BISHOPSTOKE, FAIR OAK & HORTON HEATH Wednesday 29 March 2017Case Officer Andy Grandfield

SITE: Fir Tree Farm and Victoria Farmhouse Firtree Lane Horton Heath Eastleigh Hampshire SO50 7DF

Ref. O/16/79354 Received: 03/10/2016 (27/10/2016)

APPLICANT: Mr Phil Farminer

PROPOSAL: Outline application: Construction of up to 450 dwellings with new road and access onto Fir Tree Lane and Allington Lane. With associated highway modifications, infrastructure, public open space, landscaping and drainage. Detailed matter for consideration-access. The proposal effects the setting of a Listed Building, effects a Public Right of Way and is subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment. The development is contrary to the Development Plan

AMENDMENTS: 25 January 2017

RECOMMENDATION:

GRANT OUTLINE PERMISSION

CONDITIONS AND REASONS:

(1) The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the following plans numbered: 12.09, 15024 - P.00 005 Rev F, 15024-P.00.026 D, 15024-P.00.027 D, 15024 - P.00.028 D, 15024-P.00.029 C, 15024-P.00.030 C, 15024-P.00.031 C, 15024-P.00.032, 15024-P.00.033 C, 15024-P.00.034, 15024-P.00.038, 15024-P.00.039, 15024-P.00.040 A, 15024-P.00.041 A, 15024-P.00.042 A, 15024-P.00.043 A, 15024-P.00.044 A, 15024-P.00.045 A, 15024-P.00.047 A, 15024-P.00.056, 2563-LA-04 Rev A, 2563-LA-05 Rev A, TB10268-GA-018F, ITB10268-GA-019 C, ITB10268-GA-023 A, ITB10268-GA-025 A, ITB10268-GA-026 C, ITB10268-GA-028 B, ITB10268-GA-044 A, ITB10268-GA-045 B, ITB10268-GA-051 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

(2) The permission hereby granted is an outline permission and an application

for the approval by the Local Planning Authority of the following reserved matters (for at least the first phase of development) must be made no later than the expiration of two years beginning with the date of this permission:

a) layoutb) scalec) appearanced) landscaping of the siteThe development shall not commence until the above has been approved and shall accord with the approved details. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail, encourage delivery and comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)

(3) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of

1 year from the date of the approval of the first Reserved Matters Application. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail, encourage delivery and comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)

(4) Prior to the approval of the first reserved matters application, a detailed

design code for the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The detailed design code shall demonstrate how the objectives of the Design and Access Statement will be met, and shall take account of the drawings referred to in Condition 1 above. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved design code unless otherwise agreed, in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The design code shall include the following :

a) principles for determining quality, colour and texture of external materials and facing finishes for roofing and walls of buildings and structures including opportunities for using locally sourced, low embodied carbon and recycled construction materials;b) sustainable design and construction, in order to achieve a BREEAM Communities 'excellent' standard for the whole development and the equivalent of Code for Sustainable Homes Level 4 for energy and water for residential propertiesc) built form strategies to include density and massing, street grain and permeability, street enclosure and active frontages and relationships between buildings;d) principles for hard and soft landscaping including the inclusion of existing important trees and hedgerowse) structures including street lighting, floodlighting and boundary treatments and play equipmentf) design of the public realm, including layout and design of squares, areas of public open space and areas for play. g) Open space needs including sustainable drainageh) Conservation of ecological interestsi) A strategy for the hierarchy of streets and spacesj) On and off-street residential vehicle parking and loading areask) Cycle parking and storagel) Waste and recycling bin storage and collection

m) Means to discourage casual parking and encourage parking only in designated areasn) Integration of strategic utility requirements, landscape and street tree planting and highway design and planting of parking areaso) refuse requirements.Reason: To ensure a comprehensive approach to high quality design across the site.

(5) Plans and particulars showing the proposals for all the following aspects

for each phase of development in accordance with the Design Code approved pursuant to condition 5 (where applicable) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before that phase of the development is commenced. The development must then accord with these approved details for that phase:(a) The provision to be made for street lighting and/or external lighting.(b) Details of rainwater goods.(c) Details and location of meter boxes.(d) Colours and materials for fascias and soffits.(e) Balcony details.(f) Details of chimneys.(g) Proposed ground levels and relationship to existing levels both within the site and on immediately adjoining land.(h) The alignment, height, design and materials of all walls, fences and other means of enclosure.(i) The ground floor levels above ordnance datum of all buildings.(j) The provision of street trees.(k) Any green roofs.(l) The provision to be made for the storage of refuse.The development shall not be occupied until the approved details have been fully implemented, unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.Reason: In order that these matters may be considered by the Local Planning Authority.

(6) No residential development shall commence until details and samples of

all external facing and roofing materials in respect of buildings within each phase of development are submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The development of that phase must then accord with these approved details. Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of any building is satisfactory.

(7) A detailed strategy for the proposed disposal of foul water (including a

programme for implementation) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of the development hereby permitted. Each phase of the development must demonstrate compliance with this strategy and the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved strategy and details. Reason: To ensure satisfactory provision of foul and surface water drainage.

(8) No development shall take place until a surface water drainage scheme for the site, conforming to that detailed within Page 18 and Figure 7.3 of the Flood Risk Assessment January 2017 and based on naturalised sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage strategy should demonstrate the surface water run-off generated up to and including the 100 year critical storm, including an allowance for climate change, will not exceed the run-off from the undeveloped site following the corresponding rainfall event. Each phase of the development must demonstrate compliance with this strategy and the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved strategy and details. Those details shall include:

(i) information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and the measures taken to prevent pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters (ii) 3 naturalised filtration processes within the treatment train to ensure no pollutants leave the site; maintenance of runoff at greenfield rates; (iii) a timetable for its implementation; and(iiii) a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker, or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the sustainable urban drainage scheme throughout its lifetime.The system shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to improve and protect water quality, improve habitat and amenity, and ensure future maintenance.

(9) No development shall take place until a landscape management strategy,

including long-term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscaped areas (except privately owned domestic gardens), has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Each phase of the development must demonstrate compliance with this strategy through the submission of a landscape management plan and the development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved strategy and details.The strategy and plan shall include the following elements: • detail extent and type of new planting (NB planting to be of native species)• details of maintenance regimes• details of any new habitat created on site• details of any the Landscape features of new wetlands/SUDs created on site and their future management• details of treatment of site boundaries and/or buffers around water bodies

• details of management responsibilities.

Reason: This condition is necessary to ensure the protection of wildlife and supporting habitat found on the site and to secure opportunities for the improvement of wildlife corridors and wider enhancement of the nature conservation value of the site in line with national planning policy.

(10) No later than submission of the first Reserved Matters application a site

wide green infrastructure strategy should be submitted detailing the extent and nature of the natural habitat, open space and corridors within the network. The network should incorporate all open space within the development and extend into the urban area via wildlife corridors and other enhancements. The strategy should be overarching, referencing all the species specific strategies and providing details relating to overall habitat connectivity within the network, any requirements above that provided for mitigation and details of aftercare, maintenance and management responsibilities. The final green infrastructure should be multifunctional and provide gains for wildlife and the human population in line with national policy. Reason: To ensure provision of a fully connected, multifunctional green infrastructure that can be access by the population and nature

(11) Prior to commencement of development, an updated badger survey will

be undertaken and submitted to Eastleigh Borough Council for approval with each Reserved Matters Application and prior to the commencement of development within each phase. If active setts or foraging signs are discovered setts, foraging corridors should be protected or mitigated within the development. If setts require closure a licence will be obtained from Natural England. Reason To protect badgers from harm

(12) No later than the submission of the first reserved matters application, an

overarching bat mitigation strategy will be submitted detailing:

• A methodology for assessing and a mitigation plan for all roosts to be lost• Protection measures to ensure no impact on the retained or replacement roosts• With each Reserved Matters Application, a Hedgerow plan incorporating the location and extent of mitigation for fragmentation and habitat loss and additional hedgerow habitat within the residential area for that phase (12) No later than the submission of the first reserved matters application, an overarching bat mitigation strategy will be submitted detailing:

• A methodology for assessing and a mitigation plan for all roosts to be lost• Protection measures to ensure no impact on the retained or replacement roosts• With each Reserved Matters Application, a Hedgerow plan incorporating the location and extent of mitigation for fragmentation and

habitat loss and additional hedgerow habitat within the residential area for that phase (and the same for all subsequent phases thereafter). • With each Reserved Matters Application, a plan of the locations of bat boxes on 50% of housing or apartments within the phase (and the same for all subsequent phases thereafter)• The extent and location of at a network of dark corridors across the site to provide prime bat foraging habitat• With each Reserved Matters Application, a lighting plan for the phase (and the same for all subsequent phases thereafter) with the aim of light spill not exceeding 1 lux in areas used by bat species. • A monitoring plan to monitor the roosts and foraging activity once the site each phase of the development is operational.

With each reserved matters application thereafter a statement on how the mitigation principles of the overarching bat mitigation strategy have been secured shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. Each phase shall accord with these approved details.

Reason: To ensure no impact on the bat population roosting and foraging within the site

(13) All buildings and trees possessing bat roosts or potential that will be

impacted directly or indirectly by the development during the construction or operational phases will be resurveyed before the first reserved matters to ascertain the location of additional roosts and provide information for the bat mitigation strategy. If further roosts are found then appropriate mitigation, in accordance with an agreed methodology with the local planning authority, will be provided for all roosts to be lost or indirectly impacted. Reason: To ensure roosting bats are protected from harm and appropriate mitigation is provided.

(14) No development shall take place until a species protection plan detailing

the protection and/or mitigation of damage to populations and habitats of otter and water vole during construction works and once the development is complete is submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development must accord with the species protection plan and in accordance with a timetable for implementation as approved. Reason: To protect the otter and water vole and its habitat within and adjacent to the development site.

(15) A great crested newt mitigation, management and monitoring strategy,

will be submitted before any works commences. The strategy should conform to the overarching North Eastleigh Great Crested Newt Strategy and incorporate(i) Habitat creation methodology and the extent of the habitat to be provided(ii) Measures to repair habitat fragmentation brought about by the development (iii) A management plan detailing short medium and long term management with appropriate review periods

(iv) A post development monitoring schedule of terrestrial habitat

Reason: To ensure the protection of great crested newts: (16) No development until a detailed method statement for the removal of

Himalayan Balsam on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The method statement shall include proposed measures that will be used to prevent the spread of Himalayan Balsam during any operations e.g. mowing, strimming or soil movement. Development shall proceed in accordance with the approved method statement.Reason: To protect the River Itchen SAC and prevent the spread of Indian and Himalayan Balsam which are invasive species.

(17) Before development commences a programme of archaeological

evaluation for the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. It shall detail:(i) Submission of a Written Scheme of Investigation detailing an overarching programme of archaeological assessment. The agreed Written Scheme shall be implemented on a phase-by-phase basis prior to the commencement of the relevant phase.(ii) The implementation of the programme of archaeological mitigation of impact in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation on a phase by phase basis(iii) On completion of archaeological fieldwork within each phase 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.

The development must accord with these approved details. Reason: To assess and mitigate the impact of the development on any archaeological deposits and to contribute to our knowledge and understanding of our past.

(18) Prior to the commencement of the phase of development immediately

south of the watercourse passing through the site, details of the protection, upgrading and improvements to the Public Right of Way (Fair Oak and Horton Heath Footpath 11) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The development must accord with these approved details. Reason: In the interest of public safety, amenity and accessibility.

(19) As part of each reserved matters application a detailed Arboricultural

Impact Assessment and Method Statement (including a programme for implementation) in accordance with British Standards Institution Code of practice for trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations British Standard BS 5837:2012 shall be submitted for each phase of the development and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Each phase of the development shall then accord with the details of protective fencing ground protection and other measures set

out in each approved Method Statement. Reason: To protect trees both on and adjacent to the site

(20) No development related works 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 for each phase of the development.Work cannot commence until the Local Planning Authority officer has inspected and approved the proposed tree protection. Once approved no access by vehicles or placement of goods, chemicals, fuels, soil or other materials shall take place within 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. This tree condition may only be fully discharged on completion of the development within each relevant phase subject to satisfactory written evidence of monthly monitoring and compliance by the pre-appointed tree specialist during construction. Reason: To retain and protect the existing trees which form an important part of the amenity of the locality.

(21) No trees or hedgerows shall be removed from the site without the prior

written consent of the Local Planning Authority, other than those tree and hedgerow works hereby permitted for the approved access works. Reason: To retain and protect the existing trees and hedgerows which form an important part of the landscape amenity and heritage of the locality.

(22) 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:

(a) 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 in accordance with BS10175:2011+A1 2013 and BS8576:2013, and, unless otherwise agreed with the Local Planning Authority;(b) A detailed site specific scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to avoid the risk from contaminants and/or gases when 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. 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

(23) The development within each relevant phase 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 the above condition 22(b) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of the above condition 22(b)

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 agreed in writing with the local planning authority such verification shall comply with the guidance contained in CLR11 and EA guidance for the safe development of housing on land affected by contamination - R&D Publication 66:2008. Typically such a report would comprise:- (a) A description of the site and its background, and summary of relevant site information(b) A description of the remediation objectives and redial works carried out (c) Verification data including - sample locations/ analytical results, as built drawings of the implemented scheme, photographs of the remediation works in progress, etc. (d) 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 22(b).

Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme under Condition 2322(iii). Reason: To minimise the risks of pollution and to ensure the site is satisfactorily decontaminated.

(24) With each reserved matters application, the applicant shall submit a noise

report that demonstrates that the impacts of noise from road traffic and other sources identified at the outline application stage affecting the site have been considered. This assessment must give due consideration to external and internal layout as well as orientation of residential dwellings and gardens, in order to minimise noise impacts. The report shall include a scheme of mitigation measures for protecting that phase of development from noise and vibration that must be submitted for approval by the Local Planning Authority. All works which form part of the approved scheme must be not be varied and must be completed before any of the permitted dwellings within that phase is occupied (unless agreed by the Local Planning Authority). Reason: To protect residential amenity.

(25) Where acceptable noise standards cannot be met with open windows,

alternative ventilation, (rapid ventilation or whole house ventilation to ensure temperature control), will be required. A detailed ventilation scheme must be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority (LPA). All works relating to each property, which form part of the scheme approved by the LPA must be completed before each permitted dwellings is occupied (unless agreed by the Local Planning Authority). The scheme must be fully implemented, unless varied with written permission of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation. Reason: In the interests of residential amenity.

(26) Before development of each phase commences, details of all crime

prevention measures in respect of that phase must be submitted to and

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development of that phase shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interest of crime prevention.

(27) Before each phase of development commences, a Construction and

Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), a construction phase public communication strategy and a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) in respect of that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CEMP and CTMP must consider the timing and phasing of the works and lorry routing with a specific reference to the movement of traffic, whilst the CEMP must also consider the location of temporary site buildings and plant and material storage areas, the arrangement for construction deliveries, dust, vibration, noise, construction traffic movements, lorry routing and temporary construction car parking both on and off-site, temporary lighting , mud on the road, site security, a scheme for controlling noise and vibration from demolition and construction activities (to include piling); the protection of pedestrian routes during construction, storage of and collection of waste, control and the quality of surface water runoff with three forms of filtration, watercourse crossings and any proposed diversions (temporary or permanent), a map or plan showing habitat areas to be specifically protected (identified in the ecological report) during the works and any necessary mitigation for protected species and the persons/bodies responsible for particular activities associated with the method statement. The construction of each phase must then be carried out in accordance with the agreed plan for that phase. Reason: In the interests of amenity, highway safety and protection of ecological features.

(28) Prior to the occupation of any building within each individual phase of the

development [or, in accordance with a timetable to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority], as built stage SAP data and as built stage water calculator confirming energy efficiency and the predicted internal mains water consumption to achieve in respect of energy efficiency, a standard of a 19% improvement of dwelling emission rate over the target emission rate as set in the 2013 Building Regulations in respect of water consumption, a maximum predicted internal mains water consumption of 105 litres/person/day shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The development shall accord with these approved details. Reason: To support a comprehensive approach to high quality design across the site; in line with the guidance set out in the Government’s Ministerial Statement of 25 March 2015 which states that Local Planning Authorities should, from the date of its publication, take into account the government’s intentions in the statement and not set conditions with requirements above a Code level 4 equivalent

(29) Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development hereby

approved (or in accordance with a timetable to be agreed in writing with the local planning authority) other than for the access works an interim BREEAM Communities certificate demonstrating how an Excellent level is

to be achieved shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority in respect of that phase. Reason: To demonstrate the required compliance with BREEAM Communities Excellent standard.

(30) Prior to first occupation of a dwelling within each phase of the

development (or at a later dated as agreed with the local planning authority) a BREEAM Communities Final Certificate confirming Excellent standard for that phase has been achieved shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To deliver sustainable development to a high standard

(31) Prior to the commencement of each phase of development a scheme of

work detailing the extent and type of piling proposed within that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Each phase of development shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To protect the amenity of occupiers of adjoining residential properties

(32) Before each phase of development is commenced a noise and vibration

assessment shall be carried out to assess the impact of construction noise on noise sensitive development within or adjacent that phase, and a report of its findings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The report shall include a programme for implementation and identify a scheme of any mitigation measures that are considered necessary for protecting noise sensitive uses from noise and vibration. The assessment should have due regard to the advice and guidance contained in British Standards Institution Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites British Standard BS 5228-1:2009 A1:2014 , and BS 5228-2:2009 A1:2014 Noise And Vibration Control On Construction And Open Sites. Each phase of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To protect noise sensitive development from unacceptable levels of noise.

(33) 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.

(34) Prior to the commencement of each phase of the approved works, details

of paving and construction within the root zones of retained trees to be retained in accordance with the approved plans and particulars in respect of that phase must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall be in accordance with the British Standards Institution Code of practice for trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations British Standard BS 5837:2012 . The development of each phase must not be carried out

otherwise than in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To conserve the trees adjacent to and within the proposed development.

(35) Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, details of a

technology and communication strategy for the provision of broadband, fibre optic or other audio visual technology within that phase 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 within that phase 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.

(36) Prior to the commencement of each phase of development, details of 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 of street lighting and the method of disposing of surface water and details of the programme of implementation for the making up of the roads and footways must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Each phase of 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.

(37) No development within each phase shall start until the following details

have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in respect of that phase:

a) width, alignment, gradient, sight lines and type of construction surface and material proposed for any roads footpaths, cycleways and accesses.

The relevant phase shall not be occupied until the approved details have been fully implemented, unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To limit the impact the development has on the locality and to ensure the roads are built to an adoptable standard.

(38) Prior to the commencement of development, a reptile translocation and

habitat retention creation, management and monitoring strategy will be submitted to and approved by Eastleigh Borough Council. The strategy shall include - An updated reptile survey

- Habitat creation methodology - Translocation methodology

- Short, medium and long term management of the mitigation land - A post development monitoring schedule detailing frequency and an

obligation to provide data to the local authority, Reason: To ensure the protection of reptile species

(39) No later than submission of the first reserved matters application a

Habitat Creation Mitigation, Management and Monitoring Plan

(HCMMMP) will be submitted to the local planning authority for approval detailing - Methods by which habitat is to be created

- The short medium and long term management of the entire green infrastructure

- Monitoring measure to ensure the long term health of the habitats createdEach subsequent reserved matters application shall be supported by a statement demonstrating how the HCMMMP has been addressed within its layout and landscaping details. The development must be built in accordance with these approved details. Reason: To ensure the ecological mitigation and the green infrastructure are delivered in the short medium and long term

(40) The roads and footways within each phase must be laid out and made up

in accordance with the specification, programme and details for that phase 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 unless otherwise agreed by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the roads are constructed to a standard which will enable them to be taken over as publicly maintainable highways.

(41) No burning of materials shall take place during the demolition,

construction and fitting out process. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties.

(42) No trenches for services or drains shall be sited within the crown spread

of any trees that are to be retained on site. Reason: To protect the health and stability of the trees to be retained on site.

(43) No construction or demolition work shall take place except between 0800

hours to 1800 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 hours to 1300 hours on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby dwellings.

Note to Applicant: Eastleigh Borough Council has taken all environmental

information including the Environmental Statement and the Non-Technical Summary dated and the Addendum to the Environmental Statement and the Non-Technical Summary dated October 2016 and supporting Transport Assessment and its addendum to the Environmental Statement into consideration in reaching this decision.

Note to Applicant: In dealing with the application, Eastleigh Borough Council has in accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework worked with the applicant in a positive and

proactive manner. Detailed advice has been made available in the form of planning policy, Supplementary Planning Documents and other informal advice as well as offering a full pre-application advice service and entering into a planning performance agreement. Solutions to challengeshave been found and negotiation has overcome issues in order to achieve a positive outcome and to ensure the proposal has been dealt with in a timely manner.

Note to Applicant: The illustrative layout plans provided are for illustrative purposes only and the Council are not wholly supportive of the design concept illustrated. Future reserved matters will be reviewed against the adopted supplementary planning documents that are applicable at that time including the Quality Places SPD and Residential Parking SPD.

Note to Applicant: The applicant / developer should enter into a formal agreement with Southern Water to provide the necessary sewerage infrastructure required to service this development. Please contact Southern Water, Sparrowgrove House, Sparrowgrove, Otterbourne, Hampshire SO21 2SW (44) or www.southernwater.co.u

Subject to securing a s106 legal agreement for on and off-site mitigation, community benefits and the enhancements as detailed within the committee report.

Report:

1. This application has been referred to Committee because it is a major development which is contrary to the Development Plan, affects a public right of way and is controversial.

The site and its surroundings

2. The site is located to the west of Horton Heath and south of Fair Oak and comprises primarily of agricultural land with associated farm buildings and two residential properties and outbuildings. Made up of four clear parcels of land , the site is defined by Victoria House and its outbuildings and field to the south of Fir Tree Lane. To the north of the lane is Fir Tree Farm with associated agricultural buildings, yard and small fields whilst a larger grazing field forms the eastern boundary of the site. A watercourse passes through the centre of the site on an east – west axis north of which is the fourth parcel of land, a large grazed field leading to the northern boundary of the site application site. The ground generally falls towards the watercourse from the north and south with levels falling by up to 16m.

3. The site is designated as countryside and does not fall within a local or strategic gap either within the adopted of the submitted Local Plans. The site measures approximately 28 ha in size.

4. The rural lane of Fir Tree Lane is single track in part with passing points bound by hedging which dissects the site, linking Allington Lane with Burnetts Lane. The western boundary of the development area abuts Allington Lane beyond which are a handful of residential properties, businesses and land used for a car boot site. Farmland lies to the east and south, which forms part of the approved development on the draft allocated site Chalcroft Farm and West of Horton Heath (WE1). Northeast is Quobleigh Wood, a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) and a habitat for protected species within Quobleigh Pond. A small watercourse, a tributary to the River Itchen, flows this woodland and across the site.

5. To the north is a residential property (Fair Oak Lodge) set within large ground beyond which is a development site at St Swithun Wells Church on which 72 dwellings were approved at appeal in November 2014 (O/13/72471).

6. In the centre of the application site, but outside of the development area, is the Grade II Listed Fir Tree Farmhouse and its extensive grounds, whilst on the eastern boundary, at the junction of Fir Tree Lane and Allington Lane is a modest 1950s farmhouse with gardens and pond. This also falls outside of the application site boundary.

7. The site is crossed by a designated public right of way (Footpath 11) which runs immediately south of Quobleigh Woods connecting to a network of footpaths in both a north/south direction and east/west.

8. The boundaries of the application comprise of mix of mature trees and hedging, conifer hedging along the southwest boundary with Moon Vista and woodland within the centre of the site along the stream. Adjacent to the stream is pond and the wetland areas.

Description of application

9. This is an outline planning application which seeks an approval “in principle” for residential development of up to 450 dwellings (12 ha), a new roundabout on a realigned Allington Lane with a further access on to Fir Tree Lane and approximately 16ha of public open space (POS) for formal/informal recreation and ecological mitigation. The new access road would join in to the approved road passing through the West of Horton Heath scheme to a new roundabout on Burnetts Lane and new link road through to Bubb Lane. New public rights of way, footpaths and cycleways would be provided on site with a new cycleway/footpath along Allington Lane to Dean Road also proposed.

10. The only matters for formal consideration at this stage are as follows:-

Whether the proposed land uses are acceptable in principle in this location;

Whether the proposed amount of development is appropriate; Whether the proposed vehicular access and roundabout are

acceptable.

11. All other matters of detail, such as the detailed layout, appearance, design and landscaping are not for detailed consideration at this stage.

12. In accordance with the relevant Regulations, this application is supported by an Environmental Statement Addendum (ESA), supplementing the West of Horton Heath Environmental Statement (WHH ES), with an assessment of the additional 450-unit development and minor changes to the WHH ES parameter plans, the conclusions of which are either combined where appropriate with those of the original assessment, or replace the WHH ES conclusions, to reach an overall conclusion for the overall development, comprising up to 1,400 dwellings in total.

13. This outline planning application is supported by the following plans and documents;

Planning Application Form and Certificates Location Plan (Red Line Plan) Existing Site Survey Design and Access Statement including illustrative master plan Parameter Plans: - Access, Boundary, Density, Heights,

Hydrology, Land Use, Landscape and Phasing Transport Assessment with additional technical notes Flood Risk Assessment Planning and Affordable Housing Statement Statement of Community Involvement Arboricultural Report Sustainability Statement Environmental Statement Non-Technical Summary Environmental Statement Addendum and associated

Appendices which include - Traffic & Transport (including draft junction designs), Landscape and Visual Assessment, Water Environment (Hydrology and Flood Risk), Ecology, Noise, Air Quality, Built Heritage, Ground Conditions, Socio-Economic.

Illustrative layout plans to demonstrate densities within residential blocks.

Public Open Space land use plan. Illustrative framework landscape strategy

14. The illustrative masterplan included within the Design and Access Statement (DAS) responds to the constraints and opportunities within this site. The key design principles are:

Developable areas to the south of the woodland and watercourse to assist with its containment and provide a clear urban edge

A hierarchy of roads, public and private space and strong green links through and around the boundaries of the development.

Traditional perimeter block residential developments with houses facing the street public areas.

Most properties being two storey with an element of three storey in the south east corner and key landmark buildings.

Multifunctional green infrastructure and public open space Retention of trees and hedges on site boundaries and within the

site, with new hedgerow planting along the spine road and enhanced wildlife corridors and habitats.

Sustainable drainage Car parking within private drives, courtyards or small parking areas

with visitors parking distributed across the site Footpaths and cycleway links provided on an off site

15. The scheme has been submitted to assist in the delivery of the road link from the WE 1 site through to Allington Lane avoiding the need to upgrades to Fir Tree Lane. In addition, the scheme would offer financial support to the other key pieces of infrastructure proposed under WE1 including the school, community centre and local centre. It is anticipated combined both sites would take approximately 10 years in total to develop out once development commences. Development would be phased and linked to the WE1 site to deliver a sustainable new community to the west and north west of Horton Heath.

16. This is a Schedule 2 EIA development and significantly above the guidance thresholds advised by the NPPG. The proposal has been screened under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England) Regulations 2011 with the conclusion that it needs an Environmental Statement and subsequent Environmental Impact Assessment, which has been undertaken as part of the environmental considerations of the application

17. The development has been screened under the Habitats Regulations and it has been established through appropriate mitigation and conditions to control impacts are included within the current submission there will not be any significant likely impacts on any European Designated sites which would occur as a result of the development.

Relevant planning history

18. Land at Chalcroft and West of Horton Heath (WE1) is a 105ha site to the southeast and south that has a resolution from June 2015 to grant outline approval for 950 dwellings, land for a 3 form entry (FE) primary school and 8 FE secondary school, 6 ha of employment land, two local centres, 50ha of public open space and ecological mitigation land and road link from Burnetts Lane to Bubb Lane. The issuing of permission has been delayed whilst the S106 for planning obligations has been

negotiated. Whilst the extent of obligations (timings, costs and works) has been agreed, agreement on the formal wording of the agreement is being finalised.

19. Chalcroft Farm has received permission for various structures associated with agriculture and the butchery business including an agricultural building to house meat preparation and packaging business and farm shop (2012) and a machinery storage and maintenance building (2013). The solar farm was permitted in 2012 for a time limited period of 25 years.

20. Fir Tree Farmhouse – apart from minor extensions this property remains relatively unaltered in recent years.

21. Victoria House – new access, dwelling and garaging created following permission to convert farm barns in 1992.

22. Fir Tree Farm – a more modern farmhouse constructed circa 1989 with approval for agricultural buildings and stables (late 1970s) and the use of barns for storage of furniture (1997, 1999)

Representations received

23. To the original plans 51 letters of objection were received from adjoining residents and those living locally with concerns relating to;

Principle Erosion of character and settlement identity of Fair Oak Loss of feeling of a community Loss of countryside, greenspace and strategic gap Overdevelopment with extensive other schemes proposed within the

area 950 dwellings already approved at Chalcroft Farm Not an allocated housing site A satellite community with no facilities Recent refusal for one dwelling in the countryside should set a

precedent Loss of valuable agricultural land No evidence of comprehensive assessment of impact of numerous

large developments in the area

Highways Congestion on highway network including Bishopstoke Road corridor

which will be worsened with link from Burnetts Lane. Lack of capacity at Fir Tree Lame / Burnetts Lane junction which could

have 50% of the traffic generated by the development. Widening of Fir Tree Lane will be detrimental to residential amenity due

to traffic speed, noise, fumes and will feel more vulnerable. Fir Tree Lane and Burnetts Lane are rural lanes Traffic generation has been under estimated.

Traffic generation not assessed alongside other developments. Severance of settlement Impact on Public Right of Way Railway bridge at Allington Lane is too narrow for further traffic

Amenity Decreased in air quality due to increased traffic congestion. New right of way to rear of existing dwelling will make the property

vulnerable (Angelica Gardens). Increase in noise

Infrastructure Inadequate school, doctors and dentists No specific mitigation of impact on infrastructure provided. Will this development provide a proportional amount of contributions

towards infrastructure secured on the Chalcroft Farm scheme

Drainage Numerous fields flood that are not identified within the Flood Risk

Assessment Highways flood Foul drainage network is over capacity at present

Heritage Impact on listed building (Fir Tree Farm)

Ecology Impact on habitat and foraging areas of deer, grouse and a protected

species of bat Impact on water quality within the River Itchen

Other matters Depreciation in property value

24. Following a re-notification of the amended plans on 13 February 2017 two letters have been received raising the following points;

Loss of greenfield Inadequate infrastructure Inadequate health facilities Air pollution Traffic congestion

Consultation responses (Summarised)

25. Head of Regeneration and Planning Policy – Although the proposal is contrary to the Council’s development plan and the starting point for determining this application, the Council are unable to demonstrate a five year housing land supply. The ‘presumption in favour of

sustainable development’ cited in the NPPF is the key material consideration for determining this application.

26. Urban design – Support some of the vision as set out in the DAS (perimeter blocks, location of developable areas, references to good quality materials) but reservations are raised about the intensity of the development proposed in the. New cycle routes are welcome but would wish to see further provision around the junction of Fir Tree Lane and Allington Lane. Sustainable drainage features (SUDs) should be designed in that this stage and currently there is limited information on these features. New street trees should be provided in accordance with the Quality Places SPD.

27. Sustainability – Not mentioned in DAS at all. Need to commit at least to Code 4 standard for energy and water. The BREEAM Communities Pre-Assessment seeks to achieve ‘excellent’ in accordance with the Council’s expectations. .

28. Landscape – Whilst not in a local gap the development would raise settlement identity as an issue both physically and visually. Support no development on the northern part of the site but question value of retaining the northern part as agricultural land as originally proposed. Regard should be had of the potential combined impact if development on land south of Bishopstoke were to be brought forward. To assist with the assessment, the LVIA has been amended to superimpose location of the proposed development on baseline photos and include indicative wireframe/massing information which are an accurate representation.

29. Public Art - No comments to date

30. Heritage – A major change in setting (visual, audio and air pollution) for the farmhouse with new distributor road, together with the removal of farm buildings. Surrounding the farmhouse with new development while large areas of the site remain undeveloped completes the transition to substantial harm to the setting of this heritage asset.

31. Head of Transportation and Engineering – No objection. As an extension to the West of Horton Heath site this scheme will need to be fully linked with permeability for pedestrians and cyclists as well as cars. A 3-arm roundabout is favoured over a priority junction, with design space for the 4th arm at a later stage if required. The roundabout will have the benefit of improving highway movements, and better futureproof this junction should a 4th arm be required. HCC will comment in detail on the impact of the development on the highway network and seek transport contributions. The road width appears to show as 6.0m, but this should be increased to match the Bubb Lane link as it will essentially be a through road. The Borough Council should secure funding of TROs for future management of traffic within the development.

32. Public transport – (i) rail users are more likely to use Eastleigh with better parking and train frequency. (ii) Bus stops are further than suggested, could be improved if services diverted / extended. Improvements best targeted towards Eastleigh/Winch rather than Hedge End. (iii) Implications for Public Transport Strategy – a) should seek to prioritise connections to Eastleigh and Southampton (Bluestar b) prioritise connection to Winchester, c) diverted services should not be detrimental to existing users; and d) all properties should be within 400m from a bus stop.

33. Head of Housing and Environmental Health – No objection on noise impact grounds, air quality or land contamination subject to conditions..

34. Noise – Following clarification on the data and evidence presented within the noise assessment with regards to existing noise levels and predicted future noise levels, the impact of the North West of Horton Heath development is expected to have a negligible impact on existing residents in all locations (receptors). When combined with the West of Horton Heath development the impact on receptors ranges from a moderate beneficial change to a moderate adverse change (Angelica Gardens). However, this has been assessed without any development between the new link road and these properties, as such through appropriate layout at the reserved matters stage of the West of Horton Heath site the noise impact can be designed out.

35. The site would be suitable for residential development subject to holistic consideration of noise within the overall design with suitable mitigation.

36. Air Quality – The submitted assessment models the predicted air quality impacts on existing sensitive receptors and concludes that the proposed development and cumulative developments have the potential to have impacts which are adverse and direct but of negligible significance in terms of increases in levels of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5. As a result developer contributions should be sought with regards to air quality to aid in on going monitoring of local air quality and to achieve our targets within the Eastleigh air quality action plan

37. Land contamination - no objection subject to conditions.

38. Parks and Open Space Manager – No objection. Welcome the large POS, but footpaths need to be accessible for all. Only 2 LEAPs required (not 4 proposed) therefore remove the east/west ones. Will need to provide a formal kick-a-bout area consisting of a combi goal unit for basketball with 9.0m x 9.0m tarmac pad and football with 200 sq m of grass protection mats. Contributions sought for maintenance and sales plans to show play areas. Any woodland that is to be transferred to the public authority is to be made-good.

39. Head of Housing – No objection. A provision of 35% affordable housing units are required (158no) with this scheme required delivering a tenure split 50% affordable rent & 50% shared ownership. All dwellings must be to Lifetime Homes standards and 3% are to be built to Wheelchair Accessible Standards (5no.). The scheme will need to cluster the affordable housing within groups of 10 – 15 units, whilst each phase will need to deliver a pro rata proportion of the overall level of affordable housing

40. Borough Ecologist – No objection.

41. Designated nature sites – Based on the ES submission and additional information provided in the FRA the SUDs drainage facilities have sufficient space and can provided three forms of natural filtration to ensure the quality of water reaching the River Itchen SAC is not polluted and cause harm to the designate features of this watercourse. Whilst the development and the wider site will not have an impact alone, an in-combination impact from road traffic on air quality affecting Southern Damsel fly and their habitat has already been identified in relation to this extension and the wider site and other committed development. Eastleigh Borough Council is developing a mitigation strategy in consultation with other agencies, for which contributions should be sought to mitigate the impact of pollutants within the air. Contributions also to be sought to mitigate for recreational impact on the Solent Complex.

42. Site of Importance to Nature Conservation (SINCs) - Quobleigh Pond and Woods SINC and Wyvern Technology College Meadow SINC have Great Crested Newts and an outline mitigation strategy will need to be secured along with the parameter plans clearly defining the wildlife mitigation ponds separate to the drainage ponds. Buffers are included to the SINC and details plans will locate footpaths away from buffer zones of sensitive areas.

43. Protected species – for otters the proposed buffers are acceptable along watercourses and these should be from formal access. For Great Crested Newts it has been demonstrated that the links between the meta-populations and the ability to use the SUDs features for GCN is achievable with further work needed at the detail stages of the development. Mitigation for hedgerow severance is provided and generous areas of habitat are proposed for GCN to replace terrestrial habitat loss. Habitat for the “exceptional” population of the slow worms has been provided within the mitigation land. The draft landscape strategy for POS to the north is supported. Subject to conditions, no objection is raised in regards to bats, badgers, birds or non-native invasive species (Himalayan Balsam)

44. Borough Tree officer – an objection is raised to the loss of an oak to allow for the roundabout on Allington Lane. Alternative locations for the

roundabout should be considered. Conditions recommended for further tree surveys at the reserved matters stages.

45. Economic Development Officer - An employment and skills plan to be included as part of the Section 106 agreement.

46. Borough Health and Community Manager – no comment to make at his stage but would wish to be involved if any specific community facilities re being considered.

47. HCC Highways – no objection.

48. The site access arrangements are acceptable as are the off-site pedestrian/cycle link improvements. Combined with the improvements and facilities to be delivered on the West of Horton Heath site (WOHH) the accessibility of the development will be improved. Public transport provision should be improved in line with that agreed on WOHH development and a travel plan submitted in accordance with the principles of the framework travel plan. The personal accident data does not identify any particular trends that are likely to be exacerbated by the development proposals.

49. The trip generation forecasts are agreed (162 trips AM peak period and 245 trips PM peak period) as is the distribution across the road network and assessment of other committed developments. An operation assessment of junctions has been undertaken and agreement reached on off-site improvements, either in the form of works prior to an agreed trigger or securing financial contributions to be used by the County to undertake the works themselves.

50. HCC Minerals and Waste – No comments received

51. HCC Rights of Way – This proposal would affect Fair Oak and Horton Heath Footpath 11. West End Footpath 1 also abuts the development site, while Fair Oak and Horton Heath Footpath 12 is within close proximity. FP11 should be retained in a green corridor. Clarification on new paths created and their legal PROW status together with design details and management. DCs sought to improve existing PROW. Informative sought on surface alterations and obstruction of paths.

52. HCC Children’s Services – no objection. This development generates an additional 135 primary school pupils and an additional 95 secondary school pupils for which contributions are sought.

53. HCC Flood and Water Team – No objection. General principles of the drainage strategy are acceptable subject to condition of details.

54. HCC Archaeologist – No objection. A condition is required for the preparation of a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) and advise that the results of the geophysical survey and archaeological evaluation

and should be submitted with any detailed application. The WSI should establish a strategy to mitigate any potential impacts the proposed development may have upon archaeological features and deposits.

55. Environment Agency – no objection in principle but wish for conditions relating to the following to be added; sustainable drainage strategy, construction environmental management plan, otter /water vole mitigation and protection plan, buffers to watercourse, irradiation strategy for Himalayan Balsam and no development to be in flood zones 1 and 2.

56. Natural England – no objection. The LPA is to screen this development under the HRA due to its close proximity to the Solent and Southampton Water SPA and the River Itchen SAC also listed as Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site. Upper Hamble Estuary and Woods Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and the River Itchen SSSI are also close to the site. No comment to make on protected species. Construction Environmental Management Plan should be secured via condition.

57. Hampshire & the Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust - no comments received

58. Ramblers Association – Existing Public Right of Way should be protected and recommend the POS is dedicated as Access Land.

59. British Horse Society – no comments made.

60. English Heritage – no comments received.

61. Southern Water – There is inadequate capacity within local network to provide foul sewerage disposal. No public surface water sewers are in the locality and alternative means of drainage will need to be considered. There will be adequate capacity at the Chickenhall Wastewater Treatment Works (WTW) to cater for this development.

62. National Grid - no comments received

63. Southern Electric – no comments received

64. Southampton Airport - no objection to the proposed means of access only. All other areas (building heights, landscaping etc.) should be sent for comment as and when the information becomes available

65. Highway Agency – no objection. The likely trip generations from the development on to the Strategic Road Network are unlikely to adversely impact the network.  In addition, the overall distance from the M3 and M27 means that there may be a material impact on the local highway network, which could ultimately have a material impact on the

SRN.  Therefore, any mitigation locally needs to be planned with this in mind.

66. Bus operators – no comments received

67. Winchester CC – no comment received.

68. Hedge End TC No objection subject to road infrastructure improvements being implemented as a priority and prior to development commencing.

69. West End PC – Object. The development is contrary to the Development Plan, lack of health care, education facilities and infrastructure facilities.

70. Fair Oak and Horton Heath PC – Object. Pending clarification on (i) relevant Local Plan to apply (ii) how impact on road junctions and Allington Lane (south) is assessed (iii) concerns for impact on the right of way, (iv) impact on wildlife (v) and concerns about impact on the setting of listed building. Requested this scheme goes to committee for a decision.

71. BT Openreach - no comments received

72. Burnetts Lane Residents Association – concerns about junction improvements at Allington Lane and Fair Oak Road; traffic increased and impact on railway bridge: impact on footpaths and wildlife; impact on listed building. A poor development should not be used to make another scheme viable.

73. Moorgreen Road Residents Association – no comments received.

74. West Hampshire Clinical Commissioning Group – 1,035 additional residents would not warrant the commissioning of an additional GP surgery. The increased demand will be accommodated by the existing GP surgeries open to new registration requests from people living in the area of the proposed development, however additional capacity within the premises will be required. A financial contribution to the capital investment should be secured and used at Stokewood Practice

75. Stokewood Surgery – Object. New facilities or expansion of surgery is required before planning permission is granted for this development. Both the West of Horton Heath site and this scheme equates to 3290 people with no mitigation secured. Proposals are in place to add 2 consulting rooms to our current building but this is to meet the needs of other developments. The option of Outreach rooms is not appropriate to meet the needs of the community. The financial contribution secured would need to be of a size that would allow provision of a proportion of a proper GP surgery

76. National Planning Casework Unit – no comment to make

Policy context: designation applicable to site

Designated Countryside; Solent Mitigation and Disturbance Zone; Mineral Safeguarding Zone Flood Zones 1, 2, and 3.

National Planning Policy Framework

77. 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

78. 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.

79. 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.

80. 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.

81. 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.

82. 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.”

83. Paragraph 61 of the NPPF requires that planning decisions address the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic environment.

84. 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.

85. 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.

86. 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.

87. 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”.

88. 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).

89. 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.

90. Paragraph 118 of the NPPF sets out the importance of conserving and enhancing biodiversity.

91. 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.

92. 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.

93. 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.

94. 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.

95. 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.

96. 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;

97. 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.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.

98. 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

99. Where material, this guidance (which supplements the NPPF) should be afforded weight in the consideration of planning applications.

100. 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.

101. 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.

102. 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.

103. 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.

104. 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.

105. 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.

106. 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.

107. 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.

108. 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.

109. 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.

110. 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.

111. 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.

112. 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

113. The key policies of the adopted local plan are:

1.CO - seeks to limit development in the countryside to a range of appropriate uses - the site adjoins the urban edge as defined on the proposals map.

18.CO – seeks to limit development which has an adverse effect on the character of the landscape

23.NC – protection of SINCs 25.NC – promotion of biodiversity 26.NC – protection of wildlife network 28.ES – waste collection

30.ES – noise sensitive development 31.ES – residential development and noise 32.ES– pollution control 33.ES – air quality 34.ES – reduction in greenhouse gases 35.ES – contaminated land 36.ES – lighting 37.ES – energy efficiency 42.ES – development within watercourse catchment 45.ES – Sustainable Drainage requirements 59.BE - seeks to ensure the high quality and appropriate design 66.BE – information and communication technology 71.H – mixed use development 72.H – Density – minimum 35 dwellings per hectare unless local

circumstances and context indicate otherwise. 74.H – Affordable housing.- on site requirement 91.T – transport schemes 92.T – Local transport proposals including (iv) bus partnerships;

(v) Eastleigh cycle route network; and (vi) improved pedestrian routes to town centres.

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 modes

101.T - development to provide contributions towards sustainable transport.

102.T – Requires new development to provide safe accesses 103.T – green travel plans 104.T – parking provision 146.OS – green network of open space 147.OS – open space requirements for new developments 152.OS – enhancement of footpath network 153.OS – improvements to bridleways 162.TA – protection and enhancement of the Strawberry Trail. 165.TA – percent for art 168.LB – archaeology 190.IN – Infrastructure provision 191.IN – Developer contributions

Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan 2013

114. A very small part of the site falls within a Minerals Safeguarding Area, as defined by Policy 15 “Safeguarding – Mineral Resources”.

Submitted Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2011-2029

115. 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.

116. 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.

117. 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 – transport DM25 - Densities DM28 – 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 WE1 – Land west of Horton Heath.

Supplementary Planning Guidance

Supplementary Planning Document: Quality Places (November 2011)

Supplementary Planning Document: Environmentally Sustainable Development (March 2009) (having regard to the Ministerial Statement 28 March 2015).

Supplementary Planning Document : Biodiversity (December 2009)

Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Parking Standards (January 2009)

Supplementary Planning Document: Planning Obligations (July 2008, updated 2010)

Supplementary Planning Document: Affordable Housing (July 2009)

Supplementary Planning Document: Internal Space Standards (January 2012)

Policy commentary

118. The above policies and guidance combine to form the criteria on which this application will be assessed.

Assessment of proposal: Development plan and / or legislative background

Development Plan and Legislative Background

119. 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

120. 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).

121. 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.

122. In terms of other material planning considerations, the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance constitute material considerations of significant weight.

123. Section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states "In considering whether to grant Listed Building Consent for any works, the Local Planning Authority … shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting

or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses."

Development Plan and Five Year Housing Land Supply

124. The Council also has an ongoing responsibility to ensure that there is has a continuous 5 year supply of housing.

125. 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.”

126. It is accepted that the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five year housing supply (HLS) of deliverable housing sites, with the latest housing supply figures (Cabinet December 2016) demonstrating a 4.23 year supply at present. Since December 2016 there have been further resolutions to grant outline permission for 250 dwellings at Pembers Hill Farm and 30 dwellings at land North of Church Road, which will have a positive affect on the Council’s 5 year HSL. The appeal permission for 680 dwellings at Hedge End North has not been included in supply figures because that decision is subject to challenge.

127. 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.

128. The site is located within the countryside and as such is protected by Saved Policy 1.CO of the adopted local plan but is not within a local or strategic gap. The submitted Local Plan also shows the site to be within the countryside, protected by Draft Policy S9. Large-scale developments such as that proposed are not supported by these policies which seek to protect the intrinsic character of the countryside, and therefore the principle of development is contrary to the development plan and the unsound emerging plan. If permission were to be granted for the proposed development there would have to be other material planning considerations that provide support for the scheme, which includes the weight which can be attributed to countryside policy that are out of date.

129. The application has been submitted to assist with the delivery of the extensive infrastructure required and associated with the West of Horton Heath (WE1) site including the school site, the link road from Burnetts Lane to Bubb Lane and other off-site highway improvements. Furthermore, this current proposal would negate the need for improvements to Fir Tree Lane and provide a continuation of the aforementioned link road from Fir Tree Lane northwards to Allington Lane. Whilst an unallocated site within either the adopted or unsound Local Plans, these are material matters that will need to be considered in the planning balance.

130. However, as a standalone development this proposals displays elements of being unsustainable for it does not abut the urban edge nor does it provide for all of the future resident’s needs. To be considered sustainable, the timing of the delivery of the development will need to be carefully planned to coincide with the WE1 development which does provide the necessary community infrastructure and access improvements to the wider road and footpath network. Whilst a phasing a plan has been provided to show the timing of both developments, this current scheme will need the Section 106 Legal Agreement to ensure this two sites come forward at the same time as proposed.

131. 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. This is discussed in more detail below.

Land Use and Amount – the Parameter Plans

132. For approval are seven parameter plans which illustrate a framework for development which would evolve further through the reserved matters applications. As an addendum to the West of Horton Heath scheme (WE1) the parameter plans are to be read alongside that indicated for the larger strategic site and are informed in part by that agreed previously. The parameter plans form the basis of the illustrative master plan combining the constraints with the opportunities to provide an indicative development.

133. The development boundary parameter plan outlines the area in which works are proposed. This plan varies from the EIA plan which includes slightly more land for it considers impacts beyond the application site including loss of trees, hedgerow or highway works within the immediate environs of the site.

134. The land use parameter plan indicates how the land is proposed to be used across the site with the residential areas abutting the WE1 housing allocation and open space (Informal, formal and ecological mitigation area) to the north of the watercourse that flows through the site. No formal sports pitches are proposed as this would be secured at a centralised “hub” location such as the new secondary school site. At

a scale of 450 units, the Council would not seek to secure other land uses such as employment, retail or a local centre but preferring to see the proposed development support the recently approved community and employment facilities secured at the WE1 site.

135. The topography of the site, its ditch network and landscape features serve to disaggregate the developable areas from Allington Lane and settlements to the north, which assist in reducing the visual impact and intervisibility of the development from public vantage points. The extent of undeveloped areas to the north of the site and green infrastructure opportunities through the developable areas would provide a good setting for the development whilst preventing impact on existing feature of nature conservation value. The extent of POS is some four times greater than that needed to be policy compliant. Sufficient offset is provided to the Grade II Listed Farmhouse to ensure that its setting is protected with the delivery of the new road, located up to 20m south of its current position and enhancement of tree lined boundaries abutting lower density development parcels.

136. The land use parameter plan is in accordance with adopted plan policies 23.NC, 26.NC, 71.H, 146.OS and submitted plan policies S1, S9, DM1 and DM10

137. The Residential Density Parameter Plan sets the differing densities for development parcels on the basis of site constraints, landscape character and proximity to the larger WE1 housing scheme. Generally low - medium density areas 35 dwellings per hectare (dph) would be located on the outer edges of the site and to the west of the farmhouse. The medium density areas (40dph) are located more internally to the site abutting WE1 with a good separation to the east of the listed farmhouse. The 2011 – 29 Local Plan sought a minimum of 35 dph for any development site to ensure efficient use of the land which this accords with.

138. Indicative layouts have been provided for the two different densities and around the farmhouse to demonstrate the parameter plans take account of densities in the local area, minimum house sizes, the Quality Places Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and parking standards. Concerns are raised by the Urban Design and Implementation Manager that the sketches appear to show the example areas as not complying with guidance and display signs of being over developed. The minimum density that should be achieved as required by submitted policy DM25 (LP 2011 – 2029) in urban areas is 35 dph unless site constraints or local character justify a lower density. In areas with good access to public transport and other services and amenities, higher densities will be sought. If approved this would be a new urban area with access to facilities on the WE1 site and therefore the land should be efficiently used. The density plans demonstrate that 75% of the site would be a density of 35 dph with the

more central element closest to the WE1 facilities could achieve up to 40 dph.

139. The final detail of the schemes are to be secured at the Reserved Matters Stage when officers would ensure compliance with the adopted SPDs, a draft Local Plan policy seeking a minimum of 35 dph and the development being for “up to” a maximum number of units. The Head of Development Management is comfortable that the scheme can achieve a suitable layout that would meet adopted standards and guidance. On this basis the density parameter plan is considered acceptable and in accordance with NPPF guidance at paragraph 58, which seeks to establish a strong sense of place whilst optimising the site potential, and Development Plan policies 72.H (adopted plan) S1, DM1 and DM25 of the submitted plan on achieving sustainable communities.

140. The Building Heights Parameter Plan indicates the scale of development and proposes generally the low-medium density housing to be “up to” 9m in height, the medium density “up to” 12m in height where abutting the WE1 scheme. The majority of the site would be at two storey (up to 9m in height) as expected for an urban edge development with the option for three storey (up to 12m high) more central to the future developments. This is also proposed on the on the higher parts of the site. The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been updated to demonstrate the visual impact would not be unreasonable whilst the WE1 housing parcels abutting this scheme is on higher land and in part also 12m in height.

141. Overall, the developments sits well within the landscape character setting and existing vegetation, respecting views into the site and the height parameter plan is considered acceptable and in accordance with NPPF guidance contained within paragraphs 56 and 58 which seek to ensure good design and development plan policies that seek to ensure an appropriate response.

142. The Landscape Parameter Plan indicates a clear strategy with the open space and areas for ecological mitigation primarily located north of the watercourse. This provides a clear edge to the new urban area. Two equipped play areas and youth kick-about area are proposed and it has been demonstrated there is sufficient space to ensure no encroachment from these facilities on to ecologically sensitive areas Buffers are provided for to ecological features such as existing SINC (Quobleigh Woods) or wildlife corridors as well as compensatory habitat for protected species (Great Crested Newts and slow worms). Differing management regime will be applied to each of the areas the details of which will be agreed via strategies to be secured through conditions and the s106 process. The total amount of open space significantly exceeds that sought to be policy compliant offering opportunity for a variety of formal and informal open spaces dissected by existing and proposed public right of way network for the benefit of

new and existing residents. Within the developable areas sustainable drainage features, green lungs and retention of hedgerows and trees will assist with green corridors and suitable habitats for biodiversity to be enhanced. Inevitably some existing features will be removed or felled to facilitate the development and will need to be assessed in the planning balance.

143. A landscaping strategy plan together with the parameter plan provides for a logical response to the site constraints, context analysis, stakeholder engagement and development plan policies and assessments and would therefore accord with guidance contained within the NPPF paragraph 73 which seeks to ensure access to high quality open spaces, paragraph 75 which seeks to protect public rights of way, saved adopted plan policy 147.OS and submitted plan policies DM32 and DM33.

144. The Access and Movement Parameter Plan establishes the general principles of access and movement within the site, with primary and secondary roads identified. The strategy for vehicular access and movement includes a main spine road linking Allington Lane and Fir Tree Lane, and then on to the new road passing through the WE1 site. To provide a future proof access to Allington Lane a new roundabout is proposed in a location that, whilst requiring the removal of three trees, would minimise the impact on the hedgerow along the highway boundary and delivers the majority of the work “offline” minimising the impact on Allington Lane itself. The County as Highway Authority have raised no objection to the principle of the access or impact of traffic on the wider network. The roundabout and link road to Fir Tree Lane are detailed matters that are to be considered as part of this outline application, and considered in more detail within the highway section of this report.

145. The parameter plan also indicates a network of new and improved rights of way, pedestrian and cycle routes linking to both new or existing off-site footpaths and cycle routes at various points, ensuring the option for more sustainable travel. The access parameter plan responds to the site and accords with the NPPF guidance at paragraph 35 seeking to exploit opportunities for sustainable transport modes, paragraph 58 which seeks to ensure a place functions well. The Highway Authority raised no objection to the development, therefore the scheme accords with saved development plan policies T1, T2, 100T, 102.T, 152.OS and submitted plan policies S6, S7 and DM23.

146. The Hydrology Parameter Plan identifies existing watercourses and ponds, proposed sustainable drainage features and ecological mitigation ponds. The existing watercourses have green buffers of a minimum width of 15m allowing for wildlife corridors and facilitation of SUDS features. The plan is informed by the revised flood risk assessment and makes provision for a network of sustainable drainage features across the site and located within the open space. The

hydrology parameter plan complies with saved policies 25.NC, 45.ES and submitted policies DM5

147. The Development Phasing Plan identifies the likely order in which the site will be brought forward for development. Critical is the early deliver of the road from Fir Tree Lane to Allington Lane which would be constructed concurrently with the road link from Bubb Lane up to the school site. The site would be developed by one or two developers (and a further developer or two on the WE1 site) with phase A also including an element of residential, but the larger developable areas coming on line later in the phasing programme to coincide with the housing on WE1. The phasing plan provides the Council with assurances that the early delivery of key infrastructure and housing can be secured. This development would therefore meet the NPPF requirements to boost housing delivery (para 47).

148. In conclusion the parameter plans are the culmination of an assessment of the site, the stages of which are detailed within the Design and Access Statement. The site has been shown to have the capacity for “up to” 450 dwellings stated in a form that is considered acceptable within the landscape. Historically, outline planning applications have often left gaps in terms of reassuring Local Planning Authorities as to the context in which detailed applications will come forward. With the advent of parameter plans, greater certainty is now provided. The parameter plans submitted are considered to give comfort that future reserved matter applications on this site would be in accordance with Plan policies relating to the specifics of site development as listed in the policy sections above.

Sustainable Development – three strands

149. In paragraphs 7, 8 and 14 the NPPF sets out a presumption in favour of sustainable development, indicating that it has an economic, a social and an environmental role. These roles should not be undertaken in isolation as they are mutually dependent and, therefore, the application is assessed against all three headings. It also states that when determining applications, those that accord with the development plan should be approved without delay (unless material considerations indicate otherwise). Where the development plan is absent, silent or the relevant policies are out-of-date, permission should (unless material considerations indicate otherwise) be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF as a whole; or where specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted.

Economic Sustainability

150. One of the core planning principles of the NPPF is to proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver, amongst

other things, the homes that the country needs. As with any new housing, it’s would bring people into the area which would be a continuing economic benefit that would support growth in the local economy. A New Homes Bonus would also be paid and the development would create 168 construction jobs for a ten year period, when combined with West of Horton Heath development, with a further 336 jobs in the support services during this period.

151. In addition the development provides the the ability to collect financial developer contributions to offset certain impacts of the development, such as transport contributions towards improvements to the local network and contributions towards the provision of enhanced community infrastructure.

152. This is of particularly importance as the scheme will make a significant contribution to assisting with the delivery of essential infrastructure the need for which is generated by the West of Horton Heath scheme but the scale of which will benefit the wider community, business sector and transport network.

Social Sustainability

Housing mix, deliverability and affordable housing

153. The application is in outline and the supporting information confirms that a range of house types, sizes and tenures would be provided, including 35% affordable housing in accordance with Saved Policy 73.H of the adopted Local Plan and Policy DM35 of the Deposit Local Plan. The Council’s adopted Affordable Housing SPD is also a material consideration, as 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”. The development is of a scale that can truly offer a varied mix housing to meet the wide needs of the community.

154. The Head of Housing Services supports the application and its proposed delivery of up to 158 units for affordable rent or shared ownership. In December 2016 there were 1,854 households registered for affordable housing within Eastleigh Borough which indicates a significant local housing need. The dwellings would support social wellbeing through the provision of a mixed and balanced community, in line with Saved Policy 74.H and the NPPF’s aspiration to “deliver a wide choice of high quality homes in inclusive and mixed communities to meet the needs of different people.”

155. Future reserved matter applications would be submitted late 2017, with commencement of work on site mid 2018 with at least two developers on this site assisting the delivery of circa 170 dwellings per annum in total across both sites. First occupation is estimated as late 2018/early 2019 and completed by 2027.

Health Provision

156. The proposed development equates to approximately 1,110 residents in addition to the 2,280 residents from the WE1 scheme. Combined, this will generate demand for 2no. GP plus primary care support services, a view that is shared by those representing the medical industry who commented on this scheme. Stokewood Surgery was refurbished (2014) and the practice manager has advised the more recent plans to expand are to meet the growing needs of the population from all developments recently permitted. This current scheme places further pressure on already stretched services.

157. The option of a new branch practice on the larger WE1 site was discounted by Stokewood Surgery and NHS England due to the practical delivery of a functional and worthwhile facility, thus focus has been applied to addressing the health needs of this development off-site.

158. The Council are seeking to secure a strategic long term solution to health provision as part of the review of the new Local Plan for the period 2011 – 2036. However, in advance of this the Council are seeking contributions to mitigate the impact on the existing local surgery, through either facilitating an extension to the surgery building or pooling funds to deliver a more strategic solution. This approach is supported by the CCG but Stokewood have reservations on the delivery of any new facilities wishing for them to be built prior to any new needs created by developments. The development can only contribute to part of the funding of new capital investments (buildings, fixtures/fittings) with the CCG/NHS England securing additional funding and staff resources through other funding mechanisms outside of the control of the developer. Whilst the delivery of the additional health facilities falls outside of the applicant’s control, the applicant has agreed to the principle to secure funding through the s106 for improved off-site health facilities.

Community facilities

159. As part of the development funding of 2no. equipped play areas and a youth kick-about area will be alongside the extensive POS, footpaths and cycle paths which are of social benefit. Further contributions would be secured through the s106 agreement to the new community centre on WE1, a community development worker, other local community projects and public art.

Education

160. In accordance with submitted Policy WE1 (iv) the land use plan made provision for a new 8 form entry secondary school (with provision to

expand to 10-form entry) and a three-form-entry primary school, including shared community use of the school playing fields. HCC have not objected to the principle of the school and support the 13ha school site as set out on the land use plan.

161. With this current scheme, HCC Children’s Services have advised contributions are to be secured to assist the delivery of new local primary and secondary schools, which will also be of benefit to the wider community.

162. Provision for off-site/strategic social infrastructure, including education, health and community facilities would be secured through the necessary Section 106 agreement.

Environmental Sustainability

163. This is also addressed under the Parameter Plan considerations above, but more detail is set out in this section of the report.

.Landscape Character

164. The Council’s Landscape Character Assessment 2011 locates the site within the Local Character Area (LCA) ‘Horton Heath Undulating Farmland’. This describes the unifying characteristics of this ‘predominantly agricultural landscape’ as the gentle undulation of the landform and the pattern of medium sized fields. Although this is a predominantly agricultural landscape, there are some intrusive urban edges, and it neither contains nor forms part of any designated landscapes. The site is not within a designated nationally important landscape. The application site itself is reflective of this character with a grouping of former or current agricultural dwellings and buildings surrounded by fields with isolated dwellings beyond the site.

165. The Landscape and Visual Assessment (LVIA) assesses the development site and the wider West of Horton Heath site (WE1) noting an important contribution to landscape character are the landscape features within the site including arable fields, hedgerows, woodland and trees, streams and ponds and Public Rights of Way (PRoWs). The LVIA suggests the visibility of the site is largely contained by the vegetation within/on the boundaries of the site and by the topography. All of the identified receptors are located within 1km of the site with distant views prevented by existing landscaping / topography. The site is crossed by Public Right of Way (PRoW) which currently enjoy a rural setting. Overall the LVIA concluded the scale of the development (WE1 and North West of Horton Heath) whilst dividing LCA ‘Horton Heath Undulating Farmland’ found the LCA sensitivity low and the significance of impact judged as minor adverse (due to existing landscaping and topography) whilst there would be a negligible impact on landscape features due to predominantly their retention.

166. The LVIA concludes from most public vantage points and nearby properties the significance of visual effect of the operational development to be minor adverse to negligible. This impact is increased when viewed from Fir Tree Farmhouse, Oak Cottage (junction of Allington Lane/Fir Tree Lane) and PROW 1 where it crosses the site, but with mitigation through landscaping and buffering the significance of visual effect is assessed as moderate adverse.

167. Officers are of the opinion that the change from countryside to residential would be a clear, irreversible impact that would be incapable of full mitigation, particularly when viewed close-up. Local residents and users of the PROW and those travelling along Allington Lane due to the roundabout and potential for lighting at this junction would observe the greatest impact. The Borough’s landscape officer also highlighted the potential for the development to erode settlement identity, although noted this site is not within either a designated strategic or local gap or a proposed Countryside Gap. Such gaps are designated only when there is a risk of the coalescence of settlements and their identity is vulnerable. It is accepted that the establishment of new green infrastructure would provide some mitigation and long term benefit and the majority of existing landscape elements, such as trees and hedgerows, would be retained. Furthermore, the topography assists with containing the development, providing a strong urban edge and provides good integration of the new development into its surroundings by visually breaking up the mass of the structures.

168. The site would also be read as an extension to the West of Horton Heath development (WE1) and within 10 years the site will read as a part of the wider Horton Heath settlement, therefore it is essential that that phasing of the development is linked to the built out of the WE1 to avoid a satellite development.

169. The comments of the Landscape Officer are noted and officers support the parameter plans (density, height), secured mitigation and conditioned the submission of a Design Code for the site which would ensure that the scale and height of development is appropriate for the site which moves from urban to rural. Full three storey development, for example, is precluded from the most visible site edges, but the topography of the site can also be used in designing new built form.

170. The northern parcel of development would be managed as public open space with ecological mitigation measures, whilst a large part of the hedgerow will be retained following the realignment of the Allington Lane to within the site. The new link road would be bound by a shallow embankment with new hedgerow and tree planting with only the roundabout anticipated to be illuminated north of the watercourse although exact details would be agreed by County at the S278 stage. Furthermore, the omission of approved upgrades to Fir Tree Lane will further minimise the visual and physical impact of the wider development in this area.

171. Light pollution has also been considered as this can have an impact upon landscape character. Paragraph 125 of the NPPF states that good design should limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity, intrinsically dark landscapes and nature conservation interests. It is inevitable that the site will be illuminated at night changing the character of this rural location. It is important to try and minimise this where possible through careful design to ensure any light spillage is managed to be within acceptable limits. Dark corridors will be necessary to protect bat roosts and foraging routes. It is therefore recommended that should permission be granted, a conditions is attached requiring details of lighting be submitted and approved before the commencement of each phase of development.

172. Whilst the setting of the footpath no.11 (PROW) would be effected the development proposes to retain and strengthen the existing woodland and landscaping to the north as well as setting the developable areas back from the defined route of the footpath. This would allow for new landscaping and protect the amenity of users walking the path.

173. The proposed development would more than double the number of dwellings within Horton Heath and the concerns raised by objectors to the detriment this may cause to the character and identity of Horton Heath are appreciated. The proposal has developed in an effort to respond to these concerns through the distribution of land uses (when considering the two developments) and inclusion of extensive areas of undeveloped land, resulting in residential areas separated by extensive areas of open space. The scheme would deliver a mixed tenure community that would support the approved local facilities (community facility, retail and employment opportunities, education provision, local centre) serving both the existing and proposed housing. Without a large strategic allocation of housing the community benefits or highway improvements would not be secured.

174. In light of the above, it is considered that due to the impact on the countryside and landscape character of the local area, the proposal would be to an extent contrary Saved Policies 1.CO, 18.CO and 59.BE of the adopted local plan and Draft Policies S9 and DM1 of the submitted plan. These conflicts, and the strength of such conflicts, need to be considered in terms of the overall planning balance and guidance for sustainable development, the very limited weight which can be afforded to 1.CO for these proposals. Overall, officers conclude the impact on the wider landscape setting and settlement identity is not significantly harmful and the development could be supported if material considerations conclude the scheme is sustainable development.

Protecting the most valuable agricultural land

175. The site consists of land that has an Agricultural Lane Classification of Grade 4. Policy 4.CO of the adopted Local Plan was not saved, however submitted policy DM13 of the deposit Local Plan resist the permanent loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land (Grades 1, 2 and 3a. 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". As grade 4, the site meets the requirement advocated within the NPPF and the submitted Local Plan policy.

Access, Parking and Highway Safety

176. Traffic impact is one of the principal concerns relayed by local residents and the parish councils in their representations with particular reference to traffic impact on local junctions and Allington Lane. The application was been submitted with a detailed Transport Assessment (TA) that has taken in to account the cumulative impact of committed (permitted and proposed) development. The County as the Highway Authority reviewed the TA’s methodology, data and conclusions and raised no objection subject to securing off-site mitigation, enhanced cycle/pedestrian routes and improvement to bus services.

177. The net trip generation forecasts confirm that the development is estimated to generate 162 trips during the morning peak period (08.00-09.00) and 245 trips during the evening peak period (17.00-18.00). This traffic would be distributed across the local network with between 33 – 50% of trips utilising the new link road rather than Botley Road and Eastleigh Road at the Fair Oak Road/Botley Road junction. In assessing the forecast impact on junctions, the TA and technical notes have considered ‘committed development’ including Land at North East Boorley Green, Crowdhill Green, Pembers Hill Farm and Moorgreen Hospital and the impact in 2025 taking in to account background traffic growth. The Country raises no objection to the evidence or forecasts now presented in support of this scheme.

178. Specific junctions have then been modelled to assess their capacity in 2025 to deal with the increased traffic. Following detailed negotiations, the County as Highway Authority and the applicant have agreed a package of mitigation at some junctions, whilst others they conclude will operate within capacity. These junction assessed are;

Works required

Allington Lane / Fair Oak Road junction – exceeds theoretical capacity and a mitigation scheme to signalise this junction is proposed which will provide improvements. The County are confident the scheme can be delivered and support the principle of

that proposed but note the works would impact on the private access to properties along this part of highway. The applicant has sought to highlight this with those properties affected through delivering a consultation leaflet to each property to ensure the proposed works are known in advance of formal consultation undertaken by the County.

Contributions sought for improvements delivered by the County

Chickenhall Lane and Twyford Road roundabouts – operate above theoretical capacity and financial contributions agreed to improve junctions along the Bishopstoke Road corridor

Winchester Rod / Portsmouth Road (Fishers Pond) – a scheme for localised widening to enable dedicated right / left lanes acceptable.

Winchester Road / Church Road / Wessex Way – localised widening of Winchester Road northbound approach.

Bubb Lane / Tollbar Way junction – contributions to improvements (signalised junction) pending on traffic flows and impact on Moorgreen Road residents.

Tollbar Way / Maunsell Way junction - contributions to improvements (signalised junction)

Botley Road / Tollbar Way roundabout – contributions to widening all approaches.

Charles Watts Way / Turnpike Way – contributions to be used with those secured for the Hedge End North and WE1 schemes.

Operate within Capacity / no works required as part of this development

Fir Tree Lane / Allington Lane Fir Tree Lane / Burnetts Lane junction Botley Road / Burnetts Lane / Knowle Lane Botley Road / Eastleigh Road / Stubbington Way – improvements

secured under the WE1 scheme and no further mitigation necessary

Winchester Road / Mortimer’s Lane Winchester Road / Sandy Lane New roundabouts at Burnetts Lane and Bubb Lane (WE1) Botley Road / Snakemoor Lane Moorgreen Road / Burnetts Lane / Bubb Lane Allington Lane junctions with Swaythling Road and Upmill Close Moorgreen Road / High Street / Telegraph Road - improvements

secured under the WE1 scheme and no further mitigation necessary

179. Given the Transport Assessment work is based upon the provision of the development West of Horton Heath and the associated link road, it will also be necessary to include an Obligation to ensure the development proposal is not commenced until such time as the West Horton Heath site has been occupied

180. A significant benefit of this current proposal is the avoidance of widening the carriageway along the western section of Fir Tree Lane, with that width varying along the section from Fir Tree Farmhouse to the Allington Lane of between 3.25 and 4.8m. The Highway Authority previously acknowledged that the scope of available improvement is limited due to the extent of the Highway Boundary in this vicinity, concluding whilst a small element of the highway would experience pinch points, that traffic flows would not be such that an objection could be raised. With the delivery of a continuation of the link road through to Allington Lane with cycleway and footpaths, the western end of Fir Tree Lane can remain as a rural greenway for the sole benefit of cyclists and pedestrians.

181. Junction 7 of M27 will undoubtedly take some increase in traffic as a result of the two development scheme and contributions have been agreed with Highways England as part of the WE1 to improve traffic lights at junction 7, to ensure the impact does not result in unacceptable levels of congestion on the strategic road network (M27). No further mitigation has been sought as part of the North West of Horton Heath scheme.

182. Pedestrian and cycleway access points into the site would be provided from a number of locations whilst improvements on site to the network of rights of way are proposed along with the following additional off-site improvements to that secured under WE1; pedestrian access along parts of Fir Tree Lane, new footpath and cyclelink from the site to Dean Road and proportional contribution toward improvements to existing footways and cycleways off-site. This will serve to enhance the sustainability of the development and offer realistic alternatives to using the car to reach Fair Oak, Horton Heath, Eastleigh and Southampton. A commitment to improving on/off site Public Rights of Ways is welcomed and a contribution is to be secured via the S106 agreement.

183. In terms of the bus services, in order to ensure the site is accessible by all modes it is considered necessary for the public transport provision to be improved. The provision of this link road with bus infrastructure would provide for an alternative / additional route to service providers. To support the delivery of a service between Fair Oak and Hedge End Station on a half hourly basis to operate Monday to Friday between 07.00-19.00 as secured as part of the adjoining strategic scheme, it is considered reasonable for the same provisions to be secured in relation to the proposed development

184. A Framework Travel Plan has presented to the County that aims to reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by 10%, 5 years into development. This would be progressed through measures to promote walking and cycling, a travel voucher for public transport for every household, journey planners, promotion of the Hampshire’s car sharing scheme and a residents’ car club. A framework for management and

implementation of the Travel Plan is proposed. A Travel Plan Coordinator will be appointed by the developer and remain in post for 2 years after final occupation of the new residential development. To ensure the best chance of success, a bond would be taken by the Country returned to the developer in phases once targets were reached.

185. The TA has been updated to consider the cumulative impact of developments including, but not exclusively, development at West of Horton Heath, St Swithun Wells, Chestnut Avenue, Boorley Green and Land at Hedge End North (Boorley Gardens).

186. In terms of construction vehicle movements, the in combination movements for the construction of up to 170 dwellings a year at the same time as other land uses being constructed could generate 120 vehicle arrivals (105 cars/vans and 15 HGVs) per day in the busiest year. The other land uses within WE1 are forecast to generate 40 vehicle arrivals (30 cars/vans and 10 HGVs) per day during the same period. Daily construction traffic is forecast to generate 320 vehicles (270 car / van and 50 HGVs) and these figures are lower than the anticipated traffic generation of the operational development and are not considered to be unacceptably high. However, as a condition appropriate management of demolition and construction traffic will be undertaken within a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) which are to be secured via conditions.

187. Finally, the access points in to the development are detailed matters under consideration with this application. The technical plans provided propose a new roundabout on Allington Lane, together a new connection Fir Tree Lane east of Fir Tree Farmhouse. The roundabout location has been influenced by sightlines, minimising impact on Allington Lane, visual impact and retention of natural features with its proposed location considered the best balance between all of these points. The county find the two accesses acceptable in principle. Full design checking process under a S278 application to the County will need to be progressed prior to the design achieving technical approval.

188. The County are now able to offer support to the scheme and officers advise the scheme is in accordance with the NPPF guidance on sustainable development, the encouragement to find solutions which reduce congestion and to exploit opportunities for sustainable transport modes or adopted plan policies 100.T, 101.T, 102.T, 103.T, 152.OS, 190.IN, 191.IN, and submitted plan policies S1, S6, S7, DM1, DM23, DM37 and WE1 subject to securing an agreed package of mitigation.

Noise and Vibration

189. Paragraph 123 of the NPPF states that decisions should avoid significant adverse noise impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development, impacts should be mitigated where possible, and that there should be a recognition that development will often create some noise. The application also needs to be considered against the adopted local plan saved policies 30.ES and 31.ES, and submitted plan policies DM1 and DM7. A noise assessment was carried out by the applicants that concludes the site is dominated by road noise (local and M27) with limited impact from Chalcroft Industrial Estate, railway or planes. On this basis there are no existing noise or vibration impediments preventing the site from being developed for residential uses.

190. Construction noise has been assessed as being negligible to moderate adverse effect on nearest receptor. This can be suitably addressed through conditions seeking to secure a Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan and restricting hours of work.

191. The ES concludes that noise impact from traffic once operational would

be negligible impact at most receptors, with some experiencing no change / slight adverse. Cumulative with the WE1 development there would be major beneficial impact for Fir Tree Lane due to new road, although at the new junction some adverse noise impact is forecast as a result of increased traffic movements. The Head of Environmental Health has confirmed that the Fir Tree Farm scheme on its own would have only a negligible impact on existing residents as a result of noise generated from traffic movements. When combined with the West of Horton Heath development which includes the link road through to Bubb Lane, whilst there are some benefits to in three receptor locations there would also be minor adverse to moderate adverse change in noise levels in other locations primarily to properties along Fir Tree Lane. However, whilst a change in “existing” noise levels that are likely, the expected noise levels would in comparison not be especially high. The advice from the Head of Environmental Health is overall considering the large quantum of development, there are no major adverse effects predicted. The small number of moderate adverse impacts can be designed out through the reserve matters stage of the West of Horton Heath scheme through road layout and positioning of buildings.

192. Overall the application is considered in accordance with national guidance and adopted plan policies NRM10, 30.ES, 31.ES, and submitted plan policies DM1 and DM7 and acceptable in noise terms.

Air Quality

193. The NPPF states (para 124) 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. Adopted plan policies 32.ES and 33.ES

and submitted 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.

194. The application has been submitted with an air quality assessment and Environmental Statement (ES) which considers the impact of the development upon air quality at various receptors. Both the construction and operation phase 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 activities.

195. The closest Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) is located approximately 4.5km from the development site in Eastleigh. Bishopstoke Road runs to the north of the site and enters the AQMA, therefore any potential impacts upon this road, and potentially, the AQMA, are assessed within the ES. Using base level data the ES advises the sensitivity of the location in terms of air quality is considered to be generally very low and air quality is not of significant concern in the vicinity of the development site. Ensuring the development does not affect the free flow of traffic or increase the idling of engines is essential. Based on the findings of the TA, the ES addendum suggests air quality impacts upon humans associated with the development traffic to be adverse and direct but of negligible adverse significance in terms of increased NO2, PM10 or PM2.5 at sensitive human receptor locations. The Head of Environmental Health does not disagree with the findings and has requested a contribution towards monitoring air quality monitoring and management be secured via the planning obligations.

196. For the construction phase, impact on air quality would be controlled through the use of a condition requiring the approval of a Construction Environmental Management Plan.

197. In air quality terms, with the TA figures being ratified by County, the cumulative impact of from traffic associated with the proposed 450 dwellings, the approved mixed use development at WE1 and traffic using the link road would operate without significant detriment to human health in terms of air quality. The application is considered to be in accordance with the NPPF, adopted Development Plan policies 32.ES and 33.ES and submitted plan policy G9 and DM7.

Land Contamination

198. The NPPF and saved policy 35.ES requires sufficient information be provided to adequately demonstrate that the land can and will be remediated to a standard suitable for the proposed end use and will ensure that the risk of pollution of controlled waters is minimised.

199. The submitted desk based assessment of contamination concludes that localised contamination impacts may be present in the vicinity of the farms on site and there is a potential for widespread pesticides in shallow soils across the site and for naturally occurring ground gas. Through suitably worded conditions requiring a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and an intrusive ground investigation, The Head of Housing and Environmental Health has advised the principle of development is acceptable.

Drainage and Flood Risk

200. In terms of the foul water strategy, it is known that there is currently inadequate capacity in the existing foul sewerage system for this development and the Environmental Statement recognises that without mitigation, the environmental impact of development would be major. The applicants have been aware of this fact from an early stage and have been in discussions with Southern Water for some time, concluding the discharging of foul drainage by means of a new sewer laid parallel to the existing sewer from the site to the Chickenhall Eastleigh Wastewater Treatment Works (WTW)was the favoured option.

201. The developable areas of the application site lie within Flood Zone 1 which is considered to have little or no risk of flooding and some areas of strategic landscaping, POS and the ecological areas fall within flood zones 2 & 3. The revised 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 (SUDs). Indicative SUDs features have been proposed for incorporation into the outline drainage design taking the form of swales, porous/permeable paving and attenuation ponds. They would reduce run-off to greenfield run-off rates and protect water quality through these various methods designed to blend in to the landscape and with capacity for the 1 in 100 year storm rate plus 30-40% capacity in accordance with best practice.

202. To ensure the suitability of the water quality reaching sensitive receptors (River Itchen) is maintained the surface water runoff from potentially polluted areas (e.g. access roads, parking areas) will be discharged via source control measures reducing total suspended solids, heavy metals and hydrocarbons from the runoff, providing water quality treatment. Consultees in principle consider that the surface water drainage could be designed to ensure water quality can be protected once operational. Full details of the surface water drainage are to be sought via condition. A Construction Environment Management Plan is required to ensure pollutants as a result of the construction process do not enter the network of watercourses within or abutting the site.

203. Based on the information provided the development of this site accords with saved policies 41.ES, 42.ES, 45.ES and submitted policies and DM5.

Ecology and trees

204. The application site is within or in close proximity to a European designated site (also commonly referred to as Natura 2000 sites), and therefore has the potential to affect its interest features. European sites are afforded protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended (the ‘Habitats Regulations’). The application site is in close proximity to the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA) and the River Itchen SAC which are European sites. The sites are also listed as Solent and Southampton Water Ramsar site and also notified at a national level as Upper Hamble Estuary and Woods Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and the River Itchen SSSI. The site is also in close proximity to Moorgreen Meadows SSSI.

205. The ecological issues on the site are numerous and a large collection of ecological assessment and reports have been submitted with the application. These reports and surveys relate to the site habitat, bats, badgers, dormice, water voles, otters, reptiles, great crested newts, winter birds, breeding birds, and survey for Indian Balsam.

206. The Borough’s ecologist has reviewed the evidence provided and is able to support the development subject to a number of conditions.

207. The evidence provided has demonstrated that the development can be accommodated and serviced without causing harm to River Itchen or the Solent Complex (European sites) whilst through buffer zones and suitable drainage the wetlands and watercourses would not be detrimentally affected by the proposal.

208. Bats and Great Crested Newts are European protected species and both are found to be either present on or adjoining to the site. The Council when determining the application must have regard to the likelihood of Natural England granting a European Protected Species (EPS) license in connection with development, Natural England must consider the three tests set out in sub-paragraphs (2)(e), (9)(a) and (9)(b) of the EU Habitats Directive

(1) Regulation 53(2)(e) states: a licence can be granted for the purposes of “preserving public health or public safety or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment”.(2) Regulation 53(9)(a) states: the appropriate authority shall not grant a licence unless they are satisfied “that there is no satisfactory alternative”.

(3) Regulation 53(9)(b) states: the appropriate authority shall not grant a licence unless they are satisfied “that the action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range.”

209. The proposal results in the demolition of two buildings that contain two satellite maternity roosts (local value) for Brown Long-eared bats as well day / transitional roosts for common pipistrelles. The listed Fir Tree farmhouse is a main maternity roost (county value) for Brown Long-eared bats, and this building / roost will be retained. Activity surveys indicated a reasonable presence of the bats foraging and deemed to be of local value. A bat tree roost survey identified 53 trees had potential for bat roosts and recommended further survey be undertaken at the details layout stage.

210. Borough’s ecologist has advised that on the basis of the layout, protection of foraging and commuting corridors plus the outline mitigation strategies proposed, the development meets the three degradation tests and Natural England would be likely to grant a license. Whilst bat roosts would be lost, replacement roosts can be secured and provided in accordance with the mitigation details proposed (50% of dwellings to have bat boxes) the full details of which are to be with the Borough Council. An oak tree to be felled to facilitate the roundabout has been identified as having potential for a bat roost. Prior to development this tree will need to be further surveyed and a strategy for its removal agreed should it be found to host a roost.

211. Great Crested Newt (GCN) were found in ponds off-site and the habitat within the site has potential as terrestrial habitat. To mitigate impact on the GCN the terrestrial habitat would be enhanced and protected, and new ponds would be created within the SUDs layout that are suitable for GCN such that a favourable conservation status is secured. Conditions are accordingly recommended.

212. As for nationally protected species (otters, water voles, reptiles, badgers, over wintering birds) conditions are recommended to ensure habitats and foraging areas are retained and enhanced wherever possible. The development provides for an extensive network of green infrastructure allowing wildlife corridors to be retained and enhanced.

213. It is unavoidable that some hedging would be lost to this development and wherever possible the most valuable hedgerows are retained. The roundabout has been repositioned east to ensure the majority of the “important” hedgerow to Allington Lane is retained. The remaining “important” hedgerow within this development can be predominantly retained for it falls on the boundaries of the developable areas.

214. The roundabout and road alignment would necessitate the felling of a few trees which generally are not deemed worthy of retention. However, the roundabout requires the removal of a mature oak tree

that is deemed an important landscape feature by both the consultant arboricultarlist and the Borough tree officer. The tree officer has raised an objection to the loss of this tree. The location of the roundabout on the lower part of the POS has a reduced visual and physical impact than if located further north within the POS, whilst the sight lines needed on the curve of Allington Lane could result in greater loss of hedging and still impact on at least one of these trees. Whilst regrettable to lose mature trees, in the planning balance the location of the roundabout is deemed best located as proposed. It is important that a strong landscape strategy is secured via condition which should include substantial native tree planting to compensate for the trees to be lost.

215. Indian Balsam, a non-native invasive species, is found along the watercourse and this is to be removed in accordance with a strategy to be agreed with the Council via conditions.

216. In accordance with the Interim Solent Recreation Mitigation Strategy states a contribution is to be secured through the S106 to mitigate the impact from recreational pressure on the Solent and Southampton Water Special Protection Area (SPA).

217. An “in-combination” impact of air pollution from traffic associated with development and other committed schemes is predicted to occur on sensitive habitats of Southern Damselfly. This cannot be mitigated on site due to the specific wetland habitat, thus it is to be mitigated through a contribution to strategy to be coordinated and implemented by the Borough Council. The Borough ecologist has raised no objection subject to securing a contribution to the mitigation strategy, which would be designed and implemented by the Council.

218. A package of mitigation measures are proposed including: timing of works, use and location of sensitive lighting, bat boxes/bricks and bird boxes (50% of dwgs for both bats / birds), Bat Mitigation Plan, wildlife corridors, new hedge and tree planting, protected existing ponds and create new for GCN as well protected dispersion routes and measures to cross roads safely, a Reptile Mitigation Strategy and Habitat Creation and Restoration programme and overarching Habitat Creation Mitigation, Management and Monitoring Plan.

219. Overall, with the various mitigation and compensation strategies proposed for the loss of habitat, for the disturbance to known protected species, for the spread of invasive species, for the impact upon water quality, otters and to address the impact of increased recreational pressure on European sites, the proposals are considered to accord with the NPPF paragraph 118-120 and saved plan policies 22.NC, 23.NC, 25. NC, 39.ES, and submitted plan policy S1 and DM9 together with the requirement for assessment under other legislation.

Sustainability Measures

220. The NPPF (paragraphs 95-99), Saved Policies 34.ES and 37.ES of the local plan, Policies S1, DM2 and DM3 of the submitted local plan and the adopted Environmentally Sustainable Development SPD require development to be sustainable in terms of resource use, climate change and energy use. In March 2015 a Ministerial Statement announced that the Code for Sustainable Homes would cease to be applied to new residential development, although the requirement to still achieve the Code’s levels for energy efficiency and water consumption remains. If permission were to be granted any future reserved matters application would have to meet the energy and water standards but not now the additional requirements of the Environmentally Sustainable Development SPD.

221. The scheme is required to deliver a BREEAM Communities 'excellent' rating and the applicant has prepared an assessment and an Interim Certificate to demonstrate the excellent rating can be achieved. Subject to conditions, the principles of development are therefore considered to comply with the aims of Saved Policy 34.ES of the adopted Local Plan and the now relevant requirements of the adopted SPD on Environmentally Sustainable Development.

Minerals

222. Advice on minerals is contained with the adopted Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan 2013 (in which the site falls partially 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 a very small part of the site could contain mineral deposits. Although not commented specifically on the current application, the area identified is not of sufficient size that is could be deemed commercial value or require pre-extraction. Therefore, the development accords with paragraphs 143 and 144 of the NPPF and the M&WP 2013.

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

223. The NPPF (para 128) states that those parts of the historic environment that have significance because of their historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest are heritage assets; that they require assessment and are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. Opportunities to capture evidence from the historic environment must be taken, whilst development must ensure the setting of statutory and non-statutory buildings of local importance is protected. Adopted plan policies 166.LB to 168.LB and 175.LB, and submitted plan policies DM1, DM7 apply.

224. Fir Tree Farmhouse (Grade II Listed Building) is within the centre of the site, albeit outside of the development area. The building is no longer in

agricultural use, bound to the west by utilitarian large agricultural barns whilst the former barns to the south have been converted in to a single large dwelling separated by Fir Tree Lane and a walled/gated entrance. The concerns of the borough heritage officer are noted but the setting of the farmhouse is somewhat effected by the more modern agricultural developments to the west. Whilst visible from the lane, it is in part set behind a high hedge and set centrally on its frontage and within extensive grounds bound by mature trees and hedging. The proposed developable areas are set back from the boundaries maintaining the sense of openness around the house. Currently, the farmhouse is set close to Fir Tree Lane which at peak times experiences a reasonable flow of traffic. The current scheme proposes to reposition Fir Tree Lane up to 20m away from the immediate setting of the listed building enabling a landscape buffer and appropriate setting to be afforded to the property. Through reserved matters applications officers can ensure that the proposed new buildings opposite the farmhouse are design to reflect and respect the historic nature of this listed building.

225. Foxholes Farm and Foxholes Farm Cottages to the east of the site are identified as buildings of local importance within the ES. Their settings are not considered to be materially effected by this proposal, and with this the provision of the link road through to Allington Lane, their setting would be improved through the closure of Fir Tree Lane to through traffic.

226. The ES appendices conclude that there is potential for prehistoric, Roman, medieval and post-medieval archaeology within the boundaries of the site and that a programme of archaeological fieldwork will be required in order to fully assess this potential. HCC Archaeologist supports this approach and a suitably worded condition is proposed.

Conclusion of environmental sustainability

227. The Head of Development Management recommends that with the necessary mitigation measures set out within this report, the impact on the countryside, landscape and character and amenity of the local area would not be significantly detrimental and the location would be accessible and, as such, the proposed development is environmentally sustainable.

Planning obligation /considerations

228. 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 Submission Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2011-2029, the Council’s ‘Planning Obligations’ SPD and the requirements of Regulation 122 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.

229. If outline permission is to be granted for the proposed development, contributions / obligations towards the provision of the following infrastructure and requirements would need to be secured via a Section 106 obligation index-linked as per the Planning Obligations SPD and HCC requirements:

Contributions towards community infrastructure including the community building on the West of Horton Heath site.

Contributions towards the funding of a Community Development Worker

Education contributions for eligible dwellings Off-site Health Facilities contribution – extension to existing

practice or new medical centre Off-site sports pitch contributions On-site public open space/play provision and maintenance

including 2no. children’s play areas and 1no. kickabout games area

On and off-site provision of a new public right of way and enhancements to existing.

Off-site footway/cycleway links or improvements Off-site highway junction improvements (actual works or

contributions to works) Public transport improvements 35% on-site affordable housing Public art provision Travel plan provision, bond and monitoring Road traffic order funding Unallocated parking spaces not to be sold to individual

householders Street tree maintenance Solent Recreation Mitigation Project contribution Mitigation of air quality impact on Southern Damselfly Air Quality monitoring management contribution. Employment and Skills Plan BREEAM Communities Post Occupancy Evaluation of

Sustainability & Resident Satisfaction Survey Phasing Timing to be concurrent with and not before the West of Horton

Heath development.

230. The Council are continuing negotiations with the applicant to ensure the development would remain viable.

231. The projects and measures identified for contribution expenditure will comply with the 3 tests set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy 2010, in that the monies would 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

232. Section 38(6) of the Act states a scheme contrary to the development plan should be refused unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The NPPF as a material consideration does indicate otherwise as, in respect of housing supply policy, Saved Policy 1.CO must be considered out of date because the adopted Plan does not make sufficient provision for new housing and must now include countryside sites, however in other respects it is compliant with the NPPF and therefore has some weight

233. 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.

234. It is noted that the proposed development would give rise to significant benefits, particularly in terms of housing provision, including 158 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 provision, landscaping and financial support to the delivery of schools, community centre and improved health facilities. The provision of the link road from Fir Tree Lane to Allington Lane would divert a proportion of traffic from the congested cross roads at Fair Oak Road and Botley Road to the benefit of those residents living in this vicinity.

235. There would also be some improvement to the biodiversity value of the site including the enhancement of the habitats, removal of invasive species and improving water quality through cessing farming of the land. 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.

236. So far as harms are concerned, the development would result in the loss of undeveloped countryside of landscape. With appropriate design and mitigation it would not have a significant adverse impact on the landscape character of the local area and, critically, would not cause the unacceptable merging of settlements. Traffic impacts are acknowledged as a serious local concern but the county as highway authority confirms the forecast impact from traffic generated can adequately be mitigated. The demands from the development on education, health and community infrastructure can be addressed through contributions secured via the s106 agreement.

237. The loss of mature trees and hedging categorised as “important” is regrettable, but can be compensated through extensive landscaping secured as part of an overall landscape strategy for the site. Two bat roosts would be lost and there is a potential for impact on the flight corridors, albeit that through careful design and mitigation this can be accommodated. The setting of the listed Fir Tree Farmhouse would be impacted through the loss of adjacent farm buildings although none of these are desirable for retention in their own right. Through sympathetic layout, design and landscaping in addition to opening up of views of the farmhouse, its long term setting can be protected and the farmhouse can become a landmark feature within this new development.

238. In isolation the scheme would not deliver a sustainable community but when considered alongside the approved development at West of Horton Heath, the proposed development is sustainable and will help support the delivery and use of new community facilities, education infrastructure and employment opportunities. It is essential that the delivery of the scheme is phased to be delivered concurrently with, and not before, the West of Horton Heath scheme.

239. This is, however, a balanced recommendation weighing the loss of countrysideand other impacts of the development against the delivery of housing, including affordable housing, in what would be a sustainable location. On balance there are sufficient material considerations to support the grant of outline permission for this development contrary to policies of the adopted local plan. The impacts are acknowledged and addressed but, if mitigated, they would not outweigh the benefits this development would deliver now and in the future.

240. It is recommended that the application for outline permission be granted subject to conditions and securing the S106 obligations as set out with this report.

© Crown copyright and database rights (2017) Ordnance Survey (LA100019622)

O/16/79354

Scale:

Map Ref:

Date:

1:5000

23/02/2017

SU4817

Title:

Fir Tree Farm,

Fir Tree Lane