manydown - basingstoke · plan (the plan), to replace the saved policies in the existing adopted...

Manydown Draft Local Plan Submission Document

Submitted to: Hampshire County Council Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council

Final draft, March 2014

dwa

Typewritten Text

dwa

Typewritten Text

dwa

Typewritten Text

dwa

Typewritten Text

APPENDIX 4

dwa

Typewritten Text

dwa

Typewritten Text

dwa

Typewritten Text

Manydown – Draft Local Plan Submission Document

MANYDOWN - DRAFT LOCAL PLAN SUBMISSION DOCUMENT MARCH 2014 1

CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................................2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................4 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ................................................8

1.1 Manydown ownership ...........................................................................8

1.2 Local Plan evolution .............................................................................8

2 SITE ANALYSIS AND TECHNICAL STRATEGIES ........................... 12

2.1 Masterplan and technical study précises ........................................ 13

3 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTERPLAN ......................................................... 20

3.1 Scope ................................................................................................... 20

3.2 Methodology ....................................................................................... 20 3.3 Structure of this document ............................................................... 20

3.4 Site analysis ........................................................................................ 21

3.5 Proposed site allocation boundary .................................................. 22

3.6 Constraints and opportunities .......................................................... 23

3.7 Strategic masterplan options to 2029 .............................................. 28

3.8 Illustrative Masterplan ....................................................................... 27 3.9 Masterplanning principles ................................................................. 27

3.10 Potential to accommodate a western by-pass to Basingstoke ..... 27

3.11 Masterplan key features .................................................................... 29

3.12 Indicative Phasing .............................................................................. 30

3.13 Viability ................................................................................................ 30 3.14 Conclusion .......................................................................................... 31

4 MANYDOWN LOCAL PLAN POLICY ................................................. 34

4.1 Principle of development .................................................................. 34

4.2 Allocation boundary........................................................................... 35

4.3 Viability ................................................................................................ 37 4.4 Manydown policy clauses ................................................................. 37

4.5 Other Local Plan policies .................................................................. 40



ABBREVIATIONS

BDBC Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council

CIL A levy allowing local authorities to raise funds from owners or developers of land undertaking new building projects in their area.

HCC Hampshire County Council

Landowners HCC Property Services, BDBC Property Services and the Manydown Company/Trustees

LPA BDBC Local Planning Authority

Framework National Planning Policy Framework

Plan BDBC’s Pre-Submission Local Plan published under Regulation 19 of The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012

SA Sustainability Appraisal

SHLAA Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment

SHMA Strategic Housing Market Assessment

SPB Settlement Boundary Policy

Executive Summary



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY URS was commissioned by the landowners in March 2013 to produce an Illustrative Masterplan for the Manydown development to enable a deliverable and viable site allocation to be secured through the emerging Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (BDBC) Local Plan process covering the period to 2029. This report sets out the draft Illustrative Masterplan and attached Technical Strategies for the Manydown project which, taken together, have been designed to support the landowner written representations to the BDBC Local Plan. Further consideration of the draft Illustrative Masterplan for the Manydown development is being undertaken by the landowners following the publication of the LPA’s formal response to the representations it has received through the consultation on the Pre Submission Local Plan between August and October 2013. The LPA has recommended a series of suggested changes to the Pre-Submission Local Plan to the Planning and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Committee prior to the next publication consultation stage, to be consulted upon between 25 April and 13 June 2014. Following which, it is anticipated that the plan and any minor changes would be submitted for independent examination. The landowners support the majority of changes made by the LPA in response to their representations submitted for the previous consultation stage.

This report is divided into four sections:

1. Introduction & Background

2. Site Analysis & Technical Strategies

3. Illustrative Masterplan

4. Manydown Local Plan Policy

Part 1 Introduction & Background

This section sets the scene and provides details on the ownership of Manydown as well as highlighting the key steps in the evolution of the Local Plan and masterplanning of Manydown up to this point.

Part 2 Site Analysis & Technical Strategies

In order to build on the 2012 site capacity and options report, produced by Tibbalds, URS (including sub-consultants Gleeds and Knight Frank) developing a series of technical strategies to support work on the emerging masterplan and inform the formal submission to the Local Planning Authority in support of the Manydown site allocation within the Local Plan. These technical strategies include consideration of:

• Transport & Highways

• Heritage

• Community Infrastructure

• Sewerage & Drainage

• Flooding

• Green Infrastructure & Landscape

• Sustainability

• Ecology

• Viability, Phasing & Delivery.

This section provides a summary of the technical strategies highlighting the main opportunities and constraints resulting from the illustrative masterplanning work.

Part 3 Illustrative Masterplan

The masterplanning work has been kept to the strategic level and focused on the issues that are relevant to the allocation of the site through the Local Plan process. It has also benefited from a collaborative working process with the landowners' visioning consultant Beyond Green which has included two workshops with the Manydown Members’ Advisory Panel.

More detailed masterplanning work will be undertaken following the allocation of the site and this will include a full programme of community and public engagement appropriate to a project of this scale and complexity. The Illustrative Masterplan shown here does not seek to constrain this process and the further ideas and insights that will enrich and bring to life the final plan. However, the technical masterplanning work has enabled a number of strategic conclusions to be drawn that can inform both the Local Plan process and further masterplan development. These are:

• The Manydown site can accommodate around 3,400 homes (including land at Worting) and supporting facilities and these can be delivered within the Local Plan timeframe to 2029.

• The assessment of technical constraints and opportunities demonstrates clearly that the land to the north of the railway line is best suited to the development of a sustainable community before 2029.

• The land to the south of the railway line could also accommodate development in the longer term, but requires further technical assessment of some strategic constraints including the Battledown Scheduled Ancient Monument and the ecological resources of rare arable plants.

• The new community to the north of the railway can be developed in a comprehensive way that is supported by all of the necessary community and technical infrastructure. The masterplan can help enable and support longer term development to the south of the railway but it is not dependent upon it.

• The northern area has potential to accommodate up to three local centres within walking distance of as many homes as possible. The strategic gateway location on Worting Road is considered to have the strongest potential of the local centres identified.

• Parcels 1, 2, 4A, 4B, 5 plus 6A are all required to enable the comprehensive approach to development and phasing that is needed to deliver around 3,400 homes by 2029.

• The creation of a new link road through the community from Worting Road to the A339 could serve the development and accommodate wider transport movements while also acting as a key public transport route.

• The creation of a sustainable and integrated new community is not compatible with the construction of a segregated by-pass or dual carriageway through Parcels 1, 2, 4A, 4B and 5.

• An initial viability assessment undertaken by the project team indicates that the project is capable of delivering a competitive return as set out in the NPPF and the Harman Guidance on Viability Testing.

Above all, it is clear that the Manydown site offers a tremendous opportunity to deliver a wide range and choice of new homes in an attractive, high quality environment, set against the surrounding natural and heritage assets and supported by new local services and facilities to complement Basingstoke’s existing communities.



Part 4 Manydown Local Plan Policy

The final section in this report draws on the issues and opportunities highlighted in the technical strategies and the strategic conclusions emerging from the Illustrative Masterplan. The commentary in section 4 focuses on four main elements within the Pre-Submission Local Plan to 2029, namely:

• The site allocation boundary;

• The viability and deliverability of the Manydown allocation;

• The detailed policy clauses of the Manydown allocation; and

• The wider Local Plan policies and their impact on Manydown.

The process of producing the technical strategies and Illustrative Masterplan has helped to add weight to the principle of locating development in the Manydown area and demonstrates how the allocation will help to ensure that the social, environmental and economic objectives of the Local Plan and Sustainability Appraisal will be achieved. The landowners support the majority of changes recommended by officers1 in response to their representations submitted for the previous consultation stage (August – October 2013). However, subsequent changes to the Local Plan before and after the next consultation phase (April – June 2014) will be monitored carefully prior to submission and examination. The landowners future representations shall be focussed on providing suggestions for modifications that would help to make the plan ‘sound’ in planning terms and ensure that the site will be able to deliver around 3,400 homes to 2029.

1 Suggested changes to Basingstoke and Deane Pre-Submission Local Plan, Report to Planning and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Committee 5th and 6th March 2014



This page is intentionally left blank

Part 1: Introduction & Background



1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (BDBC) is currently in the process of preparing a new Local Plan (the Plan), to replace the saved policies in the existing adopted Plan (1996-2011). The new Plan will cover the period from 2011 to 2029, and will allocate sites for development in the Borough; it will establish a policy framework within which to make decisions on planning applications.

URS was commissioned by the landowners in March 2013 to produce an Illustrative Masterplan for the Manydown development to enable a deliverable and viable site allocation to be secured through the emerging Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (BDBC) Local Plan process covering the period to 2029. This report sets out the draft Illustrative Masterplan and Technical Strategies for the Manydown project which, taken together, have been designed to support the landowner written representations to the BDBC Local Plan. Further consideration of the draft Illustrative Masterplan for the Manydown development will be undertaken by the landowners following the next publication stage (April – June 2014) and prior to the landowners formal submission of evidence to the Examination in Public (EIP) of the BDBC Local Plan.

This report is divided into four sections:

1. Introduction & Background - outlining the relationship between the Manydown Trustees and HCC/BDBC and the planning history of the Manydown land since 2005.

2. Site Analysis & Technical Strategies – considering a range of issues to inform the development of the Illustrative Masterplan

3. Illustrative Masterplan - to demonstrate that the site has the capacity to deliver at least 3,400 homes and supporting community and social infrastructure within the Local Plan period to 2029, and the potential to create a sustainable new community to the west of Basingstoke

4. Manydown Local Plan Policy - representing the URS consultant team’s views on the soundness and legal conformity of the Plan. Where it is thought the plan is unsound, suggested modifications will be provided for the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and Inspector’s consideration.

In promoting the land, BDBC and HCC have commissioned a series of technical strategies to provide a robust evidence base (see Section 2) and to inform an emerging vision and masterplan (see Section 3).

Below is an outline of the relationship between the Manydown Trustees and HCC/BDBC and the planning history of the Manydown land since 2005

1.1 Manydown ownership

BDBC purchased a 999 leasehold interest in the site from the Manydown Company Limited and the Trustees of the Manydown Estate on 20 February 1996 with a view to both BDBC and HCC eventually purchasing or selling the freehold reversion of the site following grant of planning permission for development. The leasehold interest in the land was acquired by BDBC in association with HCC after it was offered for sale by the Manydown Trustees following its inclusion in the draft HCC Structure Plan which identified a Major Development Area at Manydown to the west of Basingstoke. Under the terms of the lease, the Manydown Company and the Manydown Trustees are entitled to receive 50% of the net proceeds of sale or market value if the land is retained by both or either of the Councils for development, provided that development takes place before 2050. Therefore BDBC and HCC have a 50% stake in the land value, subject to exercising various options. The land was acquired and held under statutory planning powers (s.226 and s.227 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) and the necessary purpose for which the land is held is to promote development and secure the better planning of the area. This arrangement is relevant to representations pertaining to viability and deliverability.

1.2 Local Plan evolution

The current Adopted Local Plan, that covers the period 1996 – 2011, was adopted on 17 July 2006. Prior to 2005, Manydown was considered for inclusion within the adopted BDBC Local Plan for a development of up to 8,000 dwellings. A number of technical strategies and plans were produced at that time to support its inclusion. The Inspector at the 2005 public inquiry recommended that the additional housing, which Manydown might have provided to 2016, was not required. In his report, the Inspector examined the key issues raised by the potential development of parts of Manydown and concluded that due to sustainability, transport, sewerage infrastructure, environmental impact, and delivery issues Manydown should not be allocated for 8,000 dwellings. The Technical Strategies and masterplan seek to address these points in relation to the site today and the issues and opportunities that have arisen through masterplanning that URS are undertaking.

Production of a new Local Plan began in 2008. The Local Plan has been subject to a number of formal and informal consultation stages since 2008. Key developments of relevance to the Manydown allocation are listed below in order to frame the representations made in this report on the latest Pre-Submission draft of the Local Plan, published under Regulation 19 of The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.

• Issues and Options (January – February 2008)

o In early 2008, an Issues and Options consultation was undertaken which explored alternatives for the spatial strategy. Issue 7 Future approaches to greenfield development in the Borough included the option to extend to the west of Basingstoke.

• SHLAA Consultation (September – October 2008)

o Manydown land included.

• Vision Consultation (2009)

o In the summer of 2009 BDBC and the Basingstoke Area Strategic Partnership (BASP) consulted on a draft Vision for the Borough - this vision has now been agreed and adopted and will inform the emerging Local Plan.

• Key Themes Consultation (March – April 2010)

o In spring 2010, a Key Themes consultation was undertaken, which gave members of the public the opportunity to consider the key issues facing the Borough in the future. The consultation included questions of the annual housing target, affordable housing targets etc. but nothing specifically about growth locations.

• SHLAA Consultation (May – June 2010)

o Manydown was included in the consultation and shown to have potential for 1,350 dwellings.

• New Homes Consultation (October – January 2010/11)

o Between Autumn 2010 and January 2011, a New Homes consultation was undertaken, which gave members of the public the chance to express their views and aspirations for future housing provision in the Borough. Manydown was not explicitly mentioned but the consultation sought views on spatial strategy options.



• Pre-Submission Draft Core Strategy (February 2012)

o In spring 2012, there was a Consultation on a previous Pre-Submission Core Strategy. Manydown was omitted from Policy SS2 which set out housing targets for the allocated sites.

• Site capacity and initial options report, Tibbalds (October 2012)

o This report was prepared on behalf of the landowners to help answer three questions:

1. What amount of development could reasonably be delivered on the Manydown site in the period to 2029;

2. What is the long term potential for new homes and related facilities on land to the west of Basingstoke, extending beyond the 2029 end date of the emerging Local Plan; and

3. Where on the site development should be located and how it could be phased to help ensure that a high quality and coherent new place with a distinctive identity

– The Tibbalds report provided a high-level consideration of scenarios which concluded that identified parcels of land could support and deliver between 2500 and 3200 new homes within the Local Plan period to 2029, and could then go on to form part of a larger expansion of around 6000 new homes over the next 30-50 years (incorporating all parcels identified).

– The area of search took into account the existing physical and legislative constraints, including the restrictive covenant, existing woodland, and the physical barrier of the railway line. Land outside of this ‘area of search’ was assumed to remain as farmland and as physical separation between Basingstoke and Oakley. The report noted that small parts of this area may be suitable for small scale development to the east of Oakley, and to support growth promoted as part of a Neighbourhood Plan. Within the area of search seven sub areas are identified and tested both as part of the study but also by Basingstoke and Deane as part of the 2012 SHLAA review.

– A table summarising the key issues for each of these sub areas was included in the study which identifies that the areas to the north of the site (generally to the north of Worting Road) are the most accessible with connection possible onto the A339 and are therefore likely to form early phases of any development. This area is shown to be well located for utilities infrastructure and services. It is also located adjacent to the potential area for a Country Park which is restricted by covenant. This means that this new borough-wide facility could be delivered alongside early phases of development.

• Development of the revised Pre-Submission Local Plan (July 2012 to August 2013)

o Updates to the SHMA, Viability evidence, SHLAA, Site Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal of the emerging site allocations.

o Landowner evidence studies by Tibbalds Planning and Urban Design Ltd (Masterplanning) and JMP (Transport).

o Manydown was previously allocated to only deliver 3,080 housing units over the plan period.

• URS appointed to masterplan Manydown (March 2013)

o URS were appointed as the preferred multi-disciplinary consultant to lead masterplanning of the site on behalf of the landowners, in order to:

1. Build on the 2012 site capacity and options report produced by Tibbalds; and

2. Produce an Illustrative Masterplan and supporting document(s) for submission to the LPA to support the allocation of land at Manydown for a future greenfield development.

o As part of this process URS (including sub-consultants Gleeds and Knight Frank) has produced a series of technical strategies to inform masterplanning and the recommended representations that will inform the formal submission to the Local Planning Authority in support of the Manydown site allocation within the Local Plan:

Transport & Highways

Heritage

Community Infrastructure

Sewerage & Drainage

Flooding

Green Infrastructure & Landscape

Sustainability

Ecology

o Since March 2013 the consultant and client team has provided the LPA with information on topics such as infrastructure requirements to help inform the Infrastructure Delivery Plan and provided input into draft site allocation policies as part of on-going consultation with all stakeholders and landowners in the borough.

• URS assisted the joint landowners in formulating representations to Pre-Submission Local Plan (August – October 2013)

o URS provided suggestions for representations (informed by evidence) on the issues of: the principle of development, allocation boundary, viability, the detailed Manydown policy clauses and other Local Plan policies of relevance to Manydown.

• URS coordinated a response to the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Community Infrastructure Levy Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule (February 2014)

o URS, Gleeds and Knight Frank jointly prepared a technical response to BDBC using the emerging evidence from the work developed for Manydown to comment upon the proposed levy rates, the draft 123 list, infrastructure delivery plan and the viability evidence base (produced by Three Dragons consultancy).

Part 2: Site Analysis & Technical Strategies



2 SITE ANALYSIS AND TECHNICAL STRATEGIES

The technical strategies that support the Masterplan and work to inform the Local Plan have built on existing Manydown evidence (e.g. Tibbalds site capacity and options work, 2012) and sought to address historical issues related to the site.

In Section 1 we have summarised the key steps in the chronology of the Plan’s development, including consultations on the quantum of growth and emerging spatial strategy (distribution of development). LPA-led evidence has informed production of technical strategies and development of the Masterplan up to this point. The technical strategies have also sought to address perceived gaps or weaknesses in the LPA’s current Local Plan evidence base. In some instances masterplan-led evidence provides a finer resolution of information in order to help the consultant team arrive at a draft preferred approach for the Masterplan.

URS’ approach to masterplanning Manydown is built on a collaborative working that seeks to integrate all disciplines/stakeholders. The methodology ensures that masterplanning is evidence-led. Ten core disciplines, supplemented by the cost consultancy expertise of Gleeds and the property market knowledge of Knight Frank, contributed to a number of key work stages:

1. Whole team briefing day – A joint site visit attended by all consultant, HCC and BDBC team members, including a bus tour of the surrounding areas followed by an initial reactions and key issues workshop.

2. Baseline reports - technical baseline documents were produced by each discipline using a standard pro-forma to ensure a comprehensive front loaded approach was adopted across the multi-disciplinary team.

3. Synthesis workshop – following the baseline reporting stage a series of workshops were held bringing together the lead professionals for each discipline. Attended by all team members to identify key issues and opportunities arising from the baseline analysis stage of the technical workstreams. BDBC, HCC and consultant team (including the visioning consultants Beytond Green) shared ideas and debated the issues to ensure that the masterplan options were developed in a collaborative and integrated way.

4. An initial Visioning Workshop – held with the Manydown Members’ Advisory Panel (MAP), facilitated by Beyond Green with input from URS, HCC and BDBC officers.

5. Preparation of initial options based on the findings of the previous two workshops - discussions of those initial options at an Options Workshop attended by all team members and a second Visioning Workshop with the Manydown MAP to discuss the emerging options and to agree a preferred strategy.

Following the completion of these key milestones it was possible to begin drafting the Illustrative Masterplan and supporting technical strategies. Table 1 shows a summary of the scope these workstreams.

Table 1 Technical strategies scope

Technical Study Scope

Illustrative Masterplan • Introduction

• Issues and opportunities

• Illustrative Masterplan - masterplanning principles, perspective drawing and written commentary

• Indicative land budget

Viability, Phasing & Delivery • Based on the Three Dragons report, Infrastructure Delivery Plan and Masterplan assumptions.


Each concise study considers the area within the proposed site allocation boundary up to 2029 and covers:

• Scope

• Methodology

• Baseline conditions

• Strategic approach to accommodating development to 2029

• Masterplan commentary

• References and list of annexes as necessary

Heritage


Sewerage & Drainage

Flooding

Green Infrastructure & Landscape

Sustainability

Ecology

The key salient points emerging from each workstream are summarised overleaf.



2.1 Masterplan and technical study précises

A summary of key findings and implications for the emerging Plan are set out below.

Table 2 Technical strategies summary Key constraints Key opportunities Infrastructure requirements/land budget Policy implications Illustrative Masterplan

• Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) 1km northwest of site

• Area of high visual impact and visibility within the landscape;

• Active oil pipeline running north-south through site, west of Worting requiring 12m safeguarded maintenance strip;

• Woodland areas east of Oakley restricting development capacity;

• 98ha area in northern part of the site subject to restrictive covenant preventing development, except development ancillary to open space;

• Main London to Weymouth railway line cuts through the central part of the site;

• Presence of Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMS) within the site; and

• Proximity to Worting Conservation Area.

• Northern part of the study area has the greatest potential for creating a coherent development with the critical mass required to support the necessary facilities and infrastructure within walking distance of homes. Capacity for at least 3,400 homes including site 6A;

• Creation of an exemplar development planned for in an integrated manner;

• Creation of open space if required to conserve archaeology and provide opportunities for habitat creation and spaces for relaxation;

• Retention, enhancement and linking of ecological networks and corridors to provide biodiversity benefits and access for local people; and

• Creation of a country park providing opportunities for safe access to the countryside for local users with opportunities for learning and play.

• Spine road and development plot access roads (12 Ha)

• Oil pipeline wayleave (HSE consultation zone) (22 Ha)

• Reservation for potential future rail crossing approaches and bypass (10 Ha)

• One main centre and two local centres (6 Ha)

• Two primary schools (1x2FE and 1x3FE) -(6 Ha)

• Reserve site for a secondary school (13 Ha)

• Green infrastructure at 3 ha per 1,000 population (25 Ha)

• Core open space at 3 ha per 1,000 population (25 Ha)

• Potential residential land available (123 Ha)

The Illustrative Masterplan demonstrates that the site has the capacity to deliver at least 3,400 homes in the current Local Plan period to 2029, and the potential to create an exemplar development which provides a diverse choice of homes for all residents to complement Basingstoke’s offer.


• The Worting Road link and Pack Lane link under the railway line restricts vehicular traffic along these corridors.

• Junction of A339/Roman Road, Black Dam Roundabout, Binfields roundabout and Fiveways signalised junction all operate at or above capacity during the morning and evening peaks; and

• Limited public transport provision currently serving the site.

• New central spine link road provides the opportunity to manage the potential impact of traffic on Worting Road and provide for bus, pedestrian and cycle movements, through encouraging vehicular traffic to use the link road as a connection to central Basingstoke;

• Creation of sustainable connections to and from built areas at Winklebury, Buckskin, Kempshot and Oakley;

• Creation of new pedestrian and cycle links that give pedestrians and cyclists priority;

• The existing public rights of way; and • Provision of new or enhanced bus

services, providing connections to the town centre and key employment locations

Safeguarding of land for provision post 2029 of:

• A bridge or tunnel crossing the existing railway line; and

• A future bypass and possible connection to the crossing of the existing railway line if required.

• In accordance with national planning policy, the Masterplan seeks to promote a pattern of development at Manydown that would ensure that the use of sustainable transport modes is maximised.

• Transport improvements to mitigate the impacts of development are supported by the landowners and justified with reference to the initial strategic transport assessment work published by JMP in 2013.



Key constraints Key opportunities Infrastructure requirements/land budget Policy implications Heritage

• Worting Conservation Area which includes Listed Buildings; and

• Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs) in the northern and southern halves of the site.

• Creation of a neighbourhood centre linked to the current amenities of Worting, that reflects the character in terms of materials, scale and plan;

• The use of materials which reflect the local distinctiveness of the area and potential to capitalise on the cultural links provided by the historic Manydown estate;

• Archaeological investigation, particularly for community involvement in archaeology and heritage, and contribution to the understanding of historic settlement and human activity in the area; and

• Creation of community hubs and the creation of further road and green links in the vicinity of Worting could ensure development revitalises the Conservation Area while preserving and enhancing its character.

• The masterplan has been designed to avoid significant impacts to the Scheduled Monument at Catern Crossroads by the positioning of a new road to its eastern boundary.

The masterplan proposes a number of measures which will lead to the retention of heritage features in the area and create opportunities to highlight cultural heritage within the development, including:

• Avoid impacts to Scheduled Monument at Catern

• Focussing a coherent development design away from the scheduled zone of the Battledown Farm Scheduled Monument, pending further site investigations;

• Planning routes through the site to link areas of historic interest, including the country park and Worting Wood to the Roman road;

• Retention of current green boundary around Worting Conservation Area; and

• The country park will give a distinct boundary between Wootton St Lawrence and the development area, mitigating the possibility of impacts on views to the south, as well as providing a further area which could contain interpretation of the historic landscape and way-marking for tourism and community purposes.


• Existing schools are unlikely to be able to accommodate additional pupils arising as a result of the Manydown development.

Manydown offers a range of opportunities in terms of new community infrastructure, including the creation of:

• New primary and secondary school sites with multiple forms of entry that will accommodate pupils living in Manydown and the wider area;

• Additional healthcare facilities and community centres to serve the new resident population; and

• Green routes and pedestrian and cycle links connecting residential areas with community facilities and the wider Basingstoke area, to facilitate the adoption of active and healthy lifestyles by residents, in addition to creating opportunities for recreation.

The community infrastructure strategy and Masterplan have identified the following infrastructure requirements for Manydown:

• Three local centres with the potential to house community facilities;

• Two new primary schools; • One new secondary school site; • Sports pitches and facilities in conjunction

with the three schools; • A site for a new country park; • Green boulevards and links promoting

healthy lifestyles; • A new large public open space; and • Multiple smaller open and play spaces

within residential areas.

• In accordance with national planning policy, the Masterplan and Community Infrastructure Study propose a number of measures to ensure that the development will maximise opportunities to promote a healthy, inclusive community at Manydown.



Key constraints Key opportunities Infrastructure requirements/land budget Policy implications Sewerage & Drainage

• The site’s topography is identified as a key constraint; however this can be overcome through the construction of foul pumping stations.

• There could potentially be constraints within the existing Wastewater Treatment Works, the capacity of the Basingstoke Relief Sewer or policy decisions that would preclude the foul water generated by development undertaken between 2021 and 2029 being directed to Basingstoke STW. However it is considered likely to be feasible to direct foul flows to one of two alternative works (Ivy Down Oakley STW and an on-site Wastewater Treatment Works that could be positioned in the western part of the site).

• Enhanced Sequential Batch Reactors (ESBR) technology could potentially be used to improve the removal of Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous at Basingstoke STW in order to enable growth beyond 2027 to be accommodated.

The Sewerage and Wastewater Treatment Study and Masterplan have identified the following infrastructure requirements for Manydown:

• Safeguarding land for an onsite Wastewater Treatment Works that could be used to process sewerage generated by development constructed after 20212; and

• Safeguarding land for foul pumping stations situated at the low point within each catchment to overcome constraints in topography.

• The proposed Sewerage and Wastewater Treatment Study demonstrates that there is potential for wastewater from the proposed development to be treated without increasing the risk of sewer flooding.

Flooding

• Of the six main flooding types, surface water and sewerage are identified as having moderate flood risk to the proposed development. The study proposes mitigation methods to reduce this flood risk. All other sources of flood risk are identified as having either low, negligible or no risk.

The flooding study and masterplan have identified the following opportunities for ensuring flood risk is minimised for Manydown:

• Incorporation of SuDS to provide a combination of treatment prior to infiltration, and attenuation prior to discharge into the downstream catchment;

• Incorporation of green infrastructure to provide areas for infiltration and, where it is not possible to infiltrate all surface runoff, provide areas for storage on site; and

• Incorporation of green roofs to attenuate and improve the quality of water, whilst reducing the volume of runoff compared to a conventional roof.

The Masterplan proposes the following water management schemes to reduce flood risk to and from the site:

• Green infrastructure to provide areas for infiltration and, where it is not possible to infiltrate all surface runoff, provide areas for storage on site;

• In accordance with national planning policy, the Masterplan and Flooding Study propose a number of measures to ensure that Manydown will maximise opportunities to reduce the causes and impacts of flooding.

2 This option would be required in the event that Thames Water determine that it will not be practical to upgrade the Basingstoke STW to accommodate additional development or that other developments erode the residual capacity within the Basingstoke Relief sewer and that the Environment Agency do not provide permission for the Ivy Down Lane STW to be extended.



Key constraints Key opportunities Infrastructure requirements/land budget Policy implications Green Infrastructure & Landscape

• The North Wessex Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) is 1km north west of the site and extends to the north and west;

• Two Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs) and the Worting Conservation Area are located within the site policy boundaries;

• Two further SAMs are to the south of the site and Oakley Conservation Area lies to the southwest and Park Prewett Conservation Area to the northeast;

• Though undesignated, a roman road forms a strong linear edge along the north eastern boundary of the site and is a key landscape feature; and

• Several non-statutory designated sites for Nature Conservation including Site of Interest for Nature Conservation (SINC) are scattered across and close to the site.

• Increase access to accessible natural green space and to amenity green space in Basingstoke - the Green Infrastructure and Landscape Study and Masterplan have identified a number of opportunities for creating Multi-Functional Green Spaces (MFGS) in order to enhance green infrastructure and landscape on the site;

• Country Park; • Existing trees and hedgerows; • Topography, views and character; and • Structural landscape’s ability to minimise

visual intrusion into the AONB, villages to the west including Oakley, the existing urban area of Basingstoke and wider views.

• Country Park – comprising a range of accessible habitats and green spaces, managed for wildlife and people;

• An open space located on the northern ridgeline (within the Country Park, See Figure 3 below)to celebrate the visual enclosure along the ridgeline and the panoramic views across the surrounding landscape;

• Other parks if required to conserve underlying archaeology whilst providing opportunities for habitat creation and spaces for relaxation;

• A small area of open space to celebrate the local high point to the south of Worting Road in the south western part of the site. Planted to accentuate the elevation with opportunities for a viewpoint;

• Amenity green space and informal urban semi-natural green space within residential and commercial areas – range of high quality interconnected green spaces would provide opportunities for relaxation, active recreation, healthy living, social interaction, neighbourhood events and building community cohesion;

• Recreation grounds, playing fields and play areas throughout the development to provide opportunities for formal recreation;

• Residential gardens and allotments – private outdoor areas and opportunities for food production;

• Green links, tree lined streets, and multi-functional paths – a network of green spines and access routes to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to move freely through the development and connect with the wider area.

• Approximately 6 hectares per 1,000 population provided for Green Infrastructure, landscaping and open space.

• Development should be located away from the northern ridgeline (within the Country Park area), south of the woodland to protect views to the north and the setting of the AONB;

• The western part of the study area, beyond Wooton St. Lawrence Road should be protected from development to avoid visual coalescence between Basingstoke and Oakley, and retain the rural setting of villages to the west;

• Development should be contained within the existing framework of hedgerows and woodlands to minimise disruption of existing views and help to frame views; and

• Strategic planting in parts of the development, particularly along the existing urban edge of Basingstoke and Oakley is likely to contribute to the improvement of existing exposed views and create new views through the settlement.

• More detailed Landscape and Visual Appraisal would be undertaken as part of development of the illustrative masterplan in order to develop landscape proposals to filter, screen and frame views from existing settlements, the AONB and the wider area.



Key constraints Key opportunities Infrastructure requirements/land budget Policy implications Sustainability

• Density of Illustrative Masterplan may not warrant suitable heat loads to enable the viability of decentralised energy such as Combined Heat & Power on the Manydown site alone. However, potential remains for a heat and power network serving the new development and existing communities to the east and west of Manydown. The presence of the railway line and heritage assets make decentralised energy more challenging.

• There is only one operating landfill, in Hampshire and this is expected to reach ‘filled’ capacity within 10 years, therefore the opportunity to dispose of non-recyclable waste locally may be difficult and costly (i.e. if waste has to be transported further to be disposed of).

• The South East of England is an area of potable water scarcity.

• General issues with heritage assets and railway line location.

• Layout and orientation – the current master plan proposals are favourable for encouraging building layouts orientated to support low energy building which can best optimise the use of the local environment and natural resources

• On site waste water treatment works - a potential location has been identified within the Manydown estate ..

• Local waste recycling hubs – to be strategically located to enable the collection of bulky items such as clothes, shoes and items not suitable for household recycling or disposal such as batteries.

• Large scale solar - photovoltaics solar farms have been identified as there is land available within the same ownership which is not proposed for development and the masterplan would therefore not preclude this technology at a strategic scale. Biomass opportunities also identified.

• 3.2 hectares for a waste water treatment works (if required), with a stand-off of 450m from existing and proposed housing

• Strategic gap policy should accommodate supporting infrastructure to serve adjacent development allocations, e.g. for renewable energy or waste water treatment.

Ecology

• Several non-Statutory designated sites for nature conservation are scattered across and close to the site; and

• Key areas of ecological value are at the field edges, boundaries and close edges linking habitats such as grassland verges, hedgerows and woodland.

• The key value of the site are its ecological networks and corridors and individual groups of protected species and protected species potential;

• Retention and enhancement of the key habitat features across the site to protect and potentially enhance key protected species on site during more detail design stages;

• Creation of good ‘green’ corridor network of foot and bridle ways across the site to link local communities with the proposed Country Park;

• Potential for positive land management of the retained farm estate; and

• Ecological potential of gardens, parks and areas of recreation within the development.

• Creation of a Country Park; • Incorporation of buffer zones to existing

sensitive habitats – located around the SINC woodlands, hedgerows and Country Park, an open space to complement, enhance and protect those sites for the new urban pressures;

• Creation of other open space if required to conserve the underlying archaeology whilst providing opportunities for habitat creation and spaces for relaxation;

• Incorporation of a network of green spines and access routes; and

• Creation of amenity green space with a focus of ecological features within residential and commercial areas.

• In accordance with national planning policy, the Masterplan seeks to maximise opportunities for incorporating biodiversity in and around the site through establishing coherent ecological networks and incorporating buffer zones to protect existing sensitive habitats.

Part 3: Illustrative Masterplan



3 ILLUSTRATIVE MASTERPLAN

The Illustrative Masterplan has been prepared in support of Hampshire County Council (HCC) and Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council’s (BDBC) Local Plan Submission and should be read in conjunction with the formal representations.

3.1 Scope

This section sets out the Illustrative Masterplan to support the allocation of land at Manydown for a residential led mixed use development. The purpose of the Illustrative Masterplan is to demonstrate that the site has the capacity to deliver at least 3,400 homes3 and supporting community and social infrastructure within the Local Plan period to 2029, and the potential to create a sustainable new community to the west of Basingstoke.

The Illustrative Masterplan is intentionally strategic and conceptual to support the local plan process. Further more detailed masterplanning work will be needed following the Examination in Public of the Local Plan and this will provide the opportunity for extensive engagement with local residents, community groups and other stakeholders. This process of consultation will support and inform more detailed masterplan development and ensure that the development of the new community addresses the full range of aspirations and concerns that arise with a project of this strategic importance.

3.2 Methodology

This Illustrative Masterplan has been developed through a detailed technical understanding of the site, building upon the Manydown Site Capacity and Initial Options report carried out for HCC and BDBC in 2012 and including further detailed studies on the following aspects:

• Urban design;

• Town planning;

• Transport and highways;

• Cultural heritage;

• Community infrastructure;

• Sewerage and waste water treatment;

• Flooding;

• Green infrastructure and landscape;

• Sustainability;

• Ecology; and

• Viability.

It has been prepared in collaboration with HCC and BDBC officers in their capacity as landowners and BDBC’s visioning consultants, Beyond Green, in an integrated, multi-disciplinary masterplanning approach including:

• A joint site visit attended by all consultant, HCC and BDBC team members; 3 Including potential additional capacity provided on land around Worting House.

• A Synthesis Workshop attended by all team members to identify key issues and opportunities arising from the baseline analysis stage of the technical workstreams;

• An initial Visioning Workshop with the Manydown Members’ Advisory Panel (MAP), facilitated by Beyond Green;

• Preparation of initial options based on the findings of the previous two workshops;

• Discussion of those initial options at an Options Workshop attended by all team members;

• A second Visioning Workshop with the Manydown MAP to discuss the emerging options and to agree a preferred strategy.

3.3 Structure of this document

This document sets out:

• The key constraints and opportunities presented by the site and surrounding area;

• The masterplanning options considered

• The Illustrative Masterplan and key development principles; and

• A number of conclusions from the masterplanning work which can help inform more detailed masterplan development;

Photographs showing site visit and options workshop led by URS with the participation of HCC and BDBC officers and Beyond Green.



3.4 Site analysis

HCC and BDBC, together with the Manydown Company Ltd, jointly control c.800ha of land west of Basingstoke known as Manydown as shown in Figure 1. The wider site (referred to here as the ‘study area’) is bordered by the A339 Kingsclere Road to the northeast, the settlements of Wootton St Lawrence and Oakley to the northwest and west respectively, Roman Road and Worting in the east, and open countryside to the south and southwest. Pack Lane and Worting Road bisect the study area from east to west and the railway line also cuts across the study area in a northeasterly direction towards Basingstoke station. Only the northern part of the study area, Parcels 1-6a, is the subject of this Local Plan Submission.

The masterplanning area is split into parcels which respond to the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) produced by the Local Planning Authority. The relationship to the Worting Estate is also considered (Parcels 3A, 3B and 3C) but not masterplanned in detail.

Figure 1 Broad Location of Land within HCC/BDBC ownership at Manydown © Crown Copyright and database rights 2013. All rights reserved. HCC 100019180

6A


MANYDOWN - DRAFT LOCAL PLAN SUBMISSION DOCUMENT MARCH 2014

22

3.5 Proposed site allocation boundary

Figure 2 shows HCC and BDBC’s proposed site allocation boundary for development during the plan period to 2029 which has been informed by detailed analysis of the wider study area (summarised below in Section 2.2). The preferred site allocation boundary has emerged from the iterative illustrative masterplaning work. It covers Parcels 1, 2, 4A and 4B and 5 but excludes Parcels 3A to 3C which, whilst under different ownership, may also come forward for development during the plan period. This Submission argues for the whole of Parcels 4B and 5 to be included but Parcel 6A to be included as a standalone site or reserved site.

Figure 2: Proposed site allocation boundary for Manydown to 2029 © Crown Copyright and database rights 2013. All rights reserved. HCC 100019180.



23

3.6 Constraints and opportunities

Figure 3 illustrates the main constraints presented by the wider study area. Key constraints

A number of constraints have been identified through the illustrative masterplanning process:

• Relationship with Basingstoke and neighbouring settlements - how to best relate to Winklebury, Buckskin and Kempshott in Basingstoke, and Wootton St Lawrence, Worting and Oakley. Winklebury and Buckskin to the north of the railway line face outwards onto the study area, whilst Kempshott has properties facing away, suggesting that there may be a greater opportunity to create a relationship with new development north of the railway rather than south. Ensuring that new services and facilities provided within Manydown complement existing offers in the surrounding settlements will also be important, as well as the need to preserve the distinct architectural and historic character of Wootton St Lawrence, Worting and Oakley.

• Addressing areas of high visual impact and avoiding visual coalescence – an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) is located 1km northwest of the site and its setting must be protected, as well as views outwards over Manydown from surrounding settlements, particularly those with listed buildings such as Wootton St Lawrence. The 2012 Site Capacity and Initial Options Report highlighted the need to avoid visual coalescence between Oakley and Basingstoke and promoted development adjacent to the existing urban edge of Basingstoke for this reason. There are also two ridge lines; one to the south and another one running along the southern edge of the Country Park. In addition a spur of higher ground runs north-south through the Manydown 2029 Area to form a local high point south of Worting Road. The AONB, green gap to Oakley, the two ridgelines and the local high point are shown in Figure 3.

• The location of an active oil pipeline running under the site – an active oil pipeline runs north-south through the site, west of Worting, as shown in Figure 3. It is understood that this pipeline requires a safeguarded maintenance strip of 12 metres with six metres on either side of the pipeline. It is assumed that roads, cycle, footpaths and open space can be placed within this corridor. Beyond this narrow maintenance corridor is a wider hazard safeguarding zone extending to 195 metres on either side of the pipe, within which development would need consultation with the Health and Safety Executive, and within which some classes of land use may not be acceptable (for example, schools or care homes). A disused pipeline is located just west of the active one. It is unclear whether the disused pipeline could be, or is likely to be, used again in the future by the operators. It has therefore been assumed that it remains unused and in situ.

• How to address and incorporate existing natural landscape features – a key value of the study area is in its existing ecological networks and corridors (for example in the woodland, hedgerows and field margins) and these should be retained and enhanced where possible to protect key protected species on site and any impacts mitigated. These are highlighted on Figure 3. In addition to the mature woodlands in the northernmost part of the site, there are also a number of existing woodland areas within the study area, east of Oakley, further restricting development capacity in the southern part of the area.

• Covenant of no development on the northern part of the site – approximately 98ha of the northern part of the study area, as shown in Figure 3, is subject to a restrictive covenant preventing any form of development. This location, with its mature woodlands and rolling topography, has already been identified for a Country Park by HCC and BDBC.

Figure 3: Constraints diagram



24

The railway line as a barrier – the main London to Weymouth railway line cuts through the central part of the study area and splits towards Southampton and Andover to the west as shown in Figure 3. This railway line could act as a significant barrier to successful integration of the new development, separating it into two communities. In addition, the type of crossing, either a bridge over the railway line or an underpass, has significant social, environmental and cost implications.

• The presence of scheduled ancient monuments (SAMs) within the site – the monuments at Catern Crossroads (crop marks) and White Barrow (undated ring ditches) are located in the northeastern corner of the study area whilst Battledown Farm is located south of the railway line, as shown on Figure 3. The extent and complexity of the scheduled archaeological remains at Battledown Farm are such that this multi-period asset (comprising 28ha) should be protected from development, significantly limiting development capacity south of the railway line.

• Proximity to the Worting Conservation Area – this area (shown on Figure 3) borders Parcels 2 and 4A where development will need to take into consideration the setting of the Conservation Area. In addition, the settlement of Wootton St Lawrence to the north contains listed buildings with views towards the Manydown site. Appropriate mitigation measures will therefore need to be accommodated within the development.

• Provision of adequate community infrastructure for the residents of Manydown – whilst there is generally satisfactory provision of community infrastructure within the surrounding catchments, additional demand from the new Manydown population will mean that the proposed development will have to provide new or enhanced facilities to complement the existing provision.

Key opportunities

Based on the key constraints identified, it is clear that the northern part of the study area - i.e. north of the railway line - has the greatest potential for creating an integrated and sustainable new community which would have the critical mass needed to support the provision of viable local facilities and services within walking distance of as many homes as possible. These key opportunities are discussed below and shown on Figure 4.

Of fundamental importance is the fact that the northern part of the site is related to existing movement routes along the A339 to the north and Worting Road which runs between Parcels 4B and 5 in the southern part of the area. These established routes connect the area to surrounding communities and provide crucial opportunities to strengthen public transport services and to create new mixed use district and local centres at places where they will be sustained by both local (walk in) and passing trade.

Establishing successful mixed use centres is a fundamental building block in creating a sustainable community where people can walk to local facilities and services and it is of the utmost importance that these centres are placed in locations where they can thrive over the long term. A location on Worting Road has been identified as the best location for a centre given its prominence on the existing and proposed road network and the ability to create a pedestrian catchment around it at the heart of the new community – this is shown as a key gateway location on Figure 4.

Development in the northern part of the site is also more likely to be able to relate more successfully with settlements on the western edge of Basingstoke (Winklebury and Buckskin) with existing properties facing on to Roman Road, also shown on Figure 4. Development within the northern part of the site area would also have less visual impact on the countryside as the ridgeline running across the northern part of the site would help to visually contain the development from the wider countryside to the north and south.

Containing development to the north of the railway line would also help to retain the separation between Oakley and Basingstoke, as will the potential strategic green gap shown on Figure 4.

Figure 4: Opportunities diagram



25

It follows from the above consideration of the key constraints and opportunities that the inclusion of Parcels 4B and 5 within the land to be allocated is of fundamental importance to the creation of a sustainable and viable masterplan for Manydown. Development within these parcels is not incompatible with the findings of the Council’s Landscape Capacity Study 2010.

In addition, there are a number of other opportunities for Manydown presented by its location and surroundings such as:

• Land ownership –the site is promoted by public and private landowners who are committed to creating a high quality sustainable new community at Manydown with a wide range of benefits to surrounding communities and new residents through new facilities, services and open spaces. The availability of such a large site creates the opportunity to plan comprehensively for new development in an integrated manner.

• Integrating public transport – the configuration of the area to the north of Worting Road lends itself well to a central avenue running through the heart of the community. This route has the potential to become a high quality bus route with the majority of homes within a short walk of stops along the route and would also be the optimum location for local centres.

• Maximising heritage assets – There is an opportunity to create a small park in the northeastern corner to conserve the underlying archaeology found there whilst providing opportunities for habitat creation and spaces for relaxation. But the most important heritage asset which Manydown can benefit from is Worting which is adjacent to the geographic centre of the site proposed for allocation. Worting Conservation Area could provide visual and historic interest and depth to the character of the new development around it, alongside opportunities for business and leisure uses (depending on the landowners’ plans) and could complement the main local centre for Manydown.

• Existing habitats as an asset – as previously discussed, these present an opportunity to maintain and link green infrastructure across the site and to provide biodiversity benefits, as well as access for local people. They can also be used to help frame new development, to provide an attractive setting for new homes, and to enhance foot, bridle and cycle paths across the site.

• Creation of a country park – the restrictive covenant on the northern part of the site has led to this area being earmarked for a new country park as a town-wide asset which could be delivered by the landowners and developer contributions from new development sites across the Borough. It will provide safe access to the countryside for local users with opportunities for learning and play with multi-functional spaces for biodiversity, landscape mitigation, food production and informal recreation. Links would be provided through Manydown to the country park.


26

3.7 Strategic masterplan options to 2029

The masterplanning process has been informed by different options and testing. Figure 5 below shows a summary of the options explored.

OPTION 1: PRE SUBMISSION DRAFT (AUGUST 2013) ALLOCATED AREAS ONLY

Includes only the yelllow cross hatched areas on Local Plan Proposals map

OPTION 2: NORTH & SOUTHERN AREAS

Includes all of the HCC / BDBC land identifed as having development potential in the Tibbalds Study.

OPTION 3: OPTION 1 + SITES 4B & 5

Adds parcels 4B & 5 to those considered in Option 1

PREFERRED OPTION: NORTHEN AREA ONLY

As per Option 3 and including parcel 6A as a standalone or reserved site

• Insufficient land available to accommodate 3000

homes, green infrastructure and supporting facilities • Limited development south of the railway line does

not justify the high cost of crossing the railway • Northern and southern areas are developed as

separate housing areas separated by railway line • Isolated areas of housing have limited potential to

support the creation of viable local centres or public transport

• The exclusion of Parcel 4B prevents a link road between Worting Road and the A339.

• Connecting the northern and southern areas

requires a scale of development not envisaged by the Local Plan

• Development potential in the south is more constrained by ecological and heritage issues which could create isolated areas of development

• Would provide more houses than required to 2029 • Would not be deliverable by 2029

• Creates the potential for a cohesive and integrated

community to the north of the railway line • Enables a new link through the development

connecting Worting Road to the A339 • Creates the potential for local centres on Worting

Road and along link road • Provides capacity for c. 3000 homes.

• Creates the potential for a cohesive and integrated

community to the north of the railway line • Enables a new link road through the development

connecting Worting Road to the A339 • Creates the potential for local centres on Worting

Road and along the link road • Balances the land area with the homes required

while safeguarding land for a possible by-pass route and crossing of the railway (as discussed below).

• 6A could come forward for development as a standalone or reserved site within the allocation.

© Crown Copyright and database rights 2013. All rights reserved. HCC 100019180.

Figure 5: Strategic masterplan options considered

Manydown - Draft Local Plan Submission Document


3.8 Illustrative Masterplan

The Illustrative Masterplan has emerged from a consideration of the options as described above, and informed by a technical understanding of the site in terms of urban design, transport, archaeology, community infrastructure, sewerage and drainage, flooding, green infrastructure and landscape, sustainability and ecology. Studies on the viability and capacity of the site have also been undertaken and the Illustrative Masterplan shown in this chapter can accommodate around 3,400 homes within the plan period to 2029.

This section sets out the masterplanning principles which have informed the Illustrative Masterplan for Manydown before explaining the key features of the Masterplan.

3.9 Masterplanning principles

The key principles for Manydown have been derived from a thorough understanding of the site and implementation of urban design best practice drawn from existing national guidance such as The Urban Design Compendium, Better Places to Live: By Design, Safer Places and Manual for Streets, as well as more recent research by the Town & Country Planning Association on Garden Cities and Suburbs such as “Nothing Gained by Overcrowding”.

The key principles are as follows:

• An efficient and permeable network of streets which allows pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles alike to move easily through the development and to connect with the wider area. A central spine road will form the primary route through the development, connecting Worting Road in the south to the junction of Roman Road and the A339 Kingsclere Road in the north east. The secondary network will provide users with a choice of easy-to-navigate routes so that they can move in all directions (avoiding cul-de-sac developments).

• Well maintained tree lined and landscaped streets which are designed to firstly meet the needs of pedestrians and cyclists, and then vehicles, can help to create attractive residential areas as well as encouraging more walking and cycling. Wider streets can be used to define more important routes such as those leading to ‘destinations’ within Manydown such as the country park or the local centres.

• All streets should be fronted by development where possible, including the central spine road and Roman Road, to animate the streets and to provide natural surveillance.

• Integrated, walkable neighbourhoods are essential components or building blocks of any sustainable new development with as many homes as possible within 400 metres walking distance (or five minutes’ walk) of a local centre where daily facilities such as a corner shop/ newsagent might be located as well as a school.

• Larger residential development blocks with good levels of natural surveillance and substantial private areas for back gardens and also opportunities for allotments, recreation and biodiversity, all helping to increase residential amenity.

• Creating a strong relationship between the urban form and the open countryside is important to help establish a sense of identity, character and belonging for Manydown. Existing landscape assets like mature woodland and hedgerows can be used to help create attractive living environments by framing development whilst other assets like the country park can help to enhance local residents’ safe and free access to the countryside, with opportunities for informal play, recreation and learning.

• Providing a range of high quality open spaces for a variety of uses throughout the development so that as many residents as possible are within walking distance of a green

open space. Amenity spaces will include equipped play areas (LEAPs and NEAPs) and complemented by the new country park, historic views park and other open space / buffer zones where required and boulevards.

• High quality design of the built form and hard and soft landscaped areas with a mix of housing types and densities to create a diverse and distinct development.

• Providing a wide range of housing opportunity and choice for a range of residents in Manydown over their lifetimes.

• Promoting healthy and active lifestyles through the provision of opportunities for walking and cycling and access to informal and formal open spaces and recreation areas.

3.10 Potential to accommodate a western by-pass to Basingstoke

The longer term need for a western by-pass (outside of the plan period) has been raised in discussions about the Manydown project. The preferred masterplan option shown in Figure 5 above and described more fully below includes a new link road between Worting Road and the A339. This new link road would be a significant addition to the road network allowing movement from Worting Road to the A339 and thus reducing pressure on Worting Bridge and Roman Road.

However, this link road needs to be carefully integrated into the new community to fulfil a wider range of functions as an urban road and to avoid separating different parts of the community. In particular to make public transport services, local centres and community facilities accessible to the whole community, the road needs to be planned at the heart of the community rather than as a separate by-pass to one side or the other.

The topography and configuration of the site is another important consideration. The narrow shape of parcels 1, 2, 4A and 4B means that there is no scope to accommodate additional by-pass routes as well as the main spine route. Such an approach would undermine the capacity of the site to provide around 3,400 homes and create undesirable severance to the country park or the existing communities in Basingstoke. It would have knock-on effects to the spatial planning principles of the new development and could place more pressure on Roman Road for local traffic movements.

The preferred masterplan option could be integrated with a longer-term by-pass scheme to the west of the draft allocation including a crossing of the railway. An area of land adjacent to the railway line has been shown as reserved for a potential crossing.



Figure 7 shows the Illustrative Masterplan for how Manydown could be developed up to 2029.

Figure 7: Illustrative Masterplan © Crown Copyright and database rights 2013. All rights reserved. HCC 100019180

Parcel 6A is hatched to denote it is a standalone or reserved site within the areas sought for allocation



3.11 Masterplan key features

Three local centres

Three local centres are proposed with the main centre on Parcel 4B at the junction of Worting Road and the new north-south spine road with walkable catchments. The main centre could be a linear one running north of the Worting Road along the spine road. The other two smaller centres will also be located on the spine road.

The good majority of homes will be within 400-500 metres (five minutes) walk of a local centre which will provide a range of shops and community facilities, potentially including health services.

A central spine road

A spine road will run through the development connecting the northeastern corner of the site (at Roman Road/A339 junction) to the Worting Road at the main local centre. The southern ‘tail’ of this spine road will serve development on Parcel 5 and could enable future access south of the railway.

The character of this spine road will vary throughout the development from a High Street-type environment at the main centre to more residential in character in other parts of Manydown. It will be fronted by development and provide access to the secondary street network. Schools

Two primary schools and a secondary school site are proposed, all located within or very close to one of the local centres. The majority of homes within the development will be within a 500 metre (five minute) walking catchment of a primary school, mainly walking along safe and attractive residential streets.

The secondary school site could have buildings fronting the local centre with playing fields to the south, backing on to the Worting SINC and existing houses east of Worting (around Wykeham Drive/Carbonel Close). This location also has the potential to draw pupils from western Basingstoke, improving choice and accessibility. Alternatively, a secondary school may be provided south of the railway at a later date. Country park

A green buffer will be provided at the edge of the development and along the edge of the country park. Three access points to the park are envisaged with tree-lined boulevards leading up to the country park from various points along the spine road.

This park will provide an excellent opportunity for residents to enjoy informal recreation and participate in healthy activities such as walking and cycling, and to create an attractive backdrop for residential areas north of the railway line. It will also help to maintain a distinct boundary between Wootton St Lawrence and Manydown and offers potential to screen the development from longer distance views out of the AONB. A range of open spaces

Access to core open space (LEAPs, NEAPs, etc) and green infrastructure (e.g. green buffers and boulevards) can be provided within the allocation, equating to approximately 6 ha per 1,000 population excluding the country park provision. This generous provision will create a leafy, green living environment for Manydown’s new residents and will help the new development better integrate with the existing landscape and surrounding settlements. It will also help to provide opportunities for healthy living and active recreation with provision for sports pitches (including all-weather pitches) within the development.

A new park is proposed immediately south of the country park at the northern end of Parcel 2 to celebrate the historic visual enclosure of the woodland and to provide wider vistas over Manydown and Basingstoke. A green space is also proposed at the local high point to the south of Worting Road. This space would be integrated into the setting and design of the main local centre on Worting Road.

In addition, a small park could be created in the northeastern corner of the site which could relate to the underlying archaeology of Catern Crossroads and White Barrow whilst also providing opportunities for habitat creation and spaces for relaxation. A network of green routes or corridors

A number of green boulevards will be created (as part of the green infrastructure provision) which will add to the leafy nature of the development, including the western side of Roman Road facing Winklebury, and along key roads leading from either the spine road or Roman Road towards the country park. These routes will be pedestrian and cycle links as well as vehicles.

Buffer zones will also be provided to protect sensitive habitats such as the SINC woodlands, hedgerows and the country park.

In general, the green infrastructure will provide areas for infiltration of surface water runoff or areas for storage. Worting

Development adjacent to Worting will need to take into account the setting of the Conservation Area, but sensitive development within the Worting area (which would be undertaken by third party landowners) could complement the character of Manydown, particularly the main local centre, and vice versa.

The existing trees along the northern edge of Worting would be preserved to protect the setting of the listed buildings. General access

A new junction where Roman Road meets the A339 will be required and potentially improvements to the B3400 Worting Road/Roman Way roundabout and Worting Road roundabout. Wastewater treatment works

A potential location has been identified and reserved for a new wastewater treatment works to be constructed after 2021 if required as shown in Figure 7. This location has taken into account technical restrictions and would offer additional capacity to serve development beyond the Plan period. It would need to be positioned at least 450m from any proposed or existing dwellings and it would need to have an area of 3.2ha. The potential location has direct access from Pack Lane and is screened from Oakley by existing woodland.



3.11 Indicative Phasing

A fundamental masterplanning consideration is the need to deliver the large number of homes that are required within the plan period to 2029 and to phase the delivery of homes with the provision of infrastructure in a way that makes the project viable and to create a strong sense of identity for Manydown. The preferred phasing strategy commences with Parcels 1 and 4B (north of Worting Road and south of the A339) and then continues into the main body of the site, as shown below in Figures 8 to 11. Site 6A is a standalone site and could be developed in advance or following the development of the northern phase.

The first phase would establish two different housing offers at either end of the Manydown development: at the northern end, family housing which is more integrated with the existing western edge of Basingstoke; at the southern end, a greater mix of apartments, houses and retirement homes focused around supporting the main local centre west of Worting. It will be important to create multiple phases to ensure that there are sub-phases of developments within each phase and it will also be essential for the main centre to be well established at an early stage in the development to help create a sense of identity for Manydown. The spine road could begin to be implemented at the northern and southern ends via the existing road network – this is shown in Figure 8. In this scenario, parcel 6A could be part of phase 1 as a standalone site. Being already served by a road, it could deliver homes from the outset without the need for significant infrastructure provision. Otherwise, it could be a reserved site for future phases.

The second phase would continue the two-pronged approach with development along Roman Road and along the railway, with phases 3 and 4 completing the middle section of the development and completing the central spine road.

Figure 8: Phase 1 development Figure 9: Phases 1 & 2

Figure 10: Phases 1, 2 & 3 Figure 11: Phases 1, 2, 3 & 4

© Crown Copyright and database rights 2013. All rights reserved. HCC 100019180.

This has a number of significant advantages in terms of phasing the delivery of infrastructure and enabling the build out of a wide range of different types of housing in different locations at the same time. This ability to respond to the full range of market and affordable requirements in distinct locations is important in achieving the necessary housing trajectory. This rate of delivery could only be achieved in line with the proposed officer’s allocation.

3.13 Viability

As part of the URS work an initial viability assessment has been undertaken. This work has been led by Gleeds Cost Management utilising their Masterplan Cost Planning and Cash Flow Analysis System and has drawn on property market advice from Knight Frank. The viability assessment has been informed by the Illustrative Masterplan and Technical Strategies prepared by URS as well as by the Three Dragon’s work on the Borough Council’s whole plan viability assessment. The viability assessment will need to be reviewed and up-dated once the Three Dragon’s exercise has been completed, but the initial assessment indicates that the project is capable of delivering a competitive return as set out in the NPPF and the Harman Guidance on Viability Testing. An analysis of the property market/build out rates confirms that 3,400 units can be accommodated over the plan period within the phasing strategy and based upon 19 eventual development outlets. This situation is improved by the officer’s suggested changes that reinstates the whole of parcel 4B and also includes land at Worting and parcel 6A.



3.14 Conclusion

This Illustrative Masterplan has been prepared to support the allocation of the Manydown site in the Local Plan. The main focus of the work has been on understanding the constraints and opportunities affecting the site and following urban design best practice principles to illustrate how the area could be developed to create an attractive and sustainable new community for Basingstoke.

The masterplanning work has been kept to the strategic level and focused on the issues that are relevant to the allocation of the site through the plan process. In doing this the work has built on detailed technical assessments of the site and advice on property market, viability and delivery issues. It has also benefited from a collaborative working process with the landowners' visioning consultant Beyond Green which has included two workshops with the Manydown Members’ Advisory Panel. Further more detailed masterplanning work will be undertaken following the allocation of the site and this will include a full programme of community and public engagement appropriate to a project of this scale and complexity. The Illustrative Masterplan shown here does not seek to constrain this process and the further ideas and insights that will enrich and bring to life the final plan. However, the technical masterplanning work has enabled a number of strategic conclusions to be drawn that can inform both the Local Plan process and further masterplan development. These are:

• The Manydown site can accommodate around 3,400 homes and supporting facilities and these can be delivered within the Local Plan timeframe to 2029.

• The assessment of technical constraints and opportunities demonstrates clearly that the land to the north of the railway line is best suited to the development of a sustainable community before 2029. Parcel 6A could be utilised a standalone site south of the railway or a reserved site.

• The land to the south of the railway line could also accommodate development in the longer term, but requires further technical assessment of some strategic constraints including the Battledown Scheduled Ancient Monument and the ecological resource of rare arable plants. The exception being Parcel 6A, which could be an early phase of development.

• The new community to the north of the railway can be developed in a comprehensive way that is supported by all of the necessary community and technical infrastructure. The masterplan can help enable and support longer term development to the south of the railway but it is not dependent upon it.

• The area has potential to accommodate up to three local centres within walking distance of as many homes as possible. The strategic gateway location on Worting Road is considered to have the strongest potential of the local centres identified.

• Parcels 1, 2, 4A, 4B, 5, and 6A are all required to enable the comprehensive approach to development and phasing that is needed to deliver around 3,400 homes by 2029.

• The creation of a new link road through the community from Worting Road to the A339 could accommodate wider traffic movements while also acting as a key public transport route.

• The creation and delivery of a sustainable and integrated new community is not compatible with the construction of a segregated by-pass/dual carriageway through Parcels 1, 2, 4A, 4B, 5 and 6A.

Above all, it is clear that the Manydown site offers a tremendous opportunity to deliver a wide range and choice of new homes in an attractive, high quality environment, set against the surrounding natural and heritage assets and supported by new local services and facilities to complement Basingstoke’s existing offer.

Part 4: URS Recommended Representations



4 MANYDOWN LOCAL PLAN POLICY

This section provides a commentary on the emerging Local Plan, insofar as it relates to Manydown, to help inform representations submitted by the landowners prior to and during the forthcoming Examination in Public. Since March 2012, the consultant team has used the emerging masterplanning and technical work to highlight those elements of the Plan that were deemed unsound either in terms of not being positively prepared, unjustified, ineffective or inconsistent with national policy. During August to September 2013, suggested modifications were put forward by the URS team that would help to make the plan sound.

The Framework’s tests of soundness for plan-making are referenced throughout the section as they pertain to the allocation and policy published for Manydown, and also including relevant District-wide development management policies. Therefore our representations assess if the Plan is:

• Positively prepared

• Justified

• Effective

• Consistent with national policy

“The plan should be prepared based on a strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements…the plan should be the most appropriate strategy, when considered against the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence.”

– NPPF Paragraph 182

The officer’s suggested changes to Pre-Submission Local Plan outlined in the report to Planning and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Committee (dated 5th and 6th March 2014) are broadly welcomed by the landowners.

4.1 Principle of development

Policy SS3 includes an indicative phased delivery programme for the Manydown site and other Greenfield allocations. This policy helps to demonstrate compliance with Paragraph 47 of the Framework which states that LPAs need to identify and maintain a rolling supply of specific ‘deliverable’ sites sufficient to provide five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirements (including an additional buffer) to ensure choice and competition in the market for land. For years 6-10 LPAs should identify a supply of ‘developable’ sites or broad locations for years 6-10 and, where possible, years 11-15. Including an Illustration of the expected rate of housing delivery through a trajectory; and set out a housing implementation strategy describing how a five year supply will be maintained.

Some clarity as to what is meant by deliverable and developable is provided by footnotes 11 and 12 in paragraph 47 of the Framework. To be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular that development of the site is viable. Sites with planning permission should be considered deliverable until permission expires, unless there is clear evidence that schemes will not be implemented within five years, for example they will not be viable, there is no longer a demand for the type of units or sites have long term phasing plans. To be considered developable, sites should be in a suitable location for housing development and there should be a reasonable prospect that the site is available and could be viably developed at the point envisaged. The BDBC SHLAA (January, 2013) and emerging CIL and Affordable Housing Viability study (2013) underpin elements of policies SS1- SS4. This evidence also supports the release of Greenfield sites necessary to meet objectively assessed housing need, as identified in the SHMA and

further demographic evidence, such as the Demographic analysis & forecasts report (June 2013). Following the August – October 2013 consultation the LPA undertook a review of the Pre-Submission Local Plan’s spatial strategy and site policies to take account of comments received and new information related to site yields and boundaries. An updated Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) has been published to bring the evidence base up to date and reflect the outcomes of the consultation.

A great deal of work has gone into the Local Plan and the LPA’s approach to testing alternatives via consultation and the Sustainability Appraisal process. This provides a robust basis for informing the most suitable broad locations of growth. Following the Judicial Review and introduction of the Localism Act and Framework the Local Plan evidence base has been brought up to date and the plan revised accordingly. Stakeholders were asked to comment on updates to the SHMA, SHLAA, viability evidence, SA and Site Assessment study. In addition, the current draft of the Plan has benefited from highly engaged Member input through the Planning and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Committee and various Cabinet meetings held since the High Court decision in 2012.

It is clear how and why the decisions were taken on alternative sites and there is an intelligible audit trail showing how the final spatial strategy has evolved. The parallel SA process shows how the different options perform and it’s clear that this SA process has been an integral element of Plan-Making since work began in 2008.

The Framework introduces a requirement (paragraphs 14 and 47) that Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs for development and infrastructure, including unmet requirements from neighbouring authorities where it is reasonable to do so and consistent with achieving sustainable development. Table 3 demonstrates Manydown’s role (or potential role) in delivering much of the borough’s requirements over the plan period.

Table 3 Borough-wide requirments

Category Borough-wide requirements Housing need/supply

• 13,464 dwellings between 2011 – 20294

• 748 units pa

• 7,337 required via site allocations

Manydown could meet approximately 25% of total need over the plan period and represents over 46% of the supply required through site allocations.

Employment land

• 124,000 m2 of B1 space

• 5,200 m2 of B2

• 122,000 m2 of B85

The masterplanning process may highlight potential for B class commercial floorspace at Manydown.

4 Source: Pre-submission Local Plan 5 Source: Employment Land Review 2014



Category Borough-wide requirements Retail • 30,000m2

• Less than 4,000m2 convenience goods retail floorspace6

Manydown could provide 1,500m2 retail floorspace (based on 3 new Local Centres) or even more with the inclusion of a new District Centre at Worting Road e.g. 1,500 – 11,500m2 (using London Plan minimum retail floorspace thresholds as a proxy)

Open space/green infrastructure/ recreation

• The IDP recognises that the best approach is to enhance existing parks and create new neighbourhood parks where there are opportunities to do so.

• Expected quantity standard of: 65m2 per person (Basingstoke) 32m2 per person (rural)7

The emerging masterplan envisages approximately 20 ha of core open space and 20ha of green infrastructure (subject to more detailed masterplanning). The emerging masterplan also envisages improved access and connections to the proposed Country Park (98.3 ha).

Community facilities/social infrastructure

• Council’s policy aspiration is that everyone in the urban area of the borough should live within a 10-15 minute walk of at least one community hall.

• The IDP requires all major development to include appropriate hall provision. Developer contributions will be sought for the provision of new and enhanced facilities.

• Thresholds for a new school are: - 700 dwellings would require one new 1 form (210 places) primary school - 1,400 dwellings would require one new 2 form (420 places) primary

school - 2,100 dwellings would require one new 3 form (630 places) primary

school - At least 4,500 dwellings would require one new secondary school (at

least 900 students)8 Manydown could include 3 new local centres (that could potentially include community facilities). The draft emerging masterplan has included land for 2 new primary schools and 1 new secondary school site (which could provide sports pitches and indoor facilities). A new large public open space, multiple smaller open spaces and play spaces have also been factored into the draft masterplan.

6 Source: Retail Study Update 2013 7 Source: G.I. Study/IDP 8 Source: IDP

Category Borough-wide requirements Transport • Various bus improvement measures including from Daneshill Roundabout to

Town Centre;

• Creation of pedestrian / cycle links to Town Centre.9

Creation of new central spine link road, as envisaged in the emerging draft masterplan, provides the opportunity to manage the potential impact of traffic on Worting Road and provide for pedestrian and cycle movements. Creation of sustainable connections between built areas at Winklebury, Buckskin, Kempshot and Oakley is also envisaged, as is the creation of new pedestrian and cycle links that give pedestrians and cyclists priority. Provision of new or enhanced bus services, providing connections to the town centre and key employment locations could also be incorporated.

Physical infrastructure

• Thames Water plan to provide the necessary infrastructure at Basingstoke STW to meet growth up to 2021, and to maintain the current consent. For growth beyond 2021, a policy decision needs to be made in the RBMP with respect to consent standards to ensure good ecological status is achieved by 2027. Analysis shows that it is possible to secure compliance with good ecological status by using novel technology in combination with closing two smaller STWs.

Two options exist for Manydown: Firstly, Ivy Down Oakley STW could be extended to accommodate 1,350 dwellings; and secondly, an on-site Wastewater Treatment Works that could be positioned to the west of parcel 5. This would avoid phasing issues and land ownership issues with option 1. Effluent from an on-site works would need to be treated to near potable standards using equipment such as the Enhanced Sequential Batch Reactor and discharged to a suitable watercourse.

The emerging masterplan process has helped to add weight to the principle of locating development in the Manydown area. Emerging technical studies have shown that the necessary infrastructure to support 3,400 units is deliverable and feasible. The benefits of locating development in this part of Basingstoke far outweigh any possible impacts. The technical studies demonstrate how development put forward in the emerging masterplan can be accommodated and the impacts mitigated. The emerging masterplan also demonstrates how the allocation will help to ensure that the social, environmental and economic objectives of the Plan and SA will be achieved. The principle of locating development at Manydown is sound given the reasonable alternatives and the results of the high-level SHLAA, SA and Site Assessment work.

4.2 Allocation boundary

The revised boundary (Map 1a Manydown Site Allocation10) proposed by the LPA would provide the plan with sufficient flexibility. The allocation boundary, by its very nature, has a huge influence on the ability of the site to provide the development and infrastructure requirements envisaged for Manydown, therefore the proposed inclusion of 4B, 5, 6A and Worting is welcomed.

With regards to housing, the Framework requires planning authorities to “use their evidence base to ensure that their Local Plan meets the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable

9 Source: Transport Study 10 Appendix 2 : Draft Revised Local Plan Policies Map . Suggested changes to Basingstoke and Deane Pre-Submission Local Plan, Report to Planning and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Committee 5th and 6th March 2014 http://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/CommitteeDocs/Committees/Planning%20and%20Infrastructure%20Overview%20and%20Scrutiny/20140305/Pre%20submission%20local%20plan%20appendix%202.pdf

http://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/CommitteeDocs/Committees/Planning%20and%20Infrastructure%20Overview%20and%20Scrutiny/20140305/Pre%20submission%20local%20plan%20appendix%202.pdf

http://www.basingstoke.gov.uk/CommitteeDocs/Committees/Planning%20and%20Infrastructure%20Overview%20and%20Scrutiny/20140305/Pre%20submission%20local%20plan%20appendix%202.pdf



housing in the housing market area, as far as is consistent with the policies set out in this Framework, including identifying key sites which are critical to the delivery of the housing strategy over the plan period”. Manydown is critical to the delivery of the housing strategy over the plan period, as shown in Table 3. LPA evidence should underpin and support the Plan’s development strategy; the landowners believe that the deficiencies in the evidence base highlighted previously have been partially addressed. The changes proposed to the allocation boundary are supported and justified by the evidence.

The landowners support an allocation that includes the Worting estate (under third party ownership). The landowners understand this parcel of land can deliver at least 100 houses in the plan period. With the inclusion of parcel 6A, land in the ownership of HCC/BDBC can deliver at least 3,300 houses in the plan period.

Suggested modification: The wording in this clause should therefore be changed from ‘approximately’ to ‘at least 3,400 houses’.

Parcel 6A11

Parcel 6A falls within Area F of the BDBC Landscape Capacity Study (2010), this area has been identified with a low landscape capacity for development. Only a small part of Area F is actually contained within the Manydown site boundary and it is heavily influenced by the adjacent urban edge of Basingstoke. The small part of Area F within the Manydown allocation plays a minor role as a buffer between the Basingstoke and Oakley as compared to the rest of Area F, which falls outside the site allocation boundary. As such the landowners would fully support the proposed deletion of Clause (g) and inclusion of parcel 6A within the Manydown allocation boundary.

Parcels 4 and 5

The preferred phasing strategy commences with Parcels 1 and 4B (north of Worting Road and south of the A339) and then continues into the main body of the site. It will be essential for the main centre within parcel 4B to be well established at an early stage in the development to help create a sense of identity for Manydown. The spine road could begin to be implemented at the northern and southern ends via the existing road network providing gateways and a sense of arrival in the early phases.

This has a number of significant advantages in terms of phasing the delivery of infrastructure and enabling the build out of a wide range of different types of housing in different locations at the same time. This ability to respond to the full range of market and affordable requirements in distinct locations is essential in achieving the necessary housing trajectory. This rate of delivery would be achievable within the proposed amendments shown in Map 1a within the Plan. Any reduction in size to the allocation would reduce the number of development outlets and could harm some of the aspirations emerging in the draft masterplan.

Emerging masterplanning work has demonstrated that with a sensitive approach to the pattern and design of development, the landscape and heritage assets of the area (including Worting Conservation Area and the area’s listed buildings including Worting House) would not only be preserved, but also enhanced by the new development. The masterplan proposes a number of measures which will lead to the retention of heritage features in the area and create opportunities to highlight cultural heritage within the development.

With regards to biodiversity, while there are no statutory Designated Sites of Nature Conservation Importance on the site, there are Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation as well as a number of good existing green habitat linkages throughout the site (i.e. woodland and hedgerows). In accordance with national planning policy, the Masterplan seeks to maximise opportunities for incorporating biodiversity in and around the site through establishing coherent ecological networks

11 All parcels referenced are based on the parcels in the LPA’s Site Assessment, Volume 1 (January 2013)

and incorporating buffer zones to protect existing sensitive habitats. There is currently poor access to accessible natural green space in Basingstoke and access to amenity green space is variable. The Green Infrastructure and Landscape Study and Masterplan have identified a number of opportunities for creating Multi-Functional Green Spaces (MFGS) in order to enhance green infrastructure and landscape on the site.

With regards to accessibility, enhanced links to and from the area denoted as Parcel 5 will be created during the site’s development, thereby ensuring that the area is successfully integrated into the wider development. In accordance with national planning policy, the Masterplan seeks to promote a pattern of development at Manydown that would ensure that accessibility to services and the use of sustainable transport modes is maximised. As such the reinstatement of parts of Parcel 4 and 5 is welcomed as tis will help to increase connectivity potential between the local centres in Manydown and generate the critical mass required to support new facilities and services. This would result in creating a sustainable new development with a strong identity.

The emerging masterplan for Manydown currently includes local centres and, in time, a District Centre. This will ensure that Manydown will become an exemplar sustainable community to the west of Basingstoke with a defined network and hierarchy of centres that are resilient to anticipated future economic changes. Manydown offers a range of opportunities in terms of new community infrastructure, including the creation of new education facilities, healthcare facilities/community centres to serve the new and existing resident population and new green routes and pedestrian and cycle links connecting residential areas with community facilities and the wider Basingstoke area, to facilitate the adoption of active and healthy lifestyles, in addition to creating opportunities for recreation.

The detailed masterplanning and technical studies supporting the landowners formal representations “positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs” of the area in line with the Framework. The Framework states that objectively assessed needs must be met unless “any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits”. The benefits of allocating all of parcels 4 and 5, Worting and 6A will help to provide a comprehensive exemplar sustainable urban extension capable of meeting almost a third of the housing requirements over the plan period.

The Landscape Capacity Study 2010 identifies parcels 4B and 5 falling within ‘area B’. Area B, as a whole, is identified as having less capacity than areas E and D due to area B’s strong links to the countryside to the west or to the north of the ridgeline (in close proximity to the country park running west-east). The Area is however extensive in the 2010 Study (much larger than the Manydown allocation), and the Study states that there are ‘opportunities for pockets of settlement growth close to the existing built form.’ The Study recommends development should be restricted to the area around Worting Road and Pack Lane, ‘where urban influences are more apparent than in other parts of the Area and development would be more sheltered from the wider countryside.’ This extract helps to justify the officer’s proposed allocation boundary. This opens up development opportunities in the east of the extensive Area B identified within the Landscape Capacity Study 2010 i.e. the whole tract of land in parcels 4B and 5. The 2010 Study supports development on parcels 4B and 5 if ‘The design and layout of any built form minimises impact upon the wider area, limiting visual intrusion by strategic planting to enhance existing screening between settlements.’ As only part of Area B is contained within the Manydown 2029 site, an area is retained as open arable fields and hedgerows, acting as a rural buffer and screen between Basingstoke and Oakley.

The view from the ridgeline (running west-east) to the North West of parcel 4B (Wootton St. Lawrence Road) was subject to a visual appraisal by a member of the Consultant team (a Chartered Member of the Landscape Institute) which considered the types of views, the nature of visual receptors (people experiencing the view) and ability of development to be accommodated within views. The technical study found that the vegetated enclosure of the road opens up as it travels south away from Wootton St. Lawrence, allowing open panoramic views to the east and south. To the east, woodland along the ridgeline (running west-east) filters and restricts views towards the skyline of Basingstoke. In contrast a more open view is possible towards the south, where the distinctive field pattern of medium to large



arable fields defined by hedgerows is visible. Worting to the south east and Oakley to the south west are screened by vegetation. Tall structures such as the Battledown flyover and tall buildings within the southern part of Basingstoke are visible in the distance. On clear days, the hills to the south are visible along the horizon. The view is experienced by travellers along the road. No footpaths or residential properties are in the near vicinity. Based on the four representative views, visual receptors that experience views for longer periods are more numerous along the eastern boundary of the site with relatively few receptors in the west. The Consultant’s visual appraisal identifies the importance of views within the site and opportunities for accommodating development within the existing views by adopting the following principles:

• Development should be located south of the woodland along the ridgeline (running west-east) to protect views to the north and the setting of the AONB;

• Western part of the study area, beyond the site boundary should be protected from development to avoid visual coalescence between Basingstoke and Oakley, and retain rural setting of villages to the west;

• Development should be located on land adjacent to the existing urban edge to the west of Basingstoke and contained within the existing framework of hedgerows and woodlands to minimise disruption of existing views and help to frame views; and

• Strategic planting throughout the development, particularly along the existing urban edge of Basingstoke should assist in improving existing exposed views and create new views through the settlement.

Summary

The proposal to amend the allocation boundary will ensure a land budget capable of supporting the requisite number of development outlets needed to yield the 3,400 dwellings required over the Plan period to 2029 in a deliverable and viable manner. The provision of a District Centre and the associated road infrastructure required to serve the community in line with the principles of sustainable development (paragraphs 14 and 47 of the NPPF) would be enhanced with these proposed changes.

The proposed allocation boundary has sufficient flexibility to meet development and infrastructure needs/requirements in line with the presumption in favour of sustainable development and in compliance with the Framework’s tests of soundness.

4.3 Viability

The plan should be deliverable over its period and viability is a critical aspect of achieving sustainable development. The current proposed expansion of the allocation boundary helps to improve the deliverability of the site and would increase the number of development outlets to enable the phasing strategy to proceed as suggested in this report.

The Framework introduced a requirement to assess the viability of the delivery of a Local Plan and the impact on development of policies contained within it. The Framework includes the following requirements:

173. Pursuing sustainable development requires careful attention to viability and costs in plan-making and decision-taking. Plans should be deliverable. Therefore, the sites and the scale of development identified in the plan should not be subject to such a scale of obligations and policy burdens that their ability to be developed viably is threatened. To ensure viability, the costs of any requirements likely to be applied to development, such as requirements for affordable housing, standards, infrastructure contributions or other requirements should, when taking account of the normal cost of development and

mitigation, provide competitive returns to a willing land owner and willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable.

174. Local planning authorities should set out their policy on local standards in the Local Plan, including requirements for affordable housing. They should assess the likely cumulative impacts on development in their area of all existing and proposed local standards, supplementary planning documents and policies that support the development plan, when added to nationally required standards. In order to be appropriate, the cumulative impact of these standards and policies should not put implementation of the plan at serious risk, and should facilitate development throughout the economic cycle. Evidence supporting the assessment should be proportionate, using only appropriate available evidence.

Manydown is clearly critical to the overall delivery of the Plan/housing target. Therefore it is important that in addition to the Three Dragons study, the LPA consider site-specific viability findings (following more detailed masterplanning and technical work) as they move toward Submission.

Table 4 highlights an indicative land use schedule attached to the emerging Illustrative Masterplan. The Manydown policy currently allocates 333 hectares.

Table 4 Indicative land use schedule for emerging masterplan (excluding Country Park)

The landowners consider the site viable and developable if the suggested modifications remain as drafted.

4.4 Manydown policy clauses

The policies in paragraphs 18 to 219 of the Framework, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice. The Manydown policy should enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the Framework and provide a sound strategy over the plan period.

Clause (a)

In order to meet objectively assessed housing needs over the plan period Manydown will need to deliver 3,400 dwellings as a minimum.

Main land use and exclusion zones Ha

Spine road and development plot access roads 12

Oil pipeline wayleave (HSE consultation zone) 22

Reservation for potential future rail crossing approaches and bypass 10

One main centre and two local centres 6

Two primary schools 6

Reserve site for a secondary school 13

Green infrastructure at 3 ha per 1,000 population 25

Core open space at 3 ha per 1,000 population 25

Potential residential land available 123

Total site area 242



Clause (b)

The Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (2012) covers the period up to 2017. The national ‘Planning policy for traveller sites’ (DCLG, March 2012) states that a supply of ‘deliverable’ sites should be identified for the first 5 years of the plan. However, Manydown is not expected to come forward in the first five years. Similarly the current assessment does not assess needs post 2017 to include the whole plan period; as such it is not possible to identify how many ‘developable’ sites may be required in the medium to long term and whether or not Manydown would be required. ‘Planning policy for traveller sites’ states that: “Criteria should be set to guide land supply allocations where there is identified need”. As such it is premature to select Manydown as a potential ‘developable’ site and it should not be relied upon as a ‘deliverable site’ in advance of detailed viability testing and consultation on the masterplan, which does not currently build in the impact of such an allocation to the schemes overall viability or the criteria set out in policy CN5.

The policy explicitly identifies self-build as a product that the site should provide but it is included alongside a site-specific Gypsy and Traveller policy which is confusing. Whilst self-build is supported in principle it has not been sufficiently defined in the reasoned justification. Singling out self-build is felt to be too inflexible for a site allocation and we would urge that references to self-build are dealt with in a thematic housing policy.

Recommend clause (b) is deleted with self-build and Gypsies and Traveller policy covered in Borough-wide housing policy.

Clause (c)

We support the Plan’s positive approach to the provision of social and physical infrastructure in the Borough to help meet the Framework’s objective of “facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities.”

In order to provide the social, recreational and cultural facilities and services that both the future community at Manydown and the existing community will need, the masterplan has identified the need for, and set out the indicative location of a range of community infrastructure facilities. This has been developed from a review of current policy, information acquired from community infrastructure and facility providers, and an assessment of baseline conditions and future requirements.

The clause makes reference to local shopping facilities, yet the Framework (Paragraph 161) states that, “Local planning authorities should use business evidence base to assess:

• the needs for land or floorspace for economic development, including both the quantitative and qualitative needs for all foreseeable types of economic activity over the plan period, including for retail and leisure development;

• the role and function of town centres and the relationship between them, including any trends in the performance of centres;

• the capacity of existing centres to accommodate new town centre development;

• locations of deprivation which may benefit from planned remedial action.”

The size of Manydown as an urban extension is too large to simply state that local shopping facilities will be provided, this policy approach is too narrow. Strategic sites that are of a similar scale to Manydown tend to support District Centre commercial facilities. Such facilities would be complementary to those located in/around Basingstoke and would reflect the long term employment needs and requirements in the area. The masterplanning process shall help to explore the potential for such facilities.

Proposed changes in the allocation boundary mean that the centre envisaged in the masterplan just west of Worting areas would now be more feasible with expanded space to co-locate the spine road and areas for a functional local/district centre.

The draft masterplan incorporates broad locations for new local centres and in time a District Centre in the vicinity of Worting Road. These should be identified on the Proposals Map.

Suggested modification: Include a new clause supporting the provision of retail and commercial floorspace commensurate with the size of the new Manydown neighbourhood and reflecting the Borough’s long term employment needs and requirements over the plan period and beyond; and

Include indicative areas for new centres12 on the Proposals Map based on Masterplan locations.

Clause (d)

The landowners welcome the proposed changes to wording for reserving/safeguarding land for a secondary school prior to 2029.

Clauses (e) and (f)

Proposed changes to the open space/country park policy clauses are supported. The landowners recommend that the Country Park is identified in BDBC’s Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) and CIL 123 list as a desirable piece of infrastructure to be delivered over the plan period, with funding to be provided for a number of sources including from the landowners and other borough-wide development opportunities through CIL or s106.

Proposed clause (g)

The clause repeats much of the thematic landscape policy (EM1). The policy clause is seeking to single out the site-specific landscape features of most importance while informing the decision maker to ensure the edge treatments are dealt with effectively. The landowners are not convinced this adds anything to EM1. The landscaping and heritage assessments contained in the evidence to the Local Plan represent baseline conditions and do not take account of the potential to mitigate and/or develop in a sensitive manner. The masterplan process will seek to ensure that outward facing edges of development are integrated and respect and enhance the adjacent countryside while utilising opportunities to provide linkages to the special characteristics of the existing local landscape (e.g. woodland blocks).

Suggested modification: delete all repeated policy wording already contained in EM1. If policy is to remain redraft clause (g) to begin with “To take account of…” instead of “Respond positively…” and include the recognition that part of the process of developing in a sensitive manner can also include the potential to mitigate.

Proposed clause (h)

12 Annex 2 of the Framework states that town centres are defined on a local authority’s Proposals Map. The London Plan provides definitions for a Local Centre and District Centre. This is a useful proxy for an urban area such as Basingstoke: Local Centre: “typically serving a localised catchment often most accessible by walking and cycling and include local parades and small clusters of shops, mostly for convenience goods and other services. They may include a small supermarket (typically up to around 500 sqm), sub-post office, pharmacy, laundrette and other useful local services. Together with District centres they can play a key role in addressing areas deficient in local retail and other services.” District Centre: “distributed more widely than the Metropolitan and Major centres, providing convenience goods and services for more local communities and accessible by public transport, walking and cycling. Typically they contain 10,000–50,000 sqm of retail floorspace. Some District centres have developed specialist shopping functions.”



The policy should not repeat the historic environment policy (EM11). We agree with the LPA’s requirement for the architectural and historic significance and setting of the Worting Conservation Area and listed buildings to be preserved and enhanced, in order to be consistent with National Planning policy. However, we do not believe that the proposed allocation boundary will enable this policy aspiration to be achieved, given the pressure on the land budget.

The masterplan enables a pattern and design of development around the Worting Conservation Area and listed buildings that would ensure that not only would the architectural and historic significance and setting of the area be preserved, but also enhanced by the new development, thus supporting the Framework’s objectives for the historic environment.

Suggested modification: delete all repeated policy wording contained in EM11

Clause (i) and (j)

Clause (h) (if retained) and policy EM11 cover the essence of both of these clauses Clause (i) is unhelpful in advance of more detailed masterplanning, in partnership with the landowners of Worting Village.

The value of clause (i) is not fully understood given that the Country Park will help to prevent any coalescence to the North of Manydown. The sentence which seeks to preserve the ancient boundary of the Roman Road as a green boundary, whilst supported in principle, should not disturb the principles of the masterplan which seek to improve permeability and accessibility to and from surrounding areas. The policy is too detailed for a strategic policy and the wording is prescriptive in relation to maintaining the character and separation for Worting, Wootton St. Lawrence & Winklebury.

Clause (j) does not mention the possibility or potential to mitigate/relocate development in relation to assets of archaeological merit. The clause as drafted is repetition of national policies and guidelines and the landowners would question the value of the policy as currently drafted.

Manydown is a comprehensive strategic allocation, as such the Local Plan should enable the proper planning of the area and be consistent with other core policies which promote effective inter-relationships with other existing/new communities, the masterplan process is the most suitable vehicle for providing site specific detailed guidance.

Suggested modification: Redraft clause to reflect the policy objective of protecting the quality of life for existing residents and enable the landowner to explore ideas to achieve that objective with existing residents during the detailed masterplanning work following the local plan adoption.

Proposed clause (k)

With regards to biodiversity, there are no statutory designated Sites of Nature Conservation Importance on the site, although there are sites of importance for nature conservation as well as a number of good existing green habitat linkages throughout the site (i.e. woodland and hedgerows). The emerging masterplan will employ a flexible approach that will seek to ensure enhancement (and where necessary, sufficient mitigation) for these habitats in order to ensure that biodiversity benefits are realised, thereby supporting the Framework’s objective of “enhancing and conserving the natural environment”.

As such the policy clause is not required as the approach is repeated elsewhere in the Plan. While the landowners agree with the need for future development at Manydown to contribute to and enhance the natural environment, they believe that sub-policy (k) does not require being included within the policy. The reason for this is that ‘Policy EM4 – Biodiversity and Nature Conservation’ sets out the necessary policy on biodiversity and the natural environment therefore its inclusion within the Manydown site policy is unnecessary and repetitive.

Suggested modification: delete clause (k).

Proposed clauses (m) and (n)

At the 2005 inquiry the Inspector raised doubts about the previous transportation solutions and was not convinced that an adequate assessment of traffic generation was provided. The Inspector was keen for future masterplanning to demonstrate that the layout of the development would ensure that bus routes would be reasonably accessible to most new residents and that there would be reasonable integration with services serving adjoining communities, largely dependent on local provision of facilities.

A key principle of the Framework is that Local Plans should promote the use of sustainable transport. In accordance with the Framework, the emerging masterplan will seek to promote a pattern of development at Manydown that would ensure that the use of sustainable transport modes is maximised.

Paragraph 177 of the Framework states that it is important “to ensure that there is a reasonable prospect that planned infrastructure is deliverable in a timely fashion. To facilitate this, it is important that local planning authorities understand district-wide development costs at the time Local Plans are drawn up. For this reason, infrastructure and development policies should be planned at the same time, in the Local Plan.”

Development of Manydown will require a single carriageway link road which could also be part of the wider road network. The landholders support the potential extension of this road to the south of the B3400 including optimum alignment for crossing the railway line within their landholding. The policy should be redrafted to take account of the requirement for the Manydown development to have a single carriageway link road.

The policy as drafted is still too restrictive in requiring specific traffic management measures in the absence of exploring different options with the communities through consultation on the masterplan. The Local Plan should emphasise the guiding principles for development at Manydown e.g. ‘safe and convenient access’ for both residents of existing communities and (importantly) new residents of Manydown. The proper planning of the area is likely to require full and detailed consideration of options during detailed masterplanning that assess how Roman Road is used to achieve ‘safe and convenient’ access for both existing residents and new residents of Manydown

Suggested modification: Redraft clause to reflect the policy objective of protecting the quality of life for existing residents and enable the landowner to explore ideas to achieve that objective with existing residents during the detailed masterplanning work following the local plan adoption. Delete “..with the implementation of appropriate traffic management measures to protect the access and amenity of existing residents” rom policy clause, and devolve to masterplanning process.

Clause (q)

Not required as a separate policy dealing with pollution has already been included in the Plan. Policy EM12 – Pollution deals with pollution including noise.

Suggested modification – delete clause

Clause (r)

At the 2005 inquiry the Inspector raised doubts about the environmental acceptability of the former allocation citing insufficient evidence provided for an effective and viable foul sewerage system. The Inspector highlighted the need to provide supporting evidence to demonstrate that development beyond Plan Period would be served by an effective sewage treatment system: “could it be



demonstrated that the River Loddon will be able to accept discharges from the Chineham WWTP from more development than is currently proposed.”

Therefore we strongly support the policy clause that stipulates adequate infrastructure must be provided for sewage and surface water drainage at Manydown. The masterplans flood and sewerage technical studies demonstrate that development can be accommodated both during the plan period and beyond if served by an effective sewage treatment system.

Policy CN6 – Infrastructure sets out the requirements for developers with regard to infrastructure including sewage / water drainage, so technically the incorporation of (t) within the Manydown policy is repeating policy from elsewhere in the Plan. Therefore we would urge the LPA to ensure that the policy is site-specific and helps the Development Management to determine future Manydown applications.

Final policy sentence

This paragraph is not required. This text does not constitute policy and its incorporation is inconsistent with the Framework which states that “Only policies that provide a clear indication of how a decision maker should react to a development proposal should be included in the plan.” Given that this text does not strengthen Policy SS3.10, we recommend that the text is omitted from the policy and placed in the reasoned justification.

4.5 Other Local Plan policies

The policies in paragraphs 18 to 219 of the Framework, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice for the planning system. Below we have identified Borough-wide development management policies or content of relevance to Manydown.

Vision and objectives

Overall the Pre-Submission Local Plan is a positive document that has sought to set out a clear strategy for the future of the Borough. The link between the issues, vision, objectives, and policy are clear.

In general, the Vision Statement is robust but may benefit from the incorporation of more spatial elements, including a specific reference to Manydown. This would enable BDBC partners and the development management team to utilise the vision when deciding individual applications. Manydown represents a unique opportunity for the Borough, representing approximately a third of the total housing supply over the plan period. Embedding the masterplan and vision principles into the statutory plan’s vision statement and objectives for the area will help to assist the delivery of a high quality urban extension and transpose key design elements of the Framework into the Local Plan e.g. paragraph 52 of the Framework (opportunities associated larger scale development). The policy that is included in the Local Plan needs to make a clear distinction between:

• High-level strategic policy for the whole Manydown area;

• Site-specific thematic/spatial policy for the allocated parcels within the red line; and

• Policy hooks for the Oakley Neighbourhood Plan, Wooton St Lawrence Neighbourhood Plan and unallocated parcels beyond 2029.

Suggested amendment, insert headline policy statement as first sentence:

Development at Manydown will be designed so that residents can live sustainably and are able to access their daily needs locally within walking distance of their homes.

Model policy

Policies in Local Plans should follow the approach of the presumption in favour of sustainable development so that it is clear that development which is sustainable can be approved without delay. All plans should be based upon and reflect the presumption in favour of sustainable development, with clear policies that will guide how the presumption should be applied locally. The plan taken as a whole is generally sound in this respect and has been produced in the spirit of positive plan-making. However, the plan does not include the model policy that has been inserted into all Local Plans since the introduction of the Framework. We suggest the insertion of the following headline policy adapted from the model policy wording:

When considering development proposals the Council will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework and Vision Statement and Objectives contained in the Local Plan. It will always work proactively with applicants jointly to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible, and to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions in the area.

Planning applications that accord with the policies in this Local Plan (and, where relevant, with polices in neighbourhood plans and masterplans) will be approved without delay, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Where there are no policies relevant to the application or relevant policies are out of date at the time of making the decision then the Council will grant permission unless material considerations indicate otherwise – taking into account whether:

• Any adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework taken as a whole; or

• Specific policies in that Framework indicate that development should be restricted.

CN1 – Affordable Housing

The landowners fully support the principle of providing affordable housing at Manydown to meet local needs, where viable and justified by evidence. It is clear that there is a need to maximise the delivery of affordable housing in the Borough more generally. The Three Dragon’s evidence report involved a high level testing of affordable housing thresholds. CN1 sets the requirement for provision of 40% Affordable Housing. The landowners have questioned elements of the viability evidence separately via the CIL consultation; as such they reserve judgement until such time that they can assess the balance between affordable housing, CIL and S106.

CN5 – Infrastructure

Local Plan evidence on infrastructure must comply with paragraph 162 of the Framework:

“Local planning authorities should work with other authorities and providers to:

• assess the quality and capacity of infrastructure for transport, water supply, wastewater and its treatment, energy (including heat), telecommunications, utilities, waste, health, social care, education, flood risk and coastal change management, and its ability to meet forecast demands; and

• take account of the need for strategic infrastructure including nationally significant infrastructure within their areas.”



Paragraph 177 of the Framework states that: “it’s equally important to ensure that there is a reasonable prospect that planned infrastructure is deliverable in a timely fashion. Local planning authorities need to understand district-wide development costs at the time when Local Plans are drawn up. For this reason, infrastructure and development policies should be planned at the same time, in the Local Plan. Any affordable housing or local standards requirements that may be applied to development should be assessed at the plan-making stage, where possible, and kept under review.”

The LPA have produced a draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan to sit alongside the Local Plan. This document will support production of BDBC’s CIL and therefore the LPA should ensure production of the document and the content within it is in compliance with the CIL regulations and CIL guidance (as well as the Framework).

The Government issued new CIL guidance in April 2013; under section 221 of the Planning Act 2008 Charging Authorities must have regard to this guidance. The guidance provides useful insight for Council’s producing or updating their Infrastructure Delivery Plans. It sets out the evidence required and outlines the linkages between the Local plan, CIL, s106 obligations and spending of the CIL on infrastructure. The key extracts from the guidance are that:

• a clear thread is required between: plan making evidence on Infrastructure need, the evidence on the aggregate infrastructure gap, the need for CIL and the draft regulation 123 list that is now required at examination, that sets out the charging authorities spending plans (list of required and desirable infrastructure).

• Charging Authorities should collaborate with county councils in two tier areas on setting the rate, and agreeing CIL spending priorities, taking into account the county council spending priorities, where possible

• Charging Authorities will need to ‘show and explain’ how their CIL rates contribute positively towards, and not threaten delivery of their relevant (development) plan as a whole, now and through the economic cycle

• in assessing the impact of the charging rate/s on the delivery of a plan as a whole, the Charging Authority have taken into account the costs associated with regulatory requirements and policies on planning obligations including affordable housing strategic sites (he cumulative impact of policies – reflecting paragraph 173 and 174 of the Framework)

• LPAs need to explain, at examination, how CIL and S106 will operate when a CIL has been adopted

• Charging Authorities must consult if they change the Regulation 123 CIL spending list, and review the charging schedule if the change to the list affects viability

The Framework recommends that ‘where practical’ Council’s should draw Local Plans up alongside a CIL and this extends to the production of combined evidence i.e. viability testing and infrastructure planning (paragraph 175 of the Framework).

EM2 – Strategic Gaps

Whilst policy EM2 Strategic Gaps is supported as an approach, the precise boundary proposed for the Proposals Map (shown on Map 7a Basingstoke – Oakley Strategic Gap) is inconsistent with a number of policies in SS3.10. Namely clauses related to new roads/infrastructure.

The reasoned justification for the Strategic Gaps states that the policy is “essentially a planning tool to prevent the coalescence of settlements and maintain the separate identity of settlements” However, as worded it is not clear if future infrastructure supporting the Manydown development would be permitted e.g. roads or sewerage treatment works for later phases on the scheme. In addition,

SS3.10 clause (s) seeks to ensure that future phases of development at Manydown are not compromised by development during the plan period. The Strategic Gap’s width is not commensurate to the purpose it serves; coalescence can be prevented with an amended boundary that allows for the safeguarding, infrastructure provision and a pattern of development envisaged in SS3.10 that is in part driven by the Strategic Gap boundary. We would request that greater flexibility or clarification is provided in SS3.10 (s) and EM2 so that they are internally consistent and do not prejudice the objectives for Manydown both during and after the plan period.

Suggested modifications:

• Amend the Basingstoke – Oakley EM2 boundary (Map 7a) reducing its width to allow for future transport/sewerage infrastructure safeguarding/delivery etc and to provide greater flexibility for later phases of Manydown; and insert additional clause into policy EM2 (see below): EM2 (d) Development associated with the infrastructure requirements of strategc sites and the Manydown site where it preserves the existing landscape and green infrastructure assets through mitigation measures.

EP1 (Employment Development) and EP3 (Town, District and Local Centres)

At the 2005 inquiry the inspector expressed uncertainty about the delivery of shops, services and schools in the previous allocation’s identified district and local centres. The inspectors concerns related to the fact that there are few shops and services nearby; as such it was felt that the early delivery of the district and local centres was a ‘critical’ element for creating a sustainable community. At the time in 2005, the need or opportunity to make substantial provision for employment within the Manydown area was unknown. However, the lack of any such employment provision was viewed by the inspector to ‘weaken the sustainability of the MDA’.

The 2013 Retail Assessment estimates that retail capacity for new (convenience and comparison goods) floorspace in the borough over the plan period would be approximately 30,000 square metres, the majority being comparison goods with capacity for new convenience goods estimated to be less than 4,000 sqm. Policy EP3 seeks to address this by expanding Basingstoke town centre. However, the LPA will likely need to identify and allocate sites elsewhere in the Borough if it is to accommodate the identified retail floorspace capacity in a comprehensive and sustainable manner over the development plan period. Manydown can play an important role in this respect and the emerging masterplan seeks to integrate employment and retail alongside the proposals for housing.

Therefore the landowners strongly support proposed policy EP1 – Economic Growth and Investment which includes specific reference to Manydown. Equally the landowners also strongly support the proposed insertion of the new sentence in EP3 which states: “New local and district centres may also come forward as part of larger developments set out in Policy SS3”.

T +44 (0)20 7798 5000

F +44 (0)20 7798 5001

M +44 (0)77 3949 8458

www.ursglobal.com

manydown - basingstoke · plan (the plan), to replace the saved policies in the existing adopted...

Documents