of site layout, housing mix and elevational treatment as that approved in 2016, all except for the access arrangements. The 2016 scheme proposed widening of the existing farm access with the right hand turn lane from Hamble Lane plus pedestrian crossing points. At the time of submission, the 2016 scheme also included proposals for a roundabout at the junction of Portsmouth Road and Hamble Lane. With the agreement of the Hampshire County Council as Highway Authority, the roundabout was dropped in favour of the funding of traffic lights at this junction.
3. Whilst the only detailed change is to the access arrangements, as a full application the Council must consider the entire development proposal again. However, the previous approval is a strong material consideration when determining this revised proposal. The body of the report will therefore be the same as that previously reported to committee apart from in the
considerations of highway impact, ecology, residential amenity and the 5 year housing land supply and policy position.
4. The dwellings would comprise of 1 and 2 bed apartments (27no), 2 bed bungalows (3no), 2 bed coach house (8no), 2 bed house (40no), 3 bed house (72no) and 4 bed house (16no). A 40% provision of dwellings across a range of styles and size would be provided for affordable housing, pepper-potted around the development.
5. The application plans comprise the red line application plan showing the site boundary of the 6.10 ha site, detailed layout, landscaping and access plans. The red line plan includes development site and the junction of Portsmouth Road / Hamble Lane, where improvements are proposed in the form of a traffic light junction. This will be secured via a financial contribution in the s106 agreement paid to HCC at highway authority who will deliver the junction improvements.
6. The main housing design principles of this development are as previously proposed;
Perimeter block principles with houses fronting public realm A traditional design with the majority being two storey dwellings but an
element of three storey dwellings in key locations. Character areas created through the use of varying materials and
boundary treatment. Shared surface approach to some of the residential roads Retention and enhancement of landscaping to boundaries, a pocket park,
lateral park and more significant open space to the west linking to existing public open space (POS) to the north.
Street trees provided along the majority or public roads.
7. The application is also accompanied by the same reports and technical assessments provided for the 2016 application, updated where necessary to reflect the revised scheme. Most notable of which is the Transport addendum note.
8. Under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England) Regulations 2011 the Council has screened the development, confirming that and environmental statement is not required.
9. A Habitats Regulations Assessment has also been carried out concluding that, with the mitigation proposed and conditions, no significant likely impacts would occur as a result of the development.
The application site and surroundings
10. The application site is designated as being within countryside in the adopted Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2001-2011). In the Submitted Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2011 – 2029) the site is designated as countryside, a countryside gap and within a HCC Mineral Safeguarding Site. The site abuts
an area of designated public open space (Cunningham Gardens POS) and the Priors Hill Brick Works Site of Importance to Nature Conservation (SINC). In 2016, the site was granted planning permission for 166 dwellings with open space and an access off Hamble Lane
11. The majority of the site is in agricultural use with a dwelling, workshops, barns and yard to the closer to Hamble Lane, whilst a caravan storage area is centrally located within the site. A paint spraying business operates out of the former agricultural buildings. The boundaries are defined by a mix of native hedging and conifer hedging (southern, part east and northern boundaries). From its northeast corner the site very gradually drops by 1.5m to the southwest corner. The site measures 200m (north – south) and an average of 240m (east – west).
12. The site is located on fields south of Cunningham Gardens and 400m south of the Portsmouth Road/Hamble Lane junction.
13. To the east of the site are detached dwellings fronting Hamble Lane, and slightly further east is the Pilands Wood Estate which accommodates housing, a church and a small parade of shops. To the north is formal public open space whilst passing along the western boundary is a public right of way. To the south the undeveloped agricultural/horticultural land continues to Hound Way approximately 850m away.
Planning History
14. Various permissions related to the agricultural dwelling (1980), agricultural buildings (1980), temporary permission for the storage of caravans (1995, 1997, 2000, 2003, 2009 and 2014)), storage use of building (2001) and retrospective permission for use of building as storage and vehicle paint spraying (2012).
15. In June 2014 outline planning permission (O/14/73948) was refused for housing and a care home on grounds the proposal was development in the countryside that would cause an urbanising impact on the designated countryside diminish the undeveloped area between Bursledon, Hamble and Netley and the separate identities of the settlements. The subsequent appeal was withdrawn pending the submission of a revised all housing scheme.
16. In 2016, planning permission was granted for 166 dwellings with open space and vehicular access from Hamble Lane. Most of the pre-commencement conditions have been discharged and works is programmed to commence on site in April 2017.
Consultation Responses
Comments on the current 2017 scheme
17. Head of Transportation and Engineering – Comments awaited and members will be updated at Committee.
18. Head of Housing and Environmental Health – No objection subject to conditions. In terms of air quality, it is confirmed that there has been no change in legislation and no significant difference in the air quality monitoring data at diffusion tube sites Hamble Lane 1 and 2. Having reviewed the AQ assessment for F/17/79863 and assuming that the traffic assessment on which this report is based is acceptable, receptors will only experience negligible impacts as a result of committed and the proposed development are acceptable.
19. Borough Ecologist – Comments awaited and Members will be updated verbally at Committee.
20. Borough Tree officer – No objection. Conditions recommended
21. Parks & Open Space Manager – No additional comments provided.
22. Head of Housing – No objection. The scheme remains as per the 2016 approval. Affordable housing layout is acceptable, and to be built to Lifetime Home standards and 1no. unit to be to Wheelchair Accessible Standards. Concerns are raised that this is to be one of the two bed dwellings and a ground floor apartment would be preferable. Delivery of eth 8no. Starter Homes has been agreed previously.
23. Head of Direct Services – No objection
24. West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group – No additional comments received.
25. HCC Flood & Water Team – Holding objection. Comments on the further information provided are awaited.
26. HCC Countryside – No comments received.
27. Eastleigh Ramblers – No objection. Access would cut across Footpath 503. Recommend all paths are made adopted rights of way and open space is transferred to public ownership. Paths should extend to site boundary.
28. Esso pipelines – Not in the Zone of Interest for Esso.
29. CLH Pipelines – No objection. Apparatus maybe affected.
30. Southern Water – No objection
31. Bursledon Parish Council – Comments awaited and Members will be updated verbally at Committee.
32. Hamble-le-Rice Parish Council – Comments awaited and Members will be updated verbally at Committee.
33. Hound Parish Council – No objection.
34. HCC Highways – Comments awaited.
35. Bursledon Rights of Way and Amenity Group - Comments awaited.
Original consultee comments in 2016 (summarised).
36. Head of Regeneration and Planning Policy – No objection. The Council does not currently have a five-year supply of housing land, the position of the Inspector at a previous Local Plan examination that this site should be considered further as a reserve site, the location of the site outside the strategic or local gaps, and the location of the site in relation to the settlement of Bursledon i.e. the site does not extend the urban edge of Bursledon further than its current most southerly extent. The sustainability statement demonstrates the development could achieve Code Level 4 requirements for energy and water. In accordance with the BREEAM Communities process a BREEAM “C” certificate has been provided but the Council will also require a pre-assessment estimate showing how BREEAM ‘excellent’ standard could be achieved at detailed stage. No landscape objection and comments provided on the landscaping details.
37. Head of Transportation and Engineering – HCC will be responsible for assessment of the development in highway terms. An access to Cunningham Gardens may be preferable, whilst the ghost island may present problems for those turning right of the site. However, there are matters for HCC to advise on. Detailed comments provided on the cycle path, parking layout, tracking for large vehicles, the needed for a traffic regulation order (TRO) to prevent cars parking in areas that would obstruct free flowing traffic or affect highway safety.
38. Head of Housing and Environmental Health – No objection subject to conditions on land contamination and noise mitigation measures. Air quality was considered and no objection was raised.
39. Tree Officer – No objection subject to conditions.
40. Biodiversity Officer – No objection in principle subject to conditions.
41. Parks & Opens Space Manager – No objection. Contributions to be secured to deliver a Local Equipped Area of Play (LEAP) on the adjoining POS whilst any Local Areas of Play (LAP) shall be laid out in accordance with guidelines. Dragons teeth / bollards or knee rail fencing is required to help prevent unlawful access to the POS areas.
42. Head of Housing Services – No objection. This delivers 66 affordable pepper-potted around the development. Dwellings must be built to Lifetime Homes Standards and 1 unit to be built to Wheelchair Accessible Standards
43. Head of Direct Services – No objection
44. Head of Economic Development – No objection
45. HCC Highways – No objection subject to a section 106 agreement.
46. Although the Transport Assessment (TA) did not provide full information on personal injury accidents, the County have reviewed their data from the end of 2012 to June 2015 and found that 4 new accidents occurred, primarily due to driver error, within the area the TA set out. It is therefore agreed there is no discernible trend that is likely to be exacerbated by the development traffic.
47. A right turn lane for vehicles entering the development achieves visibility splays of 2.4m x 45.6m from the north and 2.4m x 47.2m which is in accordance with Manual for Streets criteria for a 30mph speed limit. This is supported by recorded speeds of 31.3mph Northbound and 32.1mph southbound. The principle of the proposal access is accepted, subject to the works being delivered through an s278 legal agreement.
48. The Transport Assessment estimates 784 daily vehicle trips. 90 trips generated in the AM peak (24 arrivals and 66 departures), 78 trips generated between 16:00 and 17:00 (48 arrivals and 30 departures), and 98 trips generated between 17:00 and 18:00 (62 arrivals and 36 departures). The trip distribution assesses the impact with committed development (Taylor Wimpey appeal site and Hamble Station scheme) and advises 8% of traffic would travel south of the development. The County agree with the trip rates and distribution within the TA.
49. All junctions between the site and Windhover have been assessed and would perform within capacity at peak times, except Windhover which already will operates over capacity on all arms in 2018 with or without the development. To mitigate the impact it will be necessary for the development to provide a contribution (£639,782) towards a major improvement scheme at this junction which would provide a fair and reasonable mitigation measure to off-set the development related impact and ensure that Hampshire County Council can deliver a long term solution scheme. The modelling work for the proposed roundabout at Portsmouth Road junction demonstrates that this would provide significant benefit over the existing situation. Although post mitigation the Hamble Lane South lane is very near capacity, this is still an improvement on the “Do Nothing” scenario.
50. The Travel plan has yet to be agreed with County the content of which will need to be agreed and secured via a Section 106 Agreement in addition to a bond to secure the cost of the agreed measures. A transport contribution of £639,782 in line with the three tests as set out in the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) 122 regulation is required as the additional vehicle trips will at times cause harm by worsening local congestion and proven by the applicant’s TA. The contributions will support the Windhover Roundabout improvement
scheme and sustainable access to Hamble Peninsula; measures, as identified through the on-going HCC study
51. HCC Access Officer (Rights of Way) – No objection.
52. HCC Economy, Transport & Environment (Minerals) No objection subject to a condition to require mineral extraction as part of the building process.
53. HCC Archaeologist – No objection subject to conditions.
54. HCC Children’s Service Department – Forecasts indicate that the surplus places at both primary and secondary age have now been exhausted and that contributions are sought towards improvement of facilities for both age groups. Based on 0.3 primary places per dwelling and 0.21 secondary yield factor, 49.8 primary school places are required by this development and 33.2 secondary places are required.
55. HCC Lead Local Flood Authority – No objection. The proposals for surface water drainage meet the current standards/best practice and more details sought at design stage on adoption of permeable solutions on the highway and a surface water maintenance regime.
56. Highways Agency – No objection subject to conditions securing mitigation for what is considered to be an adverse impact on junction 8 of the M27.
57. Crime Prevention Advisor – No comments received.
58. The Ramblers Association – The plans should secure links to the north and south to improve connectivity to existing rights of way along the western and northern boundaries.
59. Natural England – The site is close to a European designated site (Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA) which is also listed as Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site and Solent Maritime Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The proposal is not likely to have a significant effect on the interest features for these sites either alone or in combination subject to securing financial contribution towards mitigation measures as recommended by the Solent Disturbance and Mitigation Project. This is also noted at national level as Lincegrove and Hackett’s Marsh SSSI. Standing advice on protected species to be followed and enhancements to biodiversity should be sought wherever possible.
60. Environment Agency – no objection.
61. Southern Water – No objection subject to protection of existing infrastructure, meeting foul drainage needs as inadequate capacity in the local network to provide foul sewage disposal and details of long term maintenance of the surface water drainage
62. NHS West Clinical Commissioning Group – No objection. It would be reasonable to expect that most people who move into the proposed development would gravitate towards Bursledon Surgery. Allowing for the other development in and around the Bursledon area it is anticipated there would still be capacity within the surgery to accommodate this development.
63. Bursledon Surgery – No comments received to date.
64. Hamble-le-Rice PC – Object. Ddevelopment outside of the urban edge, physically and visually diminish a strategic gap, loss of agricultural land, adverse impact on the intrinsic character of the landscape, impact on air quality and the development on this site is not contained in any emerging policies nor is it a greenfield allocation for new housing.
65. Bursledon PC – Object on grounds of design, access and the development is within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA).
66. Hound PC – No objection subject to the traffic concerns accessing Hamble Lane from the development, especially when turning right, are satisfactorily addressed. It was recommended that the access be constructed using the existing road at Cunningham Gardens.
67. Bursledon Rights of Way and Amenities Preservation Group – No comments received to date.
68. Eastleigh & Southern Parish Older Persons Forum – No comments received to date.
69. Fisher German (CLH Pipeline System) – An objection is raised as the proposed housing development will directly affect our clients’ pipelines cathodic protection system. Subject to suitable diversion of the pipelines this objection could be lifted.
70. Fisher German (Esso Pipeline) – The development does not fall within a zone of interest.
71. Scottish & Southern Electric – No comments received to date.
Third Party Comments on current application.
72. Residents within the locality were notified of the proposal to which 39 letters of objection have been received on the following grounds;
Loss of greenfield Over development within the Hamble Peninsula Highway matters – congestion, insufficient infrastructure, safety of
pedestrians, impact on emergency services, no highway improvements proposed
Cunningham Gardens access – impact on residents, safe route to recreation ground,
Pedestrian crossing impacts on use of private drive on Hamble Lane Impact of congestion on local businesses Infrastructure – inadequate school and health facility capacity, Departure from the adopted Local Plan Loss of settlement identity Air Quality and impact on health Overlooking and loss of privacy Visually intrusive Noise associated with the development Reduction in quality of life of those living on the peninsula. Impact on wildlife Houses will not be local people or those who need them
1 letter of support:
Safer access to that approved off Hamble Lane
Policy Context:
National Planning Policy Framework
73. The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how it expects them to be applied. It is a material consideration in planning decisions.
74. As stated at paragraph 6 of the NPPF, the purpose of the planning system is “to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development”. There are three dimensions to this: economic, social and environmental, and these dimensions give rise to the need for the planning system to perform a number of different roles.
75. Paragraph 10 of the NPPF states that decisions need to take local circumstances into account so that they respond to the different opportunities for achieving sustainable development in different areas.
76. Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that at the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which, for decision-taking, means approving development proposals that accord with the Development Plan without delay; and, where the Development Plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole or when specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted.
77. Paragraph 17 of the NPPF sets out the “Core Planning Principles” that the planning system ought to play, underpinning both Plan-making and decision-taking. The 12 principles include as follows:
Planning should be Plan-led;
Plans should take account of market signals, such as land prices and housing affordability, and set out a clear strategy for allocating sufficient land which is suitable for development in their area, taking account of the needs of the residential and business communities;
Planning should take account of the different roles and character of different areas, promoting the vitality of our main urban areas and recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it;
Planning should take full account of flood risk and coastal change; Planning should contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural
environment and reducing pollution, with development directed to land of lesser environmental value where consistent with other policies in the NPPF;
Planning should encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value; and
Planning should promote mixed use developments, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production);
Planning should actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable
Planning should take account of and support local strategies to improve health, social and cultural wellbeing for all, and deliver sufficient community and cultural facilities and services to meet local needs.
78. Chapter 6 of the NPPF is entitled “Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes”. Paragraph 49 advises that planning applications for residential development should be considered “in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development” and goes on to state that “relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.”
79. Paragraph 61 of the NPPF requires that planning decisions address the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic environment.
80. Paragraph 109 of the NPPF makes it clear that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils. In addition it should seek to prevent existing and new development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of, inter alia, air and noise pollution.
81. Paragraph 152 of the NPPF states that Local Planning Authorities should seek opportunities to achieve each of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, and net gains across all three. Significant adverse impacts on any of these dimensions should be avoided and, wherever possible, alternative options which reduce or eliminate such
impacts should be pursued. Where adverse impacts are unavoidable, measures to mitigate/compensate the impact should be considered.
82. Paragraph 156 of the NPPF goes on to state that Local Planning Authorities should set out the strategic priorities for the area in the Local Plan, including strategic policies to conserve and enhance the natural environment, including landscape.
83. Paragraphs 186 to 207 of the NPPF make detailed provision in relation to decision-taking. Paragraph 196 re-emphasises that the NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions and paragraph 197 states that “in assessing and determining development proposals, local planning authorities should apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development”.
84. Annex 1 to the NPPF makes provision for its implementation. Paragraphs 215 and 216 make it clear that:
- Due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing Plans according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the NPPF, the greater the weight that may be given); and that
- Decision-takers may also give weight to relevant policies in emerging Plans according to: the stage of preparation of the emerging Plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging Plan to the policies in the NPPF (the closer the policies in the emerging Plan to the policies in the NPPF, the greater the weight that may be given).
85. Paragraphs 142-146 of the NPPF sets out the importance of defining Minerals Safeguarding Areas and ensuring that resources are not sterilised by other forms of development.
86. Paragraph 118 of the NPPF sets out the importance of conserving and enhancing biodiversity.
87. Paragraphs 203 and 204 of the NPPF state that planning obligations can be sought to address unacceptable impacts of a development that cannot be addressed through a planning condition, provided they are necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; are directly related to the development; and are fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
88. Paragraph 34 states that decisions should ensure developments that generate significant movement are located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised.
89. Paragraph 35 sets outs a number of factors that should be considered in locating and designing developments, including giving priority to pedestrian and cycle movements, having access to high quality public transport facilities, and creating safe and secure layouts which minimise conflicts between traffic and cyclists or pedestrians. Paragraph 36 goes on to state that developments which generate significant amounts of movement should be required to provide a Travel Plan.
90. Paragraph 50 states that where it is identified that affordable housing is needed policies should be set to provide for meeting this need on site, unless off-site provision or a financial contribution of broadly equivalent value can be robustly justified.
91. Paragraph 103 states that in determining planning applications local planning authorities should ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere and only consider development appropriate in areas at risk of flooding where sequential test is followed.
92. Paragraph 123 states that planning policies and decisions in relation to noise should aim to achieve a number of points, including:
Avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development;
Mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the use of conditions;
Recognise that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established.
93. Paragraph 124 states that planning policies should sustain compliance with and contribute towards EU limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and the cumulative impacts on air quality from individual sites in local areas. Planning decisions should ensure that any new development in Air Quality Management Areas is consistent with the local air quality action plan.
94. Conservation and enhancement of the historic environment is addressed in Paragraphs 128-130, with the objective of avoiding or minimising conflicts between conservation and other aspects of a proposal and considering positive contributions which can be secured. The more important the heritage asset, the more weight it should be given, with harm to or loss of Grade I or II assets only acceptable in exceptional circumstances. Applications which affect directly or indirectly non designated heritage assets will have the scale of any harm of loss considered as part of a balanced judgement.
Planning Practice Guidance
95. Where material, this guidance (which supplements the NPPF) should be afforded weight in the consideration of planning applications.
96. Air Quality – when determining whether air quality is relevant to planning application considerations could include any increases in traffic, introduction of new sources of air pollution, exposure to air pollutants and impact on biodiversity.
97. Conserving and enhancing the historic environment – the conservation of heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance is a core planning principle. An assessment of the impact on the significance of the heritage assets and their settings is required.
98. Design – good quality design is an integral part of sustainable development. Achieving good design is about creating places, buildings or spaces that work well for everyone, look good, will last well and adapt for the needs of future generations. Good design responds in a practical and creative way to both the function and identity of a place. It puts land, water, drainage, energy, community, economic, infrastructure and other such resources to the best possible use over the long as well as the short term.
99. Determining a planning application – to the extent that development plan policies are material, a decision must be taken in accordance with the development plan unless there are material considerations that indicate otherwise. Where the plan is absent, silent or out of date, an application must be determined in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development.
100. Flood Risk – a site specific flood risk assessment should be carried out to assess the flood risk to and from the development site and demonstrate how flood risk will be managed now and over the development’s life.
101. Contamination – Local Planning Authorities need to be satisfied that they understand the contaminated condition of the site and that the development proposed is appropriate as a means of remediation and it has sufficient information to be confident that it will be able to grant permission in full at a later stage bearing in mind the need for the necessary remediation to be viable and practicable.
102. Minerals – as minerals are a non-renewable resource, minerals safeguarding is the process of ensuring that non-minerals development does not needlessly prevent the future extraction of mineral resources, of local and national importance. Mineral planning authorities should adopt a systematic approach for safeguarding mineral resources.
103. Natural Environment – Local Planning Authorities should take into consideration various publications when taking biodiversity into account and
should look for net gains. Sufficient information should be sought through ecological surveys etc.
104. Noise – noise needs to be considered when new development may create additional noise and when new developments would be sensitive to the prevailing acoustic environment. For noise sensitive developments mitigation measures may be acceptable but should not result in an unsatisfactory development.
105. Open space, sports and recreation facilities, public rights of way and local green space – open space should be taken into account in planning for new development. It can take many forms and provide health, recreation, ecological and amenity benefits. Local planning authorities should assess the need for open space and opportunities for new provision in their area.
106. Planning Obligations – these should mitigate the impact of unacceptable development in order to make it acceptable. Obligations should be directly related to the development and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind.
107. Travel Plans, transport assessment and statements in decision taking – supports the provision of Transport Assessments where a Local Planning Authority must make a judgement as to whether a proposal would generate significant amounts of movement.
108. Water supply, wastewater and water quality – adequate water and wastewater infrastructure is needed to support sustainable development. Conditions can be used to ensure adequate infrastructure.
Development plan saved policies, emerging local plan policies and SPD’s
Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review 2001-2011 (“saved policies”)
109. This site is countryside within the current adopted Local Plan 2001-2011. The most relevant saved policies are as follows:-
1.CO – countryside protection 18.CO – landscape character 20.CO – landscape improvements 25.NC- Promotion of biodiversity unless benefits of development outweigh
the adverse impacts and that the impacts are unavoidable and that mitigation measures are proposed.
30.ES – Requires refusal of noise sensitive development where exposed to unacceptable levels of noise
31.ES – Requires appropriate design, layout and sound insulation where permission is granted in above circumstances.
33.ES – Suitable air quality assessment required if new development appears likely to have a significant impact on air quality.
35.ES – Requires sufficient information to demonstrate that contaminated land can be appropriately remediated for the use proposed and that the risk of pollution to controlled waters is minimised
45.ES – Requires sustainable drainage systems 59.BE requires high standards of good design in new developments,
including taking full and proper account of the context of the site. 73.H – Sites of 15 or more dwellings to be of appropriate mix. 74.H – Affordable housing. 92.T – Local Transport Plan proposals include (iii) Windhover roundabout
100.T – Requires development to be well served by sustainable forms of transport, to provide measures to minimize impact on the network, minimize travel demand, provide a choice of transport mode and submit a transport assessment for large proposals.
101.T - Road Traffic Reduction Act 1997 targets – if exceeded requires the need for the development to be justified; for the development to provide contributions towards sustainable transport.
102.T – Requires new development to provide safe accesses that do not have adverse environmental implications and are to adoptable standard.
146.OS – Requires proposal which would have a detrimental impact on the green network to be refused and contributions from adjoining development proposals to be sought to enhance the environment.
147.OS – Requires on site provision of public open space. 165.TA – Percent for art 168.LB – Archaeological evaluation 190. IN – requires development only to be permitted where adequate
services and infrastructure are available or can be provided. 191. IN – requires appropriate proposals to be permitted provided that
arrangements have been made to either provide or contribute towards essential infrastructure.
Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan 2013
110. Policy 15 - Hampshire’s sand and gravel (sharp sand and gravel and soft sand), silica sand and brick-making clay resources are safeguarded against needless sterilization by non-minerals development, unless ‘prior extraction’ takes place.
111. Safeguarded mineral resources are defined by a Mineral Safeguarding Area illustrated on the Policies Map and the application site lies within a safeguarded area. Development without the prior extraction of mineral resources in the Mineral Safeguarding Area may be permitted if:
a. It can be demonstrated that the sterilization of mineral resources will not occur; or
b. It would be inappropriate to extract mineral resources at that location, with regards to the other policies in the Plan; or
c. The development would not pose a serious hindrance to mineral development in the vicinity; or
d. The merits of the development outweigh the safeguarding of the mineral.
112. The soft sand / potential silica sand resources at Whitehill & Bordon (Inset Map 5), further illustrated on the Policies Map are included within the MSA and are specifically identified for safeguarding under this policy.
Submission Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2011-2029
113. The Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2011-2029 was submitted for examination in July 2014 but the Inspector concluded that insufficient housing was being provided for in the Plan and that is was unsound.
114. The Submitted Local Plan has not been formally withdrawn and therefore remains a material planning consideration. However, the weight that can be attributed to the draft policies of the Submitted Eastleigh Local Plan 2011-2029 is extremely limited. The Council consulted on the Issues and Options Document (December 2015) from 23 December 2015 until 17 February 2016. Following the completion of the consultation the Council are now undertaking the additional technical work required to inform the next formal stage in the plan-making process.
115. The most relevant draft policies of the Submitted Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2011-2029 are:
S1 – Sustainable development S2 – New development S3 – Location of new housing S5 – Green infrastructure S8 – Strategic footpath, cycleway, bridleway links S9 – Countryside and countryside gaps S11 – Nature conservation S12 – Heritage assets DM1 – General criteria for new development DM2 – Environmentally sustainable development. DM4 – Flood risk DM5 – Sustainable surface water management and watercourse
management DM7 – Pollution DM9 – Nature conservation DM10 – Heritage assets DM15 - Protection of the best and most valuable agricultural land DM23 – General development criteria - transportDM28 – Affordable
housing DM29 – Internal space standards for residential development DM32 – Provision of recreation and open space facilities with new
development DM33 – New and enhanced recreation and open space facilities DM35 – Community, leisure and cultural facilities DM37 – Funding infrastructure
116. Also relevant are the EBC Public Art Strategy 2015-2019, Landscape Character Area SPD and EBC Character Area Assessments.
Assessment of Proposal
117. Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 require a local planning authority determining an application to do so in accordance with the Development Plan unless materials considerations indicate otherwise.
118. The Development Plan in this case comprises the saved policies of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review 2001-2011 and the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (adopted 2013).
119. In terms of emerging policy, the Submitted Eastleigh Local Plan 2011-2019 (comprising: the Revised Pre-submission Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2011 - 2029, published February 2014; and the Schedule of Proposed Minor Changes) was submitted to the Secretary of State in July 2014 and, following examination hearings in November 2014, the Inspector issued his final report on 11 February 2015. The final report recommended non-adoption on the basis of the plan being unsound, largely due to its inadequate provision for new housing. It can therefore be considered to have extremely limited weight in the determination of this application. The emerging work on the new Local Plan to 2036 is also a material consideration of limited weight.
120. In terms of other material planning considerations, the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance constitute material considerations of significant weight.
Material Considerations
121. Whilst the current planning permission for housing development on this site is a very significant material consideration, it does not by default mean that a new scheme must automatically be approved. In forming a decision, Members will need to be considered any material change in circumstances since
consent was granted in 2016 that would fundamentally prevent development being supported on this site now. Such material issues could be a change to the local plan status, 5 year housing land supply, highway matters and case law. Without a significant change in these issues, the principle of development would need to be supported and a decision made solely on the impact or benefits derived from the revised access via Cunningham Gardens. Furthermore, the applicant has a “fall-back” position of the 2016 permission and confirmed development will commence on this site during 2017.
Five year housing land supply and allocation of housing sites
122. The Council also has an ongoing responsibility to ensure that there is has a continuous 5 year supply of housing, which may mean that unallocated sites within the countryside may need to be brought forward early to meet this requirement.
123. In this respect the NPPF is a material consideration of significant weight and paragraph 14 sets out the overarching presumption in favour of sustainable development. At paragraph 49 it goes on to state that; “Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the Local Planning Authority cannot demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites.”
124. It is accepted that the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five year housing supply of deliverable housing sites, with the latest housing supply figures (Cabinet December 2016) demonstrating a 4.23 year supply at present. These figures already include the 166 dwellings approved on site in 2016, thus the current scheme would not reduce this gap. Since the 2016 scheme was approved, dwellings have been approved at Pembers Hill (O/15/77190) in Fair Oak (250 dwellings) and Church Road (O/16/79469) in Bishopstoke (30 dwellings). Whilst this assists the Council, it still cannot demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply.
125. As such “relevant policies for the supply of housing” are currently deemed out-of-date in respect of this application. Following recent case law and appeal decisions, it is accepted that Saved Policy 1.CO is a policy for the supply of housing under paragraph 49 of the NPPF and, therefore that it is out-of-date as the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five year housing supply. However, this does not mean it has no application, as its objective of protecting countryside per se is broadly consistent with the NPPF, and it attracts weight accordingly.
126. It is still necessary to consider whether the proposed development is sustainable development and to apply the NPPF’s overall presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out in paragraph 14 of the NPPF.
127. Also material to a decision is the delivery rate of development. The applicant has confirmed they will be commencing work April 2017 with 50-55 dwellings
being delivered each year, with the site being fully occupied by the end of 2020.
128. Although located within countryside, the site is geographically located within a sustainable distance of local amenities. Lowford village centre is 700m to the northeast where shops and other services can be accessed, whilst closer is a local shop off Chamberlayne Road and slightly further away Tesco can be found. Schools are located within Bursledon and at Hamble, with both primary and secondary facilities located 1.4km from the site. A primary regional bus service utilises bus stops located within walking distance of the site which is also within 1.4km (approximately 17 minute walk, 5 minute cycle) of Hamble Railway Station. The site’s overall proximity to facilities and amenities results in this being a relatively sustainable site for housing.
129. Overall there has been no significant change in legislation, case law or policy since 2016 to conclude that the principle of development is no longer supported on this site.
The landscape and countryside
130. Saved policy 1.CO of the adopted Local Plan seeks to protect the countryside from inappropriate development unless it necessary for agriculture, outdoor recreational use, public utility developments or extensions to existing education or health facilities. The proposals for housing on a site designated as countryside clearly do not fall within the scope of these “accepted” forms of development. Policy 18.CO seeks to protect the identified landscape character of an area, more details of which are set out in the Council’s Landscape Character Assessment Area document.
131. The site is not located within a designated strategic gap or local gap (2.CO and 3.CO designated to protect the coalescence of settlements) although its semi-rural nature does contribute to the perception of being outside of the urban edge of Bursledon and Old Netley, especially when walking the public right of way along the western boundary. The NPPF recognises the placing of value on the local circumstances (para 10), the need to take account of the different roles and character the countryside takes (para 17) and for LPAs to adopted strategic priorities including the protection of landscapes (para 156). The principle of saved policy 1.CO is wholly consistent with the sustainable development objectives of the NPPF (para 215).
132. The site is flat with few landscape features of note. The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) note the hedgerows along the north, south and east boundaries provide a sense of enclosure, with the site as a whole having a weighted landscape sensitivity defined as Medium. The LVIA notes the visual impacts of the development varies from major (viewed from part of Hamble Lane and footpath to the west), to moderate (from Cunningham Gardens, parts of Hamble Lane/footpath to the west) to minor (Hound Road).
133. Located in “Hound Plain” as defined within the Eastleigh Landscape Character Assessment Area (LCAA), the wider area comprises of a significantly large
and generally undeveloped land west of Hamble Lane to the fringes of Netley and Southampton, extending up to Bursledon Road. The predominant characteristic is the landscape openness, interrupted by intermittent hedges and post and wire fences. The land is both arable and pasture, with patches of ‘hosticulture’ particularly around Hound. The LCAA identifies the character of the area as a whole is vulnerable to development.
134. The site’s landscape character would be altered with the skyline changing and views of the woodland obstructed at least in part by new housing. When viewed from the footpath to the west, the rural nature of the site and its contribution to the field pattern of the wider area is more noticeable than when viewed from other vantage points. Developing this site would introduce development further south bringing dwellings closer to (but not within) the more open and sensitive part of the countryside, which is designated as a local gap. Whilst the site’s landscape value can be considered as medium in pure landscape terms, its value as ‘countryside’ to those passing the site or living nearby is likely to be deemed relatively high.
135. The site does make a contribution to the rural character and separation of Netley, Bursledon and Southampton, albeit not as significant a contribution as less developed or more open sites located away from the urban fringes. With dwellings on the east side of Hamble Lane, the feeling of leaving a settlement is not fully experienced until within the more open countryside south of Mallards Road, whilst there is no intervisibility between the settlements from within or close to the site. Furthermore, the partially developed nature of the site already erodes the more open character found elsewhere. It is enclosed on two sides by residential properties, whilst the west boundary is defined by a strong belt of trees which restricts achieving medium to long distance views to only from the south of the site. With the retention of the conifer hedging along the southern boundary, the loss of the paddocks although noticeable, would have limited impact on the landscape character of the wider area.
136. The predominantly two storey development, with an element of three storey apartment blocks, is sympathetic to an urban edge development. With the inclusion of significant tree planting within the site and retention and strengthening of hedging along the majority of boundaries and removal of vehicular access from Hamble Lane, the visual impact is not unacceptable. The omission of a full vehicular access on to Hamble Lane and its replacement with a tree-lined pedestrian link will further serve to limit the visual impact of the development when travelling along Hamble Lane. This is a benefit compared to the approved 2016 scheme.
Minerals
137. Advice on minerals is contained with the adopted Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan 2013 (in which the site is within a designated Minerals Safeguarding Area) and the NPPF. The prior extraction of minerals, where practicable and commercially feasible is sought in advance of non-mineral development. HCC currently have identified the site is of a size that there could be mineral deposits of a commercial value, thus in accordance with
policy 15 of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan 2013 ‘prior extraction’ is recommended.
138. The minerals assessment advises that through prior extraction an estimated 129,700 tons of gravel and sand would be taken by a suitable operator for off-site processing. This would allow for a proportion of the sand and gravel resources to be extracted in advance of housing being built and utilised as aggregate instead of being disposed of to landfill. Full scale extraction of the site is not considered feasible as it would delay the delivery of housing and run contrary to the drainage strategy and its principle of sustainable urban drainage. HCC Minerals and Waste Team confirmed on the approved development they do not object to the scheme.
Protecting the most valuable agricultural land
139. The site consists of Grade 3 and the land appears to be for a mix of crops and grazing of horses at present. Policy 4.CO of the adopted Local Plan was not saved but the NPPF advises in paragraph 112 that "local authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land [and that] where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality".
140. As grade 3, the value of the site to agriculture is border line and at just over 6ha, its loss is not deemed to be considerable nor would it lead to a significant loss of the most valuable agricultural land. In this instance, the Council are of the opinion that the development would not be contrary to paragraph 112 of the NPPF.
Heritage Asset and Listed Building considerations
141. There are no listed Listed Buildings or other heritage assets nearby and there are no known archaeological sites within the development area, but the site does have some potential to contain previously unidentified archaeological remains. The lack of archaeological evidence from the site and immediate vicinity should be viewed as much a reflection of the lack of archaeological investigation as a genuine indication of absence of archaeology. The desk based assessment submitted with the planning application does not adequately address the potential for Pleistocene archaeology and the site has potential for limited archaeological considerations. While this potential does not present an overriding concern it should be addressed through a programme of archaeological work secured through suitable conditions attached to any planning consent that might be granted. Overall the heritage assets within the site are adequately protected ensuring compliance with the guidance contained within the paragraph 128 of the NPPF and saved policy 168.LB
Access proposals, traffic impact and sustainable modes of transport
142. A significant level of the local objection to the proposals relates to traffic generation from the development and the inability of the existing road network to accommodate this traffic without resulting in further congestion and queuing. The delays experienced currently are anticipated to increase resulting in impacts on businesses, schools, medical facilities and the emergency services. The proposed development would not increase traffic movements or overall distribution of traffic compared to the 2016 approved scheme.
143. The original Transport Assessment (TA) forecast 90 trips generated in the AM peak (24 arrivals and 66 departures), 78 trips generated at the network peak between 16:00 and 17:00 (48 arrivals and 30 departures), and 98 trips generated between 17:00 and 18:00 (62 arrivals and 36 departures). The majority of the traffic leaving the site (92%) would turn left up Hamble Lane, with 50% of that traffic heading to the M27. The County as Highways Authority agreed with the evidence set out within the TA, including the cumulative impact with the Taylor Wimpey proposal and the Hamble Station scheme if that had been approved at appeal.
144. The addendum to the TA submitted in support of the Cunningham Gardens Access has taken in to account the “Mallard Road” appeal site traffic flows to provide a robust and up to date assessment of highway conditions. Further, it has forecast traffic movements for “future years” and updated the “future year” from 2018 as assessed with the original TA to 2022 (5 years from submission of the current scheme).
145. The addendum concludes there would be no difference in impact on the capacity of junctions along Hamble Lane compared to the 2016 approval other than a marginal change to the Hamble Lane / Cunningham Gardens / Chamberlayne Road traffic light junction. The revised access would see the Cunningham Garden arm of the this junction operate well within capacity with an additional two vehicles queuing at peak times. There would be a negligible impact in delays to vehicles passing north / south along Hamble Lane. With the revised access, there would be no material changes to the operation of the signalised junction. The final comments of the Head of Transportation and Engineering and HCC are awaited.
146. A key highway improvement proposed is the delivery of a new highway layout at the Portsmouth Road/Hamble Lane junction, which is identified as a pre-requisite to this scheme coming forward. Whilst a roundabout was initially proposed, the applicant has agreed with HCC that a traffic light option is preferable and deliverable. Contributions to fund this are to be secured through the S106 legal agreement.
147. The improvements to this junction, and the wider Hamble Lane corridor that have been secured by other developments, are policy compliant and sought via saved policy 92.T of the adopted local plan.
148. The formation of an access via Cunningham Gardens would be the sole vehicular access to the site and would negate the need for the approved access from Hamble Lane and the proposed right-hand turning lane. Whilst there was no objection from the Highway Authority to the approved access, it is logical to minimise access points on to Hamble and utilise the traffic light junction to the north of the site. Sufficient carriageway width and sight lines would be achieved, with the new access into Berry Farm forming the priority route and the remainder of Cunningham Gardens acting as a minor road. An average of less than additional two trips per minute at peak times is acceptable and not deemed to cause an unacceptable impact on residential amenity. The proposal has been assessed under an independent Stage 1 Road Safety Audit and no concerns on the safety of the design were raised.
149. Cunningham Gardens is an unadopted highway and the land between the highway and Berry Farm is public open space (POS) on which there is a covenant with the former landowners that this land will be used as POS. Whilst not a material planning matter, the Council are liaising with the existing and former landowners of the highway and POS to deliver an unfettered access from Cunningham Gardens by varying the covenant. The planning application can be determined in advance of these discussions concluding.
150. Public Right of Way 503 (PROW) is an unmade path that crosses this POS and whilst not requiring a diversion would be affected by virtue of the proposed access road dissecting its route. Whilst this will need to be formalised with appropriate crossing points, a formal diversion of the PROW is not required.
151. The site is considered to be in a sustainable location in terms of the proximity to local facilities and transport infrastructure. The scheme would offer improvements to pedestrian access along Hamble Lane through the provision of a footpath/cycleway along the eastern edge of the site with two non-signalised crossing points to facilitate access across Hamble Lane. There are continuous footpath connections to essential day-to-day facilities and links are proposed to access the wider footpath network. The site is reasonably well served by public transport.
152. A Travel Plan has been submitted and setting out various measures to reduce the dependency of travelling alone in cars, again in accordance with the principles of sustainable development.
153. The Highways Authority and the Council have been satisfied that the significant movements generated by the development could be accommodated adequately on the wider transport network without a severe impact on the road safety and operation of the local transport network, subject to the Highway Authority’s comments on revised access. The scheme as submitted is not contrary to saved policies 100.T and 101.T of the adopted Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2001-2011), emerging policy DM23 of the Revised Pre-Submission Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2011-2014) and the NPPF (para 32).
Noise and contamination issues
154. The adopted local plan seeks to avoid unacceptable impact from noise or vibration on noise-sensitive developments including residential development. In situations where the merits of the development outweigh the desirability of locating it away from a location disturbed by noise or vibration, the applicant must demonstrate the design, layout and insulation can meet appropriate standards. Para 123 of the NPPF advises planning decisions should “avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development”.
155. The noise survey has assessed noise generated from traffic on Hamble Lane, concluding that development can be delivered without causing harm to the amenity of future residents through the use of varying standards of acoustic glazing and alternative ventilation. A condition is recommended to implement the recommendations of the noise assessment, which the Head of Housing and Environmental Health concurs with.
156. The submitted desk based assessment of contamination concludes that risks to the proposed use are low and can be controlled through conditions. Further investigations have confirmed the site is free from contaminants apart from a couple of very small areas that will need remediation. A condition is included requiring remediation in accordance with the submitted assessment and additional assessments of the yard area once the existing buildings are demolished.
157. The impact of noise and vibration during the construction period for the dwellings is not considered to be unacceptable in principle; the final details can be addressed via a construction impact management plan.
Air Quality
158. The NPPF states (para 124) that policies should sustain compliance with and contribute towards national objectives for pollutants, taking into account Air Quality Management Areas and the cumulative impacts on air quality from individual sites. The application site falls outside of the Hamble Lane Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) but will impact on it with the majority of traffic generated by this development going north in to the AQMA. The Portsmouth Road / Hamble Lane junction abuts the southern edge of the AQMA and this has been assessed within the Air Quality Assessment. Local plan saved policies 32.ES and 33.ES and emerging local plan policy DM7 require any impacts upon air quality to be assessed in this regard. There are also a number of European Directives that apply to air quality which the Air Quality Standards Regulations (2010) seeks to transpose and simplify.
159. The application is supported by an air quality assessment that advises the proposed highway improvements and the Travel Plan will ensure traffic
movements associated with the development would not have a harmful impact on air quality, with the three of the receptors within the AQMA demonstrating an improved level of air quality as a result of the mitigation works proposed. Both the construction and operation phases were considered as well as various forms of air quality pollutants, in particular, NO2 and particulates were considered from increased level of traffic and construction. The Head of Housing and Environmental Health has reconsidered this assessment as part of the 2017 application and confirms there have been no significant changes in legislation, guidance of air quality data collected that lead to a different conclusion to be reached to that on the 2016 application. To enable ongoing monitoring of air quality levels within the Hamble Lane AQMA contributions are to be secured via the S106 process.
Trees and Ecology
160. The 2016 application was supported by a phase 1 and protected species report plus surveys and reports on bats, great crest newts, reptiles, dormice and badgers. In support of the current 2017 scheme, a letter has been provided updating on the status and works associated with each of the ecological assets on or assessed as part of the previously approved scheme.
161. The Borough ecologist raised no objection to the approved scheme subject to conditions including reviewing the landscape details proposed to offer a more favourable habitat for reptiles. Comments from the Borough Ecologist on the current proposal, which include creating a 15m gap in the northern hedgerow are awaited.
162. The hedge along Hamble Lane would no longer need to be partially removed to facilitate the improved access points and sight lines, which is a benefit as the hedge has some value as ecological habitat and through its aesthetic qualities. The formation of a 15m ecological buffer to the SINC accords with Natural England standing advice and will offer an improvement to the biodiversity value of the site. On balance, and subject to the views of the Borough Ecologist and appropriate mitigation (through new planting and enhancement of parts of the remaining hedge) this impact is considered acceptable
163. The site is not subject to a tree preservation order nor does it have a significant number of trees of any arboricultural quality within it. Three category B trees are proposed to be lost near to the existing farmhouse, whilst there are a number of low quality and ornamental trees proposed also to be removed. The borough tree officer previously advised the loss of these trees is acceptable subject to replacement planting. On balance the development is in accordance with Policy 47.ES of the EBLP Review.
164. A Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) has been completed by the Council assessing the impact of the development on the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area/RAMSAR/Site of Special Scientific Interest. The HRA conclude that subject to securing funds to assist with the implementation of the Solent Disturbance Mitigation Projects (SDMP),
that there would be no significant effect as a result of recreational disturbance pressure on the SPA/RAMSAR/SSSI. Natural England is of the same opinion. The applicant has agreed to the principle of securing contributions to the SDMP as part of the planning obligation, which subject to completion will mitigate the impact of the development and accord with submitted policy S12 and DM9 and provisions of the NPPF.
165. In accordance with the requirements of saved policy 25.NC and the NPPF (para 118) the biodiversity value of the application site can be improved via a Landscape & Biodiversity Management Strategy whilst during the construction process an Environmental Construction Management Plan would minimise impact of works on the site. With planning conditions recommended securing the proposed ecological mitigation measures, in respect to biodiversity enhancements the development is considered to accord with policies 25.NC and 26.NC of the adopted Local Plan and DM9 of the emerging Local Plan.
Drainage and flood risk
166. The application site lies within Flood Zone 1 which is considered to have a low risk of flooding and the submitted Flood Risk Assessment demonstrates that the development would not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere, subject to the implementation and management of a comprehensive Sustainable Urban Drainage System. This includes an attenuation pond in the public open space to the northwest, permeable paving and swales or French drains within public areas as well as soakaways which combined affords treatment to surface water. A strategy is provided within the FRA and full details of drainage are also provided, mirroring that proposed for the 2016 scheme. Whilst Southern Water raises no objection, HCC as Lead Local Water Flood Authority have raised a holding objection pending clarification on a number of points. Additional information has been provided in response to their comments.
167. Southern Water has indicated that there is insufficient capacity in the foul sewer network in this area to accommodate the entire development. However, it is recognised that there is some spare capacity enabling Southern Water to agree that the first 50 units can connect in to the current system whilst the design and improvements for the entire development are brought forward. The Flood Risk Assessment identifies using a pumping station within their site to discharge foul drainage by gravity to the public sewer beneath Mallards Road which requires approximately 240m length of new off-site foul drainage. Further upgrades would be required to the existing downstream public foul sewer network which would be delivered by Southern Water. With these works, the development accords with saved policy 45.ES and emerging policy DM5.
Layout, design and residential amenity
168. NPPF highlights the importance and continued emphasis that the government places on good design. Paragraph 17 states that planning should always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of the land and buildings. Paragraph 56 goes on to state
that the Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment and that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, and should contribute positively to making places better for people.
169. The layout remains unaltered by the revised access apart from the inclusion of tree lined pedestrian link in place of the previously approved access. Based on the site layout, which includes approximately 1ha of public open space, the proposed development of 166 units equates to a density of approximately 27 dwellings per hectare, which is considered appropriate in this particular urban edge location.
170. The proposed layout is quite traditional in its form, with the proposed housing being designed to address the road, creating active frontages and a sense of enclosure to the new streets, together with overlooking of the open space areas. To a degree the layout has been influenced by its constraints including the need for development to front Hamble Lane, face outwards to the countryside, be a minimum of 15m from the SINC on the western boundary and avoid development within the pipeline easement that passes diagonally through the site. Character areas have been created based around the areas the dwellings would abut – Hamble Lane, the green edges, the linear park (easement corridor) and the central neighbourhood, with different materials and boundary treatment proposed to strengthen the theme of each of these areas and offering a sense of place and legibility.
171. The POS is delivered along the western boundary thereby not only buffering the woodland but providing a linear area that feeds in to the Cunningham Gardens POS, with footpath links to be provided between the two areas of POS. A tree lined small pocket park is proposed at the entrance to the site which with high quality landscaping will provide additional amenity for the apartments overlooking it and an attractive feature when entering the site.
172. Through a mix of dwellings sizes, including the provision of 3no. bungalows, visual interest is provided through scale, design and detailing. Careful attention has also been paid to the treatment of side elevations of the proposed units where these will be visible within the street scene and natural surveillance to the public realm. The detailed layout and design of the dwellings ensure that the privacy and outlook of both existing and future residents would be respected and the relevant criteria of the Quality Places SPD and Local Plan policies are met. The private amenity space for all the proposed dwellings meets our minimum standards, whilst the majority of the apartments are proposed with private balconies.
173. The comments raised by the Head of Housing on the wheel chair accessible units are noted and the applicant is considering them.
174. All of the dwellings meet the adopted parking standards apart from two flats over garages, whilst the sharing of unallocated spaces for the apartments is acceptable and to standard. Bin and cycle storage is provided for all the properties and collection points are proposed where dwellings are located off an adopted highway.
Sustainability measures
175. The application is accompanied by a sustainability statement which includes a pro-forma stating how the development could meet the energy and water of code level 4, which the borough’s sustainability officer raises no objection to.
176. The applicant has advised that the development will accord with the requirements of emerging policy DM2 in that BREEAM Communities 'excellent' would be achieved. Further evidence in the form a pre-assessment certificate has been provided establishing how this would be achieved. The principles of development are considered to comply with the aims of Saved Policy 34.ES of the adopted Local Plan and the adopted SPD on Environmentally Sustainable Development.
Economic Sustainability
177. In regards to the economic role of development, the NPPF requires “sufficient land of the right type to be available in the right places to build a strong, responsive and competitive economy “.
178. The construction industry is key to economic sustainability and the proposed development of 166 dwellings would deliver local employment, whilst the new population would support local businesses. The applicant has submitted an economic appraisal stating the development would generate 58 temporary construction jobs per year on average during the construction phase, or 23 FTE construction jobs. In addition a further 87 jobs could be supported per year of construction by the proposed development throughout the UK economy. It also forecasts the net residential expenditure of the development once occupied, would generate up to an additional 23 FTE jobs in the local area.
179. The proposals would align with the Council’s strategic priority of increasing prosperity to the Borough. A New Homes Bonus would also be received for the delivery of new homes, whilst contributions towards local community infrastructure can also be deemed economic benefits attributed to the scheme. These are all benefits to the economic dimension of sustainable development and are all considered benefits in the planning balance. Overall the proposals are considered to be economically sustainable.
Social Sustainability
180. In accordance with saved policy 190.IN of the local plan development is only to be permitted where adequate services and infrastructure are available or suitable arrangements can be made for their provision. Where facilities exist but will need to be enhanced to meet the needs of the development, contributions are sought towards provision and improvement of infrastructure. A development should also offer a mix of house types and tenures to ensure a
balanced and thriving community. To date the applicant has not submitted a draft s106 and so the policy requirements have not been met.
Housing mix, deliverability, affordable housing and infrastructure
181. The application proposes a range of house types, sizes and tenures, including 40% affordable housing (including 8no. Starter Homes), which exceeds the 35% provision sought by Saved Policy 74.H of the adopted Local Plan and Policy DM28 of the Submitted Local Plan. The Council’s adopted Affordable Housing SPD is a material consideration, as is the NPPF which aspires to “deliver a wide choice of high quality homes in inclusive and mixed communities to meet the needs of different people”.
182. The Head of Housing Services supports the principle of delivering affordable housing application, with the affordable dwellings being pepper-potted across the site. If secured through a planning obligation, the delivery of affordable housing is a benefit of the proposed scheme.
Education
183. In terms of education, the capacity of local schools has been considered in assessing the proposed development and infrastructure requirements, and it is noted that the potential impact on schools has been a particular concern raised by local residents.
184. Hampshire County Council Children’s Services Department advised there is no spare capacity at local primary and secondary schools to accommodate this development and that contributions are to be sought to deliver extensions or improvements to existing Bursledon Infants / Junior School and Hamble Community School. Contributions are sought in line with that secured on the 2016 scheme.
Health Provision
185. A number of letters of objections have been received to the development on grounds of inadequate primary care facilities within the immediate area. Numerous objectors have highlighted a long wait for non-urgent appointments, The NHS West Clinical Commission Group has confirmed patients are likely to gravitate to the surgery at the Lowford Centre where there is sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the occupants of the development, as such no contribution is sought for extensions to existing medical facilities.
Community facilities
186. The applicants are also required to make provision for increased capacity at community buildings, playing fields, areas of off-site public open space etc. within the local area, to meet the increased demand for these facilities arising from the proposed development.
187. The proposal includes reasonable areas of open space meeting the on-site requirements for a development of this size, the majority of which is located along the western boundary and links with the existing Cunningham Gardens open space. To offer a more comprehensive equipped play area, contributions are sought to improve the existing facilities to the north rather than provide a further small areas of play within the development. Contributions are to be secured through the s106 agreement to provide and maintain the open space, play areas and community facilities in accordance with CIL regulations, the relevant adopted policies and the adopted SPD on Planning Obligations.
Planning Obligations/development benefits
188. In accordance with the guidance contained within the NPPF, Saved Policies 74.H, 101.T, 147.OS and 191.IN of the adopted Eastleigh Borough Local Plan Review (2001-2011), Policies DM32 and DM37 of the Revised Draft Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2011-2029, the Council’s ‘Planning Obligations’ SPD and the requirements of Regulation 122 and 123 of the Community Infrastructure Regulations, there is a requirement for developers’ contributions to ensure on and off-site provision for facilities and infrastructure made necessary by the development, or to mitigate against any increased need/pressure on existing facilities. This is in addition to the requisite on-site provision of affordable housing.
189. The applicant has agreed to mirror the developer contributions previously secured, which are:
Off-site public open space contributions On-site public open space/play provision and maintenance On-site footway link improvements 40% on-site affordable housing including 5% Starter Homes (8no.) Public art provision Travel plan provision, bond and monitoring Transport infrastructure contributions Junction improvements at the Portsmouth Road / Hamble Lane junction. Community Infrastructure Air Quality Monitoring and Management BREEAM Communities post occupancy evaluation assessment. Unallocated parking spaces not to be sold to individual householders Street tree maintenance
190. The projects and measures identified above are considered to comply with the 3 tests set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy 2010, in that the monies will go towards the projects which are directly related to the development, and are fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development. The contributions would be index-linked to ensure the contributions rise in line with the costs of providing the identified projects/measures. The obligations sought are necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms and to meet the needs generated by the new residents and the potential impact on existing services and facilities.
Conclusion
191. The starting point when determining this application is the development plan. Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states : “If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise”. Saved policy 1.CO of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan (2001-2011) remains wholly relevant and up to date with the NPPF, and does not support housing development within the countryside. As such the development is contrary to the development.
192. Planning permission was granted in 2016 for 166 dwellings on this site in the same layout, design and form as that currently proposed, apart from the point of access. This is a significant material consideration.
193. The Council also recognises that it cannot currently demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing and the presumption in favour of sustainable development test within paragraph 14 of the NPPF is thus triggered, which has the objective of delivering appropriate new housing in the short term to meet urgent housing needs. The assessment of whether proposed development is sustainable requires the elements of economic, social and environmentally sustainability to be assessed in terms of their benefits and harms.
194. It is noted that the proposed development would give rise to significant benefits, particularly in terms of housing provision, including 66 units of affordable housing. In addition there would be the economic benefits due to construction employment, an increase in local population, payment of a New Homes Bonus and financial contributions secured via a S106 planning obligation. There would also be social benefits of an increase in public open space and contributions towards education infrastructure. The site abuts the urban edge and is within walking distance of Lowford local centre and community facilities, shops and bus services, whilst slightly further afield are schools and other facilities. There would also be some improvement to the biodiversity value of the site including managed habitat for reptiles and bats. Improvements to the Portsmouth Road / Hamble Lane junction would be delivered addressing a long term aspiration of the Borough and County Council. Thus the development can demonstrate that it would be economically, socially and environmentally sustainable, and indeed the BREEAM Communities framework has been applied for “excellent” standard to ensure the principles of sustainable development are embedded into every step of the process.
195. Some of the improvements proposed simply mitigate the impact of the development and deliver no net gain. The repositioning of the access would benefit those residents living on Hamble Lane but would have an impact, albeit minimal, on the residents of Cunningham Gardens.
196. In the planning balance, and having regard to all the material considerations, the recommendation is that the impacts the development can be mitigated whilst there are a number of benefits that this scheme would deliver. As such, the application is recommended for permission subject to completion of a section 106 Legal Agreement.
